2.2.20 vs 2.4.17 on 486 server

2.2.20 vs 2.4.17 on 486 server

[Jacek Popławski]

I have simple 486 server with: 
- 2 ISA ethernet cards (eepro.o)
- ppp connection to Internet
I installed 2.4.17 (then 2.4.18-pre2) there, and discovered, that two connected
workstations has very bad Internet connection (for example it was impossible to
watch huge www pages or download pictures, edonkey/kza transfers were small).
So i tested:
- WWW speed on server -> OK (every page opens without problems) 
- scp transfer between server and workstations -> OK (more than 100KB/s)
There is squid installed on my server. But even if I used it on workstation -
WWW still works bad! Looks like something was really bad with MASQ. But
everything was OK on much faster (k6-2 500) system.

So I installed 2.2.20 - and all problems disappeared!

I am almost sure I compiled similiar stuff to every kernel, there was exactly
the same ipchains rules and route. How can I check what was bad with 2.4.x ? 

-- 
decopter - free SDL/OpenGL simulator under heavy development
download it from http://decopter.sourceforge.net

Re: 2.2.20 vs 2.4.17 on 486 server

[Trever L. Adams]

I believe that the ipchains compatibility in 2.4.17 is a hack.  You
really should use iptables and not use the ipchains in 2.4.x.  I do not
know if this will fix your problem.  However, I have very good luck with
iptables and 2.4.x vs. 2.2.x.

Trever Adams

On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 16:02, Jacek Popławski wrote:
> I have simple 486 server with: 
> - 2 ISA ethernet cards (eepro.o)
> - ppp connection to Internet
> I installed 2.4.17 (then 2.4.18-pre2) there, and discovered, that two connected
> workstations has very bad Internet connection (for example it was impossible to
> watch huge www pages or download pictures, edonkey/kza transfers were small).
> So i tested:
> - WWW speed on server -> OK (every page opens without problems) 
> - scp transfer between server and workstations -> OK (more than 100KB/s)
> There is squid installed on my server. But even if I used it on workstation -
> WWW still works bad! Looks like something was really bad with MASQ. But
> everything was OK on much faster (k6-2 500) system.
> 
> So I installed 2.2.20 - and all problems disappeared!
> 
> I am almost sure I compiled similiar stuff to every kernel, there was exactly
> the same ipchains rules and route. How can I check what was bad with 2.4.x ?