Seems their router is has 4x 10baseT / half duplex ports. Lovely. I wonder if that's it! _____ From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of DMelczer@xxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 7:45 AM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: Harumph! How about this one? I saw something very similar for a remote office location that we setup...check to make certain that the line from the ADSL modem to whatever network hub or switch you're using is hard-coded full duplex on BOTH sides. I've seen them set to auto negotiate where they negotiate down to half duplex and you get this kinds of ridiculous ping times whenever file transfers or ICA bitmaps are loaded...I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that there's half duplex somewhere along the link... Good luck and hope this helps. -Dave Melczer dmelczer@xxxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: Lambert, Ryan [mailto:rlambert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 4:29 PM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Harumph! How about this one? Hey folks. I've another strange issue that seems to have me stumped, albeit only over a WAN (ADSL) connection. Note that I do not see this on the LAN. When someone opens an image via RDP or ICA, you can see the image painting itself incredibly slow. While this is occurring, you can not click on any other part of the session (locked up, for all intensive purposes) until the picture has rendered fully. Now, this is the sick part: Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=634ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=514ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=506ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=600ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=861ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=655ms TTL=249 Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=450ms TTL=249 I bet you can guess when I'm downloading the image to my client, huh? Ping times are great, until this. This is on off hours, when no bandwidth is being used by people in-house, so I can't see saturation being an issue. The traceroute indicates the latency starts right AT their router, and nowhere in the upstream's backbone. Now, I'm pretty certain this problem isn't on my end, because I'm on a DS3 that's using hardly any of the load. ;p Likewise, clients from other sites are complaining about it. ... So, eh? ********************************************************************** Please be advised that this transmittal may be a confidential attorney-client communication or may otherwise be privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this communication. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail (postmaster@xxxxxxxx) or by telephone (call us collect at 212-403-4357) and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance. www.wlrk.com **********************************************************************