search for: 1001ms

...ymmetric Unavail UNREACHABLE # ping 200.X.X.6 PING 200.X.x.6 (200.X.X.6) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 200.X.X.6: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=13.8 ms 64 bytes from 200.X.X.6: icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=17.7 ms --- 200.X.X.6 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 13.874/15.813/17.752/1.939 ms I've tried to do "module reload pbx_dundi.so", sometimes it seems like it works... But doesn't seems right... There is a right way to force DUNDi to re-check the peers? How does it check the peers? BTW, my DUNDi configuratio...

...ata. 64 bytes from 212-41-253-181.inhouse-line.inode.at (212.41.253.181): icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=15.3 ms 64 bytes from 212-41-253-181.inhouse-line.inode.at (212.41.253.181): icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=15.9 ms --- voip.inode.at ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 15.375/15.669/15.963/0.294 ms Since I am sure that I didn't change anything within the last week, I called inode support. But they said, that they didn't change anything either. Next I tried was a 'SIP RELOAD' which produced following output: asterina*CLI&gt...

...lustre]# ping -c2 141.142.69.8 PING 141.142.69.8 (141.142.69.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 141.142.69.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1.61 ms 64 bytes from 141.142.69.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=0.248 ms --- 141.142.69.8 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.248/0.930/1.613/0.683 ms, pipe 2 [root at t3honest5 lustre]# I was wondering if anyone had any ideas where to start looking? Thanks, Chad -- Chad Kerner - ckerner at ncsa.uiuc.edu Systems Engineer, Storage Enabling Technologies National Center for Supercomputing Applicat...

...s:/mnt/data1/build/xen# ping 10.42.42.1 PING 10.42.42.1 (10.42.42.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.42.42.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.28 ms 64 bytes from 10.42.42.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.819 ms ^C --- 10.42.42.1 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.819/1.553/2.288/0.735 ms debnas:/mnt/data1/build/xen# ================================================================= Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 VM-001 console VM-001 login: root Last login: Fri May 29 00:04:27 UTC 1987 from �анне рэдактарам дазваляе вам наладжваць рэчы, выка...

...P!) > 64 bytes from fe80::5054:ff:fe12:3456: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.701 ms > (DUP!) > 64 bytes from fe80::5054:ff:fe12:3457: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.06 ms (DUP!) > ^C > --- ff02::1 ping statistics --- > 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, +6 duplicates, 0% packet loss, time > 1001ms > > > If link-local address cannot be ping-ed then try pinging ::1. > Pinging link-local address via `ping6 -I eth1 fe80::5054:ff:fe1d:a4bb` works now. Could you elaborate on virbr2 and br0 being on the same network please? Because if I'm seeing this correctly, br0 has `2607:5300:60...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/4/2014 8:46 PM, Bhasker C V wrote: > On 04/10/14 15:36, The Cop wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am trying to assign an IPv6 address to one of my guests. I followed the >> following guide, unsuccessfully: >> https://www.berrange.com/posts/2011/06/16/providing-ipv6-connectivity-to-virtual-guests-with-libvirt-and-kvm/

...icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.318 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from fe80::5054:ff:fe12:3456: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.701 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from fe80::5054:ff:fe12:3457: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.06 ms (DUP!) ^C --- ff02::1 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, +6 duplicates, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms If link-local address cannot be ping-ed then try pinging ::1.

...:~# ping -c 2 109.72.92.155 PING 109.72.92.155 (109.72.92.155) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 109.72.92.155: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=13.2 ms 64 bytes from 109.72.92.155: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=14.1 ms --- 109.72.92.155 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 13.225/13.703/14.182/0.492 ms root@nwfilter-test:~# Looking at iptables-save it seems like the right rules are programmed: -A FI-vnet1 -p icmp -j RETURN -A FI-vnet1 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 22 -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED -m conntrack --ctdir REPLY -j RETURN -A FI-vnet1...

...seconds moonwolf ? ~ ? ping 10.0.49.14 PING 10.0.49.14 (10.0.49.14) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.0.49.14: icmp_seq=1 ttl=62 time=9.45 ms 64 bytes from 10.0.49.14: icmp_seq=2 ttl=62 time=26.0 ms ^C --- 10.0.49.14 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 9.459/17.754/26.050/8.296 ms What could cause this behavior? Before interface move everything was working as expected. -- Over And Out MoonWolf

...15.64 PING 83.111.196.61 (83.111.196.61) from 85.234.115.64 : 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 83.111.196.61: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=148 ms 64 bytes from 83.111.196.61: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=148 ms --- 83.111.196.61 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 148.549/148.615/148.681/0.066 ms [root@stripe ~]# ping 83.111.196.62 -I 85.234.115.64 PING 83.111.196.62 (83.111.196.62) from 85.234.115.64 : 56(84) bytes of data. --- 83.111.196.62 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2000ms [ro...

I am trying to streamline the current distribution specific setup and creation of VE''s within OpenVZ with puppet. My first attempt has gone horribly wrong as you will see below. Here''s the script I wrote to replace the redhat specific setup that OpenVZ used: [jleggett@lxp6d15m3 scripts]$ cat redhat-add_ip.sh #!/bin/bash # # Debug - take out later set -x

Hello, I''m facing a strange issue with network card PCI passthrough on my openwrt test domU. - With network PCI passthrough, DNS lookup failed for some domains (exemple, google.com) but not for other (free.fr my ISP, or my domain jbfavre.org). I can ping an IP address without any problem. - Starting domU as a "normal" (ie without PCI passthrough), no problem. As far as I can