iperf VS mtr

Just some clarification: IPerf 2 is different from the iperf3 found at https://github.com/esnet/iperf Each can be used to measure network performance, however, they DO NOT interoperate. They are completely independent implementations with different strengths, different options, and different capabilities. Both are under active development.

The current release of iperf 2 is 2.2.0 but 2.2.1 with bug fixes will be out soon.

Comparison table here: https://iperf2.sourceforge.io/IperfCompare.html

This discussion from the vendor might lead to other ideas... https://github.com/esnet/iperf/issues/861

Network - network throughput (both incoming and outgoing) is tested using iperf3 on several geographically diverse public iperf servers

Why not just provide an iperf3 server?

File transfer using iperf3 over Tailscale. I noticed that the bandwidth to my home computer (on a 500/500 fiber connection) was higher than with speedtest.net. For the first few days I was getting downloads and uploads of 28Mbps (+/- std dev of 6Mbps) and 150ms latency (+/- 35ms). After somewhere around 100GB total transfer (maybe half of that over Tailscale), it is now downloading and uploading at 10Mbps (+/- 1Mbps). I have not seen a similar throttling in the speedtest.net results, which makes me wonder if it is being throttled by Tailscale. This shouldn't be the case, because Tailscale should generally be able to establish a direct connection, but this isn't guaranteed. So I may have hit an edge case.

As a reminder, Trippy combines the functionality of traceroute and ping and is designed to assist with the analysis of networking issues. You can think of it as a modern, cross platform, Rust based version of tools such as mtr, with a bunch of advanced features and a fancy TUI.

Cool project! Two suggestions, one serious, one frivolous:

- I wonder if you could get more accurate results by using TCP or UDP instead of ICMP. I think traditional traceroute has an option to use UDP, mtr [1] can use TCP or UDP, and tcptraceroute [2] can use TCP.

- This would be a perfect fit for some Talking Heads references. "And you may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?" [3]

[1] https://github.com/traviscross/mtr

[2] https://linux.die.net/man/1/tcptraceroute

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Once_in_a_Lifetime_(Talking_He...

Run mtr, or whatever the Windows equivalent might be, and leave it running shortly before 4:15pm, and see where the traffic stops when the Internet shuts off.

Lot of great stuff here, haven’t seen MTR yet: https://github.com/traviscross/mtr

Consider using MTR (software) towards the actual end-point of the SIP connection to get a combination of traceroute and ping which will be much more revealing. This will also allow you to quickly identify if the problem is local to your equipment or somewhere along the path. Consider allowing her to join a Google Conference from Teams to determine if it is provider related. Yes, port mirroring and wire shark is the gold standard and will display the "answer" on your screen quickly but it requires skills to know what to analyze, look at and how to interpret the data.

Have you tried something like mtr to check for connection issues? I would recommand the view you get when hitting d twice after starting it (with the colored graph for latencies).

Continuing to build trippy; a network diagnostic tool inspired by mtr. There is still a long way to go but it is getting closer to feature parity with mtr.