Re: anyone else still seeing transfers hanging at 99%?

[Tomaž Borštnar <tomaz.borstnar@xxxxxxxx>]

Jeffrey Hsu wrote:
> Tomaž Borštnar wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> >     I am still noticing occasionally that HTTP transfers (fetch 
> > initiated) "hang" at 99%:
> >
> > Receiving jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2 (63577482 bytes): 99% (ETA 00:00)  ^C
> > 63577088 bytes transferred in 635.4 seconds (97.71 kBps)
> > fetch: transfer interrupted
> > jdev# make
> > ===>  Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> > ===>  Extracting for jboss-4.0.2
> > => Checksum mismatch for jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2.
> > ===>  Refetch for 1 more times files: jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2
> > ===>  Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> > => jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2 doesn't seem to exist in 
> > /usr/ports/distfiles/.
> > => Attempting to fetch from 
> > http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/jboss/.
> > Receiving jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2 (63577482 bytes): 100%
> > 394 bytes transferred in 0.0 seconds (391.04 kBps)
> > ===>  Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> > => Checksum OK for jboss-4.0.2-src.tar.bz2.
> > ^Z
> >
> > I see this on 1.2.5 and 1.3.6-Preview. Afaik, I do not have proxies in 
> > between, but you never know for sure.
> >
> > Tomaž
>
>
> Can you send me the output of 'tcpdump -s 96 -S -tt -n'?  Thanks.
This is after it paused in another case:

tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on sis0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
1127939459.029712 IP 192.168.0.31.1031 > 209.132.176.171.21: P 2607923969:260792
3972(3) ack 2405287369 win 57901 urg 3 <nop,nop,timestamp 174604 3064233032>
1127939459.029756 IP 192.168.0.31.1031 > 209.132.176.171.21: P 2607923972:260792
3979(7) ack 2405287369 win 57901 <nop,nop,timestamp 174604 3064233032>
1127939459.206048 IP 209.132.176.171.21 > 192.168.0.31.1031: P 2405287369:240528
7395(26) ack 2607923979 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 3064382446 174604>
1127939459.206216 IP 192.168.0.31.1032 > 209.132.176.171.10031: F 3205466315:320
5466315(0) ack 2416996465 win 57920 <nop,nop,timestamp 174622 3064233578>
1127939459.206421 IP 192.168.0.31.1031 > 209.132.176.171.21: P 2607923979:260792
3985(6) ack 2405287395 win 57920 <nop,nop,timestamp 174622 3064382446>
1127939459.206437 IP 209.132.176.171.10031 > 192.168.0.31.1032: R 2416996465:241
6996465(0) ack 3205466316 win 0
1127939459.379567 IP 209.132.176.171.21 > 192.168.0.31.1031: P 2405287395:240528
7409(14) ack 2607923985 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 3064382620 174622>
1127939459.379628 IP 192.168.0.31.1031 > 209.132.176.171.21: F 2607923985:260792
3985(0) ack 2405287409 win 57920 <nop,nop,timestamp 174639 3064382620>
1127939459.379950 IP 209.132.176.171.21 > 192.168.0.31.1031: F 2405287409:240528
7409(0) ack 2607923985 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 3064382620 174622>
1127939459.380048 IP 192.168.0.31.1031 > 209.132.176.171.21: F 2607923985:260792
3985(0) ack 2405287409 win 57920 <nop,nop,timestamp 174639 3064382620>
1127939459.381102 IP 209.132.176.171.21 > 192.168.0.31.1031: R 2405287409:240528
7409(0) win 57920

Is it useful at all?

Tomaž