Using multiple speed patches and the "magic sequence"...

[DDELFIERRO]

O.K., I'm running the Cablenut 3.0, Navas registry,@Home speed,and Speedguide web page patches. I've also done the manual Speedguide registry tweaks and the system.ini 4MB allocation for my NIC.

The highest DL speed I ever reached on DSL Reports was 3179 prior to today. That was without the Cablenut 3.0 or the Navas patches installed.

After installing the Cablenut patch, my DL rate dipped slightly to about 2700-2900 but I did notice that my internet experience seemed "smoother". The DL dip was not extreme in my estimation.

I installed the Navas patch today and received a DL rate of 3300. In other words, the highest so far. Seems to work fine with no funny business so far.

I've noticed in the forums how some people appear to be strongly for/against certain tweaks/patches. Personally, I don't care that much since I figure that my internet speed will vary constantly since there is no longer a real non-peak usage time anymore, IMHO.

So, my question is... Looking at all the patches that I've installed and use, which ones conflict with each other? Couldn't I just take a one from Column A/one from Column B approach? You know, do the patches in some sort of order and then manually modify the registry to apply the peak performance mods from each one that may have been changed in subsequent patches?

I realize that some of you may be a bit, shall we say "zealous" in your opinions of which patches/tweaks work or not. I figure that as long as it doesn't hurt the PC or definitely detract from my performance or cause a conflict, then it's fine to leave in.

Anybody already figure out this "magic sequence"?

[Storm90]

I agree with you! But for some people the patches don't make a bit of differance. I know if I use Cablenuts , It will lock up my computer. Just depends on your service I guess. I just use one tweak98. Witch works great for me 5678 down and 400 up no complaints here. But glad to here what you choosed work great for you!

[DDELFIERRO]

Tweak98? Is that the Speedguide tweak?

[DDELFIERRO]

Oh, dopey me!!! Yeah, I was right. I always refer to it simply as the Speedguide patch...

[cablenut]

DDELFIERRO

My new patch does a universal uninstall of any previous settings before it applies it's own settings, thus it does not conflict with other patches. I can't speak of what the other places do though. I'm pretty sure speedguide does a uninstall to before. Im not sure about Navas

------------------
Head webcheese and geek guru @ http://www.cablenut.com

[donald_k]

Windows 2000 rocks!!!! I just got it installed and still tweaking with it. I just set DefaultSendWindow to 510300 from 64240 and my upload went up from 500kbps to , well look down below
-from pcpitstop.com-

Upload Speed 1091 Kb/s

[This message has been edited by donald_k (edited 12-31-2000).]

[donald_k]

and Cablenut's win2k patch works great also. Anyone know any good Win2k sites I can go to. I am new to it, it sure looks like 98 but it is quite different. I'll learn it. Thank you Cablenut for your great patches.

[cablenut]

donald_k interesting but im not sure setting that DefaultSendWindow above 64240 works cause:

1) Im not sure if we can do window scaling on the send side of the winsock control.
2) Usually uploads are slower then downloads and/or usually capped thus putting a big rwin on them isn't going to do anything.
3) Im not really sure if the DefaultSendWindow is tcp relative or relative to winsock and the afd kernel manager.

We would need to test this throughly but in any case thanks for using my patch http://www.speedguide.net/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
Head webcheese and geek guru @ http://www.cablenut.com

[DDELFIERRO]

Cablenut: I didn't mean for it to sound like I was putting down your patch. In fact, I appreciate all the work that you and your compatriots have put into it. I'm not saying that your patch slowed my speed down, only that my original settings may have been pretty good prior to the install. Am I correct in assuming that your patch first resets any registry tweaks previously installed back to the default settings prior to applying your enhancements? If so, perhaps my results show that my configuration benefitted from some other registry tweak that had been reset upon installation of your patch.

Maybe we have just discovered the first patch in the sequence... If I were to apply the @Home patch AFTER the Cablenut patch, am I changing any settings changed first by the Cablenut patch? (I would have included the automatic Speedguide cable tweak98 next under Win98, but I've never gotten it to install and ended up just doing some manual registry tweaking instead.) How about the Navas patch, next? Finally, the Speedguide Web Page patch and System.ini tweak... Could you let us know if any of the subsequent patches listed above would then change any of the Cablenut installed settings?

[dannjr]

This is the reason for setting the send size to 64240 you might get good results now but what happens when you run into a server thats having this go on. Check this link thought you should know why.. On the other hand if you find leaving this at that size dosn't effect you please let cablenut or me know..
both his post and what I have here for you is relitive. My biggest concern is that you don't run into a brick wall and have IE blow up..
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q263/0/88.ASP
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by donald_k:
Windows 2000 rocks!!!! I just got it installed and still tweaking with it. I just set DefaultSendWindow to 510300 from 64240 and my upload went up from 500kbps to , well look down below
-from pcpitstop.com-

Upload Speed 1091 Kb/s
[This message has been edited by donald_k (edited 12-31-2000).]</font>
Just a minor note cablenut uploaded to me tonight at over 1000kbps to my FTP set with
the value 64240 so please keep in touch with this..
Trust me I'm real glad your getting that results. That goes for everyone else using it.

http://humlog.homestead.com/nicksconsulting/files/computermelting.gif
Burnin up the box through the Internet.


------------------
&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial"&gt;quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;HR&gt;THE WORLDS THINNEST BOOK: Things I can't afford - by Bill Gates&lt;HR&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
Chicago Microsystems (http://microsyspro.com)
dannjr@microsyspro.com
Speedguide has a great search engine (http://www.speedguide.net/cgi-bin/search.cgi?action=intro&default=2)

[This message has been edited by dannjr (edited 01-01-2001).]

[DDELFIERRO]

Cablenut: Are the Speedguide recommended tweaks changed by your patch? (Pls refer to: http://www.speedguide.net/Cable_modems/cable_registry.shtml)

If so, is there any danger with editing the registry as they recommend AFTER applying your patch? What are the differences between your patch and the Speedguide registry tweaks (other than ease of use)?

I'm hoping that the 2 methods change different settings so that one doesn't just automatically cancel out the other...

Also, concerning the default send window modification, how does that work with Win98/SE/ME instead of Win 2K? I figure that more of us are using 98/SE/ME/NT than 2K anyway...

[rmrucker]

Just a side bar... Uploads COULD be improved by turning on Window Scaling.

Grant it, you cannot control the exact Send Window Size from your end -- the receiving computer will have to set its Receive Window. However, by turning on scaling (TCP1323Opts 1 or 3) you are allowing the recipient computer to use a scaled Receive Window. This cannot occur if you have Scaling turned off...

[cablenut]

DDELFIERRO

1) Cablenut will remove *any* and *all* previous registry entries that may of been applied before installing its own entries. Thus using sequential patches is useless. This prevents confusing, and conflicts arising from people applying different patches before installing cablenut.

2) Windows 9x/ME's tcp/ip stack is just not as configurable as Windows 2000's thus I have not found a entry for DefaultSendWindow.

3) rmrucker im trying to figure out if the sendwindow would use window scaling do you suppose it would?

------------------
Head webcheese and geek guru @ http://www.cablenut.com

[DDELFIERRO]

Cablenut: So, I was right that your patch would set my registry to default values. That's why I intended to put it first in the "magic sequence". Not only would I get a blank slate to begin with, but then I would get your tweaks too. Using that as a beginning point, I would then begin further refinement via new tweaks not previously included in your patch. I figure that there must be someway to improve on it otherwise we'd never be able to look forward to patch 4.0.

[rmrucker]

cablenut, yes I believe the SendWindow can ONLY use scaling IF you have TCP1323Opts set to allow scaling.

Scaling is decided upon in the 3-way handshake at the begining of the TCP/IP connection. BOTH the SYN packet(from your computer) and SYN,ACK packet(from the other computer) *must* have Tcp Option "3" turned on if EITHER computer is going to use scaling.

Even if you have chose an RWIN less than 65535 -- and therefore don't specifically need "window scaling" turned on for your Receive Window -- if you don't turn on scaling, then your Send Window cannot be scaled.

I am pretty sure about this -- but comments are ALWAYS welcome!

[This message has been edited by rmrucker (edited 01-02-2001).]

[DDELFIERRO]

O.K., I've done the registry tweaks as suggested on Speedguide. This was done post-installation on the Cablenut patch. No problems, so far. I tested my speed on DSLReports.com at about 10:30 PST and I got back my highest speed to date: 3400 DL. It would appear that I can use the two methods concurrently without any problems.

So, do Speedguide's registry tweaks cancel out Cablenut's patch or are they affecting different things?

Of course, your results may vary... This registry tweaking stuff doesn't seem to give results consistantly to all users.

[rmrucker]

Jeez, should I answer this? It depends on what you mean...

I would have to match up each entry, but I think for the MOST part -- and this is JUST for Win98 -- SpeedGuide will cancel out and re-set MOST of cablenut's settings. I think a few minor ones slip by -- but not many.

cablenut?? Philip??

[cablenut]

The only ones that get by:

PMTUDiscovery
Size/Small/Medium/Large

------------------
Head webcheese and geek guru @ http://www.cablenut.com

[dannjr]

Iv been sitting here watching and waiting.
Heres a combination to try put in the Cablenut.exe in win98 then go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Class\NetTrans\000x through 00xx and put in the string value of MaxMTU = 1436 for DSL or 1472 for Cable and see how that works out..
Just a thought...


------------------
THE WORLDS THINNEST BOOK: Things I can't afford - by Bill Gates
Chicago Microsystems (http://microsyspro.com)
dannjr@microsyspro.com
Speedguide has a great search engine (http://www.speedguide.net/cgi-bin/search.cgi?action=intro&default=2)