TCP Optimizer version 2.0.1 released

[Philip]

We've released an updated version of the TCP Optimizer 2, including bug fixes and couple of user suggested changes. It can be downloaded from here:


TCP Optimizer v 2.0.1


The online documentation (including a list of fixes and changes) for this release is available here: http://www.speedguide.net/tcpoptimizer.php


We've fixed all known bugs, including the Windows 9x problem under "Optimal settings" with the final 2.0.0 version we found. I'd lke to extend our apologies to those who had problems with the Optimal settings under Windows 9x and version 2.0.0 of the program.

The only outstanding issue (that does not hinder the program performance in any way) we're aware of is the program not recognizing a few non-standard networking adapters. For example the nVidia nForce2 build-in NIC in the Gigabyte GA-K8NF-9 motherboard. If you have a networking adapter not recognized by the program, we'd like to hear from you, please give us any detailed information you can, such as make/model of the network adapter (or motherboard/chipset if built-in). Exporting and sending us a part of the Registry would really help pinpoint the issue, as per this thread. Note this issue does not hinder the ability of the program to optimize your internet connection.


Please feel free to post any suggestions, questions, and possible problems with the program in this thread.


P.S.
You can view any past issues, and list of updates in the following threads:
version 2.0.0 final
version 2 beta

[Philip]

Any comments, feedback, questions, or problems with this release ?

[Andrzej]

good work

BTW could you explain which version was used by me
e.g. are all numbers explained below are correct ?

C:\URtcp\Optimizer\TCPOptimizer2'01.exe
from > Help>About • SG TCP Optimizer version 2.0.1
the same but from | File>Property
• file : 2.0.0.0
• product : 2, 0, 2, 2

OTOH info from Belarc Advisor Version: 7.0l
Speed Guide Inc. - SG TCP Optimizer Application Version 2, 0, 2, 2

IMVHO in TCPOptimizer.exe > Help>About • SG TCP Optimizer version
explained numbers should be the same as in Belarc Advisor

[Philip]

Andrzej, you're right, I'm aware of this and it should not happen in future versions . When I say version 2.0.1 I'm refering to the one in the Help > About menu of the program.

[mccoffee]

Stupid quest from wetoddid wabbit

I know you said it another post i belive did you do any testing with novell and how much actully what was the intial promblem with eailer versions of the optimizer and novell??


Keep up the good work boss

[Philip]

Stupid quest from wetoddid wabbit

I know you said it another post i belive did you do any testing with novell and how much actully what was the intial promblem with eailer versions of the optimizer and novell??


Keep up the good work boss

We did some work on resolvin the issue with Novell Netware environments. The issue with version 1 was that after a reboot, a couple of branches in the user registry would end up with the wrong permissions, which in turn can cause some login script errors. The issue is explained here: http://www.speedguide.net/faq_in_q.p...ry=100&qid=193

We've changed some of the permissions so version 2 should work better with Novell Netware, although I have no testing environment to verify it.

[mccoffee]

We did some work on resolvin the issue with Novell Netware environments. The issue with version 1 was that after a reboot, a couple of branches in the user registry would end up with the wrong permissions, which in turn can cause some login script errors. The issue is explained here: http://www.speedguide.net/faq_in_q.p...ry=100&qid=193

We've changed some of the permissions so version 2 should work better with Novell Netware, although I have no testing environment to verify it.

you can afford a novell network considering you didn't pay us for a while

[chaicka]

Hi SpeedGuide,

I would like to extend my appreciation that the development team listened to what I have suggested - provide support for high-speed broadband services like 25Mbps.

In v2.0.1, I see that it now supports up to 20Mbps which I deem it as more than enough since there ain't any difference in RWin value between 20Mbps and 25Mbps.

Great work. I will be testing it as well as getting those high-speed broadband users here in Singapore to test out and provide feedback if any.

Cheers

[chaicka]

Moving forward, SpeedGuide may want to plan for the next release some time later this year or next year, with some significant changes in the broadband scene which may require the tool be updated:

1. ADSL2+ launch
2. WiMAX-based Wireless Broadband (Australia has launched its own propietary wireless broadband which I doubt is based on WiMAX)

I believe there should be some registry value difference between normal ADSL/Cable broadband and wireless broadband (WiMAX, etc).

[Andrzej]

Optimizer2'1 (not checked with previous versions) cannot see w95
registry settings for :
System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\MSTCP\Tcp1323Opts
even if mentioned was added manually
details hdw & sfw & connection as below

BTW please find two so different results w95B
the first was from "optimal settings" Optimizer 2.01 but RWIN was reduced
no Tcp1323Opts
the second exactly the same as above
but Tcp1323Opts=0 manually was added
and NOTHING more

the first - no Tcp1323Opts
SpeedGuide.net TCP/IP Analyzer exec. time: 0.05413 s
TCP options string = 020405ac010303000101080a000000000000000001010402
MTU = 1492 MSS = 1452
Default Receive Window (RWIN) = 33396
MTU Discovery (RFC1191) = ON
Time to live left = 51 hops TTL value is ok.
Timestamps (RFC1323) = ON
Note: Timestamps add 12 bytes to the TCP header of each packet, reducing the space available for useful data.
Selective Acknowledgements (RFC2018) = ON
IP type of service field (RFC1349) = 00000000 (0)

then strange result
the second - ONLY manually Tcp1323Opts=0 was added
SpeedGuide.net TCP/IP Analyzer exec. time: 0.05505
TCP options string = 020405ac01010402
MTU = 1492 MSS = 1452
Default Receive Window (RWIN) = 33396
MTU Discovery (RFC1191) = ON
Time to live left = 51 hops TTL value is ok.
Timestamps (RFC1323) = OFF
Selective Acknowledgements (RFC2018) = ON
IP type of service field (RFC1349) = 10000000 (128)

Precedence (priority) = 100 (flash override)
Delay = 0 (normal delay)
Throughput = 0 (normal throughput)
Reliability = 0 (normal reliability)
Cost = 0 (normal cost)
Check bit = 0 (correct, 8th checking bit must be zero)

DiffServ (RFC 2474) = CS4 100000 (32) - class 4 (RFC 2474).
Similar forwarding behavior to the ToS Precedence field.


Details concerning on used : hdw & sfw & connection
hdw & sfw details :
System Specs for Compaq LTE Elite 4/75CXL http://www.kahlon.com/rm1569_Compaq_...e_4_75CXL.html
Browser/OS = Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 95)
http://www.belarc.com/Programs/advisor.exe Belarc Advisor - Free Personal PC Audit (version 7.0o)
Operating System Windows 95 B (OSR2) (build 4.0.1111)
Processor 75 megahertz Intel 486DX4 (overclocked to 100MHz)
Main Circuit Board BIOS: Compaq 07/19/95
Drives 653 Megabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
Memory Modules 24 Megabytes Installed Memory
Communications 3Com Megahertz LAN PC Card (589E) (Ethernet)
Installed Microsoft Hotfixes [Back to Top]
UPD001 UPD002 UPD003 UPD004 UPD005 UPD006 UPD007 UPD008 UPD010 UPD256015
Internet Explorer SP2 (SP2)
OSR2 UPD273991
W95 UPD168115 UPD238453 UPD245729

Internet connection details
ISP : TPsa (polish national telecom) ; plan : Neostrada TP 2Mbps (home customers)
dynamic IP from ISP every 24 hrs ; PPPoA (ADSL PPPoE|A) neostada.tpnet.pl
CAPS 2496/320 kbps ; payment 35 Eur/mth (24mths)
behind Cisco 837 (modem+router+swich+firewall in one)

[Andrzej]

IMO importance of findings that TCP Optimizer v2.01 cannot support
w95 settings for : windows scaling & time stamp are NONE
(hehehe also cannot support several good known msOSs e.g. msDOS, w3.11 etc)
BTW recommendations for old &|or weak PC tweaking are in 5MpstweakR's thread:
older pc win95 Please help review my tweaks http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=179492
View Single Post http://forums.speedguide.net/showpos...5&postcount=33
RE : what can do for surfing speed up ? 11:09 2005-06-25

OTOH interesting that in explained above experimental cfg (hdw, sfw, connection)
in above post SG TCP/IP Analyzer results
w95 both default settings : windows scaling & time stamp
are different than can be expected
in first result should be :
inscription 'Tcp1323Opts' is not present by default in registry
and it's default value equal to 'Tcp1323Opts=0'
but in this case not expected surprise :
both are ON by default seams equal to 'Tcp1323Opts=3'
also still remaining not present in registry
so the first step 'the router's evidence' ?

also in second result - next step
value in setting
System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\MSTCP\Tcp1323Opts
=0 (both : scaling off and stamp off)
but still not checked for :
=1 (ON ; off respectively)
=2 (off ; ON respectively)
=3 (ON ; ON respectively)
activate 'TOS=128' seams still not present in registry TOS settings
but by default should be value =0 & description is not present in registry
so the second step 'the router's evidence' ?

still are several doubts e.g.
why in this case 65535 bits barrier for huge RWIN is not present
despite lack of registry inscription concerning on windows scaling
It is evident only for OS setting

OTOH a few unexpected 'gate router's evidences' are noted e.g.
MTU stuck; BlackHole; latency etc
Is it time for next options : Tcp1323Opts & TOS ?

[5MpstweakR]

We've released an updated version of the TCP Optimizer 2, including bug fixes and couple of user suggested changes. It can be downloaded from here:


TCP Optimizer v 2.0.1

... We've fixed all known bugs, including the Windows 9x problem under "Optimal settings" with the final 2.0.0 version we found. I'd lke to extend our apologies to those who had problems with the Optimal settings under Windows 9x and version 2.0.0 of the program.

...Please feel free to post any suggestions, questions, and possible problems with the program in this thread.

P.S.
You can view any past issues, and list of updates in the following threads:
version 2.0.0 final
version 2 beta

Andrzej

you said...

IMO importance of findings that TCP Optimizer v2.01 cannot support w95 settings for : windows scaling & time stamp are NONE (hehehe also cannot support several good known msOSs e.g. msDOS, w3.11 etc)

BTW recommendations for old &|or weak PC tweaking are in 5MpstweakR's thread: older pc win95 Please help review my tweaks http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=179492

The point of my post here http://forums.speedguide.net/showpos...8&postcount=30 is to make sure that anyone who uses Win95 understands that TCP Optimizer using Optimal settings if one is following the instructions does not even get you close... at least it did not for me....

It looks like this or a variant of this was a known issue from the 1st post of this thread, and appears to continue to be a problem for those using at least my version of Win95.

The issue is compounded because once your RWin is set using TCPO instructions and Optimal settings, if you use Win95 (there are still a lot of us out here using Win95), you have to either screw with the slider bar to get various new RWin values or do what I did - 2+2 said the problem was an unknown/addressed software compatibility issue and use DRTCP to change RWin values...

My post here http://forums.speedguide.net/showpos...8&postcount=30

clearly gives kudos to both programs and recognizes limitations.

The positive side of using TCPO first is that it gets you closer to the page load tweak, it also gives new values for max connections etc...

I just hope that whoever is maintaining TCP Optimizer will either address this issue or disclaim that it is not completely compatible with Win95.

[alaurene]

Are the registry entries "NegativeCacheTime", "NegativeSOACacheTime", and "NetFailureCacheTime" correct under Windows XP? MS indicates that these are for W2K with no mention of XP. MS further indicates that "MaxNegativeCacheTtl" and "MaxCacheTtl" are the equivalents for XP.

There is some commentary on the web (http://www.helpwithwindows.com/WindowsXP/tune-24.html) indicating that the W2K keys used by TCPOptimizer are, in fact, preventing XP from using the correct information........hmmmm, ya might wanna fix it.....???

[Philip]

Are the registry entries "NegativeCacheTime", "NegativeSOACacheTime", and "NetFailureCacheTime" correct under Windows XP? MS indicates that these are for W2K with no mention of XP. MS further indicates that "MaxNegativeCacheTtl" and "MaxCacheTtl" are the equivalents for XP.

There is some commentary on the web (http://www.helpwithwindows.com/WindowsXP/tune-24.html) indicating that the W2K keys used by TCPOptimizer are, in fact, preventing XP from using the correct information........hmmmm, ya might wanna fix it.....???

Thanks for the pointer, will research this further. We took the information from the MS documentation, will have to test it to confirm.

[alaurene]

Thanks for the pointer, will research this further. We took the information from the MS documentation, will have to test it to confirm.

Great.. ..I look forward to your research. The MS documentation is somewhat confusing between W2K and XP. There are differences that even the techs at MS do not seem to be fully aware of...

[mccoffee]

Thanks for the pointer, will research this further. We took the information from the MS documentation, will have to test it to confirm.

wow he is actully doing work once in a life time momement

[Philip]

There is a newer version of the program available. Please see this thread:

http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=186302