<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;">thanks all for responding!<br><br>No there's no firewall in the setup.<br><br>I think it's got to do with the X25 statements, i'll need to figure out if the translate statements are configured correctly. I'm performing this throughput test to gauge the impact of total no of x25 call on a port. It's not entirely fun btw :)<br><br>--- On <b>Sun, 4/5/09, Mark Wagner <i><mwagner@redhat.com></i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">From: Mark Wagner <mwagner@redhat.com><br>Subject: Re: [netperf-talk] unkown response to debug check<br>To: echelon360@yahoo.com<br>Cc: netperf-talk@netperf.org<br>Date: Sunday, April 5, 2009, 5:40 PM<br><br><pre>Clive Barker wrote:<br>> hi all,<br>> <br>> i can't seem to get a packet going through via netperf<br>> <br>> i've set up the
server to listen to port 4001 and a standard telnet<br>(using port 4001) verifies this to be working.However, when i run the netperf<br>command<br>> <br>> netperf -p 4003 -H 192.168.1.13<br>So this is a typo right, you are using -p 4001 on the netperf side right ?<br><br>Are there any firewalls in play here ?<br><br>-mark<br></pre></blockquote></td></tr></table><br>