New Question
 
 
PRTG Network Monitor

Intuitive to Use.
Easy to manage.

200.000 administrators have chosen PRTG to monitor their network. Find out how you can reduce cost, increase QoS and ease planning, as well.

Free PRTG
Download >>

 

What is this?

This knowledgebase contains questions and answers about PRTG Network Monitor and network monitoring in general. You are invited to get involved by asking and answering questions!

Learn more

 

Top Tags


View all Tags


PRTG ping vs CMD ping results

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

I get inconsistent results between MS-DOS and PRTG ping.

When I use MS-DOS, I get occasionally a round-trip time well over 1 msec. But with PRTG, I get that 50% of the time.

Is there something I am missing?

PRTG :

2018-01-23 11:38:18 AM0 msec0 msec0 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:37:48 AM14 msec0 msec37 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:37:18 AM0 msec0 msec0 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:36:48 AM16 msec1 msec41 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:36:18 AM0 msec0 msec1 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:35:48 AM7 msec0 msec21 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:35:18 AM0 msec0 msec0 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:34:48 AM6 msec0 msec20 msec0 %0 %100 %
2018-01-23 11:34:18 AM0 msec0 msec0 msec0 %0 %100 %

CMD:

Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.2.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

cmd ms-dos ping prtg

Created on Jan 23, 2018 9:00:28 PM by  Superbobby (0) 1

Last change on Jan 24, 2018 11:59:46 AM by  Luciano Lingnau [Paessler Support]



4 Replies

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi Superbobby,

Are you really using MS-DOS to send the Pings, or did you start a command line on the host where PRTG is installed?

PRTG uses the Windows API to send Pings to target devices. As the command line also shows one of these spikes, it does not necessarily need to be wrong that PRTG also receives these spikes; the scanning interval of 30 seconds is higher than the interval of Pings via CMD. If the command line is started on the very same host as the PRTG probe, do the spikes still occur if you stop the Pings via the CMD?

Best regards, Felix

Created on Jan 24, 2018 12:18:13 PM by  Felix Saure [Paessler Support]



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

I started a command line on the host where PRTG is installed. Sorry, MS-DOS is what some people still call it.

The spikes occur in all time. It does not affect the results if I ping simultaneously using CMD. I was not doing any ping when I captured the PRTG results (see up here).

I am aware of the 30 seconds interval. I did some random ping from CMD and the results are still the same. Using CMD from a different computer on the same LAN, I get similar results.

The device I am pinging is a Sonicwall SOHO firewall.

Created on Jan 24, 2018 1:57:28 PM by  Superbobby (0) 1



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

I got the answer.

Since I am pinging a network device (Sonicwall Firewall)...

"...pinging to a an loopback interface on a switch will always give you varying results , only a ping end end is valid ...it will not be accurate as it is not giving priority to the icmp packet"

REF

Created on Jan 24, 2018 8:14:27 PM by  Superbobby (0) 1



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi Superbobby,

Thanks for sharing your findings, makes a lot of sense then.

Best regards, Felix

Created on Jan 25, 2018 8:40:26 AM by  Felix Saure [Paessler Support]



Please log in or register to enter your reply.


Disclaimer: The information in the Paessler Knowledge Base comes without warranty of any kind. Use at your own risk. Before applying any instructions please exercise proper system administrator housekeeping. You must make sure that a proper backup of all your data is available.