Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
DynV

which processes are responsible for DNS resolve

Recommended Posts

first, please excuse me if the answer was readily available but I went through all the following query results in vain.

Search Results

Your search for the term process dns returned 149 results

Page 6 of 6

I'm using a NetLimiter on Windows 7, which a screenshot is attached, and it works as expected when I actually get a connection to programs/processes. 2/3 of the time, connection don't get through

Server not found

Firefox can't find the server at www.[...]

and the difficulties even reach low enough (ISO level) to affect ping (command-line). Ping will sometimes not get through

>ping google.ca

Ping request could not find host google.ca. Please check the name and try again.

>ping google.ca

Pinging google.ca [173.194.43.56] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 173.194.43.56:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

and sometimes do get through although with a pathetic 1st or 2nd reply, effectively getting better,

>ping google.ca

Pinging google.ca [74.125.226.248] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.

Reply from 74.125.226.248: bytes=32 time=1282ms TTL=54

Reply from 74.125.226.248: bytes=32 time=287ms TTL=54

Reply from 74.125.226.248: bytes=32 time=273ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.248:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 273ms, Maximum = 1282ms, Average = 614ms

>ping google.ca

Pinging google.ca [173.194.43.56] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 173.194.43.56: bytes=32 time=2638ms TTL=54

Reply from 173.194.43.56: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=54

Reply from 173.194.43.56: bytes=32 time=147ms TTL=54

Reply from 173.194.43.56: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 173.194.43.56:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 147ms, Maximum = 2638ms, Average = 780ms

and other times get worse through the ping

>ping google.ca

Pinging google.ca [173.194.75.94] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 173.194.75.94: bytes=32 time=3557ms TTL=45

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 173.194.75.94:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 1, Lost = 3 (75% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 3557ms, Maximum = 3557ms, Average = 3557ms

seeing such behavior, I'm wondering which process, image name or title/label, is responsible for DNS resolving ; so I could set it to high priority.

I tried to set a few processes to high (network priority) but my attempts were failures. it's likely either the ones I tried (at high) weren't for DNS resolving or the netlimiter fail to consider DNS ; high = none, normal = some, low = lots. for my process screening I've looked at the process image names in reverse order of total downloaded bandwidth.

the context is me using an offline downloader to low (bandwidth) priority, which seem to be the sole responsible for taking so much bandwidth that almost none is left for others. what usually happen using such program is the server bandwidth being lower than my provider maximum speed so I have some left out to do not-so-high internet usage, AKA non-video-streaming. now being on a limited connection, dial-up, I've set that high-bandwidth process to low priority using the netlimiter. I expected normal/high process to have no problem accessing internet just as there was about no other internt usage.

the workaround I came up with is to cap the offline downloader, to 2-4 kbps, which leave me 1-3 kbps for other programs. the downside to this is all the time I'm actually not using that little bandwidth (chatting, reading forums, etc.), I'm taking even longer to complete the download. the workaround to the workaround was to keep turning that absolute limit on & off.

I'd really like the netlimiter to do as expected, which is imposing relative limits, so I wouldn't have to use absolute ones ; the latter wasting bandwidth or annoying me to switch on & off regularly.

I'd appreciate help with bandwidth relative limitation but my main concern ATM is to find which process(es) is/are responsible for DNS resolve.

thank you kindly

post-22587-0-04402000-1343355031_thumb.p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new record:

>ping google.ca

Pinging google.ca [74.125.226.215] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 74.125.226.215: bytes=32 time=3370ms TTL=54

Request timed out.

Reply from 74.125.226.215: bytes=32 time=2600ms TTL=54

Reply from 74.125.226.215: bytes=32 time=2815ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.215:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 2600ms, Maximum = 3370ms, Average = 2928ms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy