On 2015-10-26, at 4:38, Kevin Oberman <rkober...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:10 AM, Daniel Engberg < > daniel.engberg.li...@pyret.net> wrote: > >> One thing I've noticed that probably affects your performance benchmarks >> somewhat is that you're using iperf(2) instead of the newer iperf3 but I >> could be wrong... > > iperf3 is not a newer version of iperf. It is a total re-write and a rather > different tool. It has significant improvements in many areas and new > capabilities that might be of use. That said, there is no reason to think > that the results of tests using iperf2 are in any way inaccurate. However, > it is entirely possible to get misleading results if options not properly > selected.
FWIW, I've been using netperf and tried various options. I don't think the issues is the benchmarking tool. I think the issue is TSO/LRO issues (per my earlier email.) Lars
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
