On Thursday 26 September 2002 08:02 am, Vallo Kallaste wrote: > > All that said, even old (16bit)NE2000 clone will easily sustain > 800+kB/s on my old 133Mhz Pentium with CPU load 20% or so. 400kB/s > versus 100kB/s throughput difference in this particular case isn't > matter of 3Com vs. Via NIC, I guess. I'll suggest trying out > IPFilter (ipf) and let us know of the results.
Yeah, and I run ipfirewall/divert/natd on PII-300's between xl0 and fxp0 and have no thruput problems. I don't remember what or if he said his firewall ruleset was like, or if it was "open". The difference between his system and my systems is a built-for-cheap Rhine chipset NIC. Rhythm is important in TCP/IP. When all the rowers stroke in unison then the boat moves fast and smooth. When one rower strokes to a different drum then the ride is rougher. Ssh via terminal on MacOS X to FreeBSD sshd is bursty and slow to update the terminal window when connected thru my ipfw/FreeBSD router. Better Telnet With SSH under Classic is slick and smooth. Scp in the terminal window has excellent thruput. The burstyness of ssh is due to conflicting rhythms of the schedulers on the remote end, firewall, and the MacOS client end. And I think the same sort of thing is happening in this thread. -- David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
