I'm pretty excited about what Dev has found. Since I posted about this a month or so ago, I've just let my mail run on the NT4 BDC since I was never able to get it to perform efficiently on a PowerEdge 2550 running 2000.
Out of curiosity, those of you who have had similar problems with the Intel NICs and IMail, were these 2000 machines or NT4? I have tried 2 different servers with NT4 and Intel NICs and have not had any problems. I then tried two different 2000 servers with Intel NICs and both performed miserably. I also want to note that when I tried IpSwitch's fix (Use a 3com), I believe I put the 3com in the 2000 machine and disabled the onboard Intel 100 and Broadcomm 1000 in Windows ONLY. I did NOT disable it in the bios. And I STILL had the same performance problems. I am hoping that disabling it in the bios will make the difference. I'm about to try this again. Hopefully this time I'll be able to get IMail onto a 2000 box and get rid of my last remaining NT BDC. But this time I'm going about it a bit differently. I'm moving IMail to a temporary NT BDC (did this today) and will then wipe the original NT IMail box, install the 3Com NIC, disable onboard NICs in the BIOS, then build it as a fresh 2000 box. Then migrate the mail back. I'll post on my results hopefully next week. Thanks again, Dev! --Todd. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Travis W. Rabe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 2:33 PM Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] FIXED! Imail SLOW When Running On Fast W2K Hardware > Actually I have tried using a Netgear and a 3COM gigabit NIC for the hell of > it and got the same problem as the Gigabit NIC shipped with Dell. I have > three of the same types of Dell servers (one running SQL 2000, one running > IIS and one running Imail.) The result is the same no matter what I do for > the iMail server. Gigabit=BAD, 100MB=GOOD. I have had <knock on wood> none > of the same problems with the throughput on other servers. > > I have to agree with Dev on this one. > > Travis > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joseph Mann > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:28 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] FIXED! Imail SLOW When Running On Fast W2K > Hardware > > As you probably are aware I just wanted to mention that IMail doesn't > interact > directly with hardware. The exception only occurs with IMonitor that will > interact with the communication port if you have IMonitor setup to do so. > > In the past three years there have been two common components when used in > conjunction, don't seem to play to well together. > That would be Dell based servers in conjunction with the Intel Pro NIC, > most likely on-board based. You mentioned that you performed numerous > netstat sessions. In my experience with this issue I have see some reports > 96 pages in length due to something not closing a socket correctly, > therefore > basically running the box out of sockets. If it were IMail once I stopped > all service it SHOULD have cleared everything up, but that was not the case. > > I personally believe it has to do with Intel's buffering technique, which I > have included a > snippet from their web site below. If the system bus becomes extremely busy > the card will > then wait for the bus to become available before releasing data. > > /////// > First, it maximizes data throughput, taking > full advantage of all available network bandwidth. > Second, it minimizes the need for the system's CPU > to move network data, leaving it more time to work > on other tasks. Other design features provide > additional performance for the EtherExpress PRO/100 > adapters. For example, the cards use a high speed > transmit and receive FIFO cache of 16K static random > access memory (SRAM). The FIFO accumulates network > data when other peripherals are using the system's I/O > bus, then releases the data as the bus becomes available. > The result is a highly efficient flow of data from the > adapter to the PC and back. > /////// > > > -- Joe M. > > Wednesday, December 11, 2002, 1:32:11 PM, you wrote: > > > D> Hopefully the following may be of some help to others. > > D> I had a similar problem as Todd. Here is a part of his > D> thread: > > D> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg59929.html > > D> In my case, an existing NT4 Imail installation was > D> moved to a new, very fast (P4-2.4GHz/512MB) Dell > D> PowerEdge running W2K, hardware RAID, Imail 7.13, and > D> KWM 3.0. > > D> The result? We had inexplicably slow logins, flaky mail > D> downloads, GLACIAL webmail, and random SMTP/POP > D> hangs--and all with CPU utilization near ZERO. Oh yeah, > D> and a lot of ticked-off users!! > > D> Anyway, after a week of debugging, hardware swapping, > D> cloned testbeds, performance logging, and analyzing > D> over 200 MB of packet captures, I now have it humming > D> along quite nicely, thank you. > > D> The usual caveat here: The following fixes worked for > D> me, your mileage may vary. :) > > > D> 1. My dual-homed Dell server was equipped with an Intel > D> Gigabit ethernet integrated into the motherboard, along > D> with an Intel Pro100/S NIC. I noticed in a post that > D> Todd extracted from Ipswitch TechSupp the stunning > D> admission that Imail is incompetent at reliably > D> communicating with two popular server adapters: > > D> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg59332.html > > D> Guess what? Tech support is right. My tests showed that > D> Imail would randomly just stop communicating for > D> varying periods of time over these two adapters. This > D> particular "going into limbo" issue was resolved by > D> replacing them with two 3C905C's. > > D> Note that to fully eliminate this issue, it was > D> necessary to completely DISABLE the onboard Gigabit > D> Ethernet adapter in the server's CMOS setup. The second > D> Intel Pro adapter card was also physically removed from > D> the box. > > D> ISSUE SUMMARY: No fast, server-quality NICs are allowed > D> within sight of an Imail box. Ipswitch apparently wants > D> us to continue running the latest 1998-era hardware. :) > > > D> 2. Packet captures indicated that Imail did not like > D> operating over a NIC with more than one IP address > D> assigned to it. This may be somehow related to the > D> Imail programming blunder of binding to all IP address. > D> Inexplicably, the speed of the machine may also play a > D> role, since an identical multiple IP setup cloned to a > D> P2/266 had no such Alzheimer's issues. And yes, the > D> Imail address WAS the primary IP. The fact is that > D> removing the second IP on this P4 made a HUGE > D> difference in Webmail stability and speed. It doesn't > D> make sense, but as I said, YMMV. > > D> ISSUE SUMMARY: Only one IP address per NIC on a Pentium > D> 4 box running Imail. > > > D> 3. Once the above was sorted out (users--especially > D> WebMail--noticed a HUGE difference in performance and > D> reliability with the two fixes above), there was still > D> a mysterious 1.5 - 6 second delay on some incoming SMTP > D> and POP sessions. > > D> The cause? In this case, it was NetBIOS name lookups > D> timing out. > > D> To verify the problem, look for this unanswered NBT > D> query request string in your packet > D> captures: "*<00...(15)>" > > D> Without getting too involved in the machinations of > D> NetBIOS or of our internal network and firewall layout, > D> basically Windows 2000 (or perhaps a 'getHostAddress()' > D> call by Imail) was insisting on performing an > D> unnecessary reverse lookup (computer name from IP > D> address) on the incoming connection. It was sending a > D> node status request directly to the perceived > D> source--my NAT Public IP address (the equivalent of a > D> "nbtstat -A <ip_address>"). > > D> The irony? After NetBIOS repeatedly times out and > D> finally gives up trying to resolve the name, W2K then > D> simply ignores the timeout and successfully proceeds > D> with the SMTP/POP connection! Sheeesh! > > D> The solution? If the NetBIOS query can't be resolved > D> with properly configured WINS/DNS, go into the HOSTS > D> file (systemroot\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\) on your > D> Imail box and give the IP address query that is timing > D> out a name to satisfy the lookup. In my case (failing > D> to resolve the NAT Public IP), this is what it looks > D> like: > > > D> 127.0.0.1 localhost #existing entry > D> ... ... #more existing entries > D> 207.178.203.99 anyname.mydomainname.com #BINGO! > > > D> Note that the NetBIOS timeout issue was not present on > D> an otherwise identically configured NT4 box. > > D> ISSUE SUMMARY: Look for unexplained response delays of > D> multiples of 1.5 seconds. If you have them, sniff the > D> wire (make sure to check ALL interfaces on multi-homed > D> boxes!) for unresolved NetBIOS queries. If necessary, > D> simply create a suitable Hosts file entry to make > D> Windows happy! > > D> By the way, the Hosts file is checked every time name > D> resolution is attempted. Changes in it take effect > D> immediately and do NOT require a reboot! > > D> As I said, the box absolutely rocks now. I don't claim > D> to know why some of these fixes worked, just that they > D> did. Perhaps this will provide a helpful starting point > D> to others facing similar inexplicable slowdowns. > > D> Cheers, > > D> Dev > > D> -------------- > D> Dev Anand, MCSE,CCNA,A+ > D> Network Manager > D> Biomorphic VLSI, Inc. > D> Westlake Village, CA 91362 > D> dev_at_biomorphic_dot_com > D> pcpro_at_vcnet_dot_com > > > D> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > D> List Archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > D> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
