Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
Hi Guys, That was it, I swapped the cable and bingo I got higher transfer rates... It looks like this was quite an old ethernet cable. Thanks for the help! On Monday, May 5, 2014 9:16 PM, Christopher Hilton ch...@vindaloo.com wrote: On May 5, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Tuomo Latto d...@iki.fi wrote: On 28.04.2014 09:42, ML mail wrote: I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. How about the cables? Great point. That's bitten me in the a** before. Make absolutely certain that you have a cable with all 4 pairs wired in. 100Mbit ethernet only used two pairs, Gigabit uses all four. If you connect a gigabit port with a two pair cable the best you can do is 100Mbit/s. Also, unless you are going some major distance Cat5e cable is sufficient. In fact cat 5 cable will do 1Gb/s over short distances. When I got burned by this it turned out that the cable I got with my 3Com something-or-other only terminated pairs 1 and 2. As I said before, that's sufficient for Fast-Ethernet but not for Gigabit-Ethernet. -- Chris ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
I’m certain the answer is “it depends.” Do you have ANY idea where the bottleneck is? The hardware is capable of much more than that. What does systat or top say? Maxed out CPU? Heavy interrupt rate? How many packets per second? Can you turn off flow-control at your switch? The ethernet chipset was supported by 4.6, so I don’t think updating from 5.1 to 5.5 will benefit you in terms of hardware speed. pf continues to improve with each version … but the real fishy smelling piece is the cap right at 100Mb. That sounds like a hardware / negotiation / switch issue. ED. On 2014, May 3, at 11:22 PM, Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net wrote: ML mail [mlnos...@yahoo.com] wrote: I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. Yes ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
On 28.04.2014 09:42, ML mail wrote: I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. How about the cables? -- Tuomo --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
On May 5, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Tuomo Latto d...@iki.fi wrote: On 28.04.2014 09:42, ML mail wrote: I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. How about the cables? Great point. That's bitten me in the a** before. Make absolutely certain that you have a cable with all 4 pairs wired in. 100Mbit ethernet only used two pairs, Gigabit uses all four. If you connect a gigabit port with a two pair cable the best you can do is 100Mbit/s. Also, unless you are going some major distance Cat5e cable is sufficient. In fact cat 5 cable will do 1Gb/s over short distances. When I got burned by this it turned out that the cable I got with my 3Com something-or-other only terminated pairs 1 and 2. As I said before, that's sufficient for Fast-Ethernet but not for Gigabit-Ethernet. -- Chris signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
ML mail [mlnos...@yahoo.com] wrote: I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. Yes ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
I am using OpenBSD 5.1, would their be any performance gains in upgrading to 5.4 or 5.5? Btw yes I checked again and the interface is really in 1000baseT. Regards, ML On Saturday, April 26, 2014 4:32 PM, Christopher Hilton ch...@vindaloo.com wrote: On Apr 25, 2014, at 9:28 PM, David Ruggiero thatseattle...@gmail.com wrote: Second there is quite a bit of Voodoo^H^H^H^H^H^Hahem non-deterministic configuration here because the ALT-Q code has some real performance issues Chris, do you expect that the ALT-Q rewrite coming in OpenBSD 5.5 will significantly improve queue and bandwidth management performance? Or is it just window dressing? Would love to know if the pain of an upgrade (I'm on 5.3 IIRC) will be worth it. I do use ALT-Q extensively. If I remember right, I heard that they were reworking the code in the BSDTalk podcast at the same time as I heard about the pf performance upgrades. It's worth tracking down and listening to the podcast to get more information. If I were that interested I might even dash out a quick email to the person working on the code for an update. For me the limitation isn't a problem because with Alt-Q OpenBSD can still exceed my available bandwidth. That said I do plan to upgrade to 5.5 but it's more about getting my OpenBSD stuff under puppet configuration management. -- Chris ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
On Apr 25, 2014, at 9:28 PM, David Ruggiero thatseattle...@gmail.com wrote: Second there is quite a bit of Voodoo^H^H^H^H^H^Hahem non-deterministic configuration here because the ALT-Q code has some real performance issues Chris, do you expect that the ALT-Q rewrite coming in OpenBSD 5.5 will significantly improve queue and bandwidth management performance? Or is it just window dressing? Would love to know if the pain of an upgrade (I'm on 5.3 IIRC) will be worth it. I do use ALT-Q extensively. If I remember right, I heard that they were reworking the code in the BSDTalk podcast at the same time as I heard about the pf performance upgrades. It's worth tracking down and listening to the podcast to get more information. If I were that interested I might even dash out a quick email to the person working on the code for an update. For me the limitation isn't a problem because with Alt-Q OpenBSD can still exceed my available bandwidth. That said I do plan to upgrade to 5.5 but it's more about getting my OpenBSD stuff under puppet configuration management. -- Chris signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
Hi, On 25 Apr 2014, at 16:53, ML mail mlnos...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I am using a net6501-30 (600 MHz CPU) with OpenBSD for my internet connection (cable modem - soekris - internal network) and wanted to know what is the theoretical max throughput in terms of bandwidth? I have a 250 Mbit/s internet cable connection and currently with some speed tests I can't manage more than 100 Mbit/s. That's suspicious - is the interface negotiating 1000baseT OK and not 100baseT ? If I remove the Soekris from my setup (directly connected to the cable modem) I can manage around 220 Mbit/s. Regards ML -- Bob Bishop r...@gid.co.uk ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
My 6501-50 can handle my 100mbps just fine, with gusto. And lan traffic it can do much faster than that, about 800mbps using iperf. Should be able to route 250mbps no problem. Some firewall settings might reduce that a tad. On Fri 25 Apr 2014 07:00:44 PM Bob Bishop wrote: Hi, On 25 Apr 2014, at 16:53, ML mail mlnos...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I am using a net6501-30 (600 MHz CPU) with OpenBSD for my internet connection (cable modem - soekris - internal network) and wanted to know what is the theoretical max throughput in terms of bandwidth? I have a 250 Mbit/s internet cable connection and currently with some speed tests I can't manage more than 100 Mbit/s. That's suspicious - is the interface negotiating 1000baseT OK and not 100baseT ? If I remove the Soekris from my setup (directly connected to the cable modem) I can manage around 220 Mbit/s. Regards ML -- Bob Bishop r...@gid.co.uk ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech -- Thomas Fjellstrom tho...@fjellstrom.ca ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
On Apr 25, 2014, at 11:53 AM, ML mail mlnos...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, I am using a net6501-30 (600 MHz CPU) with OpenBSD for my internet connection (cable modem - soekris - internal network) and wanted to know what is the theoretical max throughput in terms of bandwidth? I have a 250 Mbit/s internet cable connection and currently with some speed tests I can't manage more than 100 Mbit/s. If I remove the Soekris from my setup (directly connected to the cable modem) I can manage around 220 Mbit/s. That doesn't seem right to me. Some things to check: Use ifconfig to make sure that the interfaces are negotiating the correct speed. It's unlikely that they are not but if they aren't try specifying the interface speeds in your /etc/hostname.em[0-3] files. Check the obvious cases: Make sure you are looking at a wired connection. The maximum speed you will get over wifi will be lower than the speed you get over wired. Make sure you are running a recent version of OpenBSD, The pf firewall code underwent a substantial cleanup that improved performance late in the OpenBSD 4.x stages, Somewhere between 4.7 and 4.9 IIRC. It's likely that those three aren't the culprit but you have to address the elephant in the room. From what you say about being directly connected to the Cable Modem versus the Soekris I gather that you are _not_ testing your upstream provider's internet bandwidth. Other things I would look at are: How are your pf rules setup? Pf gets most of it's performance by applying state rules to packages which is quick. A packet only goes to the ruleset only after it's been tested against, and fails to match, all of the existing states on the firewall. A ruleset with a lot of no state specifiers will be expensive to process. Are you seeing a bufferbloat condition? If you cablemodem provides excess buffering, one connection can quite easily tie up all of your bandwidth by flooding that buffer with packets that cannot be dropped to activate TCP's automatic throttling condition. Note well that you will only have bufferbloat if you have two or more streams to the internet through your OpenBSD box. If you are the sole user then you don't have bufferbloat. If you are suffering from bufferbloat consider adding queueing to your ruleset and prioritizing the delivery of outbound TCP ACK packets. There are two issues here: Firstly Alt-q style QOS is not the best solution to the problem of bufferbloat but with OpenBSD that's the only tool you have right now. Second there is quite a bit of Voodoo^H^H^H^H^H^Hahem non-deterministic configuration here because the ALT-Q code has some real performance issues. In my setup I have 120/35 Mbit/s connectivity. I've restricted my inbound queues to 131Mbit/s and my outbound to 38Mbit/s to compensate for the overhead of the Alt-q code. Those levels were set by doing a few rounds of binary testing. E.g: I think the correct setting to realize 35 Mbit/s is between In the range between 35 ~ 40. What happens when I try 37.5? You would be right to turn your nose up at this procedure. I felt that it was a better choice than having to use IPTables. -- Chris signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501-30 max throughput
Second there is quite a bit of Voodoo^H^H^H^H^H^Hahem non-deterministic configuration here because the ALT-Q code has some real performance issues Chris, do you expect that the ALT-Q rewrite coming in OpenBSD 5.5 will significantly improve queue and bandwidth management performance? Or is it just window dressing? Would love to know if the pain of an upgrade (I'm on 5.3 IIRC) will be worth it. I do use ALT-Q extensively. And as long as I'm herethe blog of the guy following the OpenBSD kernel team as they hack and slash their way through a near-total-rewrite of the buggy OpenSSL code (to create LibreSSL) is quite, quite entertaining. Check it out: http://opensslrampage.org/ -d- ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
