Re: [SOLVED] Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Imobach González Sosa wrote: First of all, THANK YOU all for your help. I tried all your solutions but I didn't worked for me. Why? Simple: the problem seems to be in may ADSL router. I'll explain: I took my desktop computer to my neighbour's home. I connected it to his ADSL and... worked pretty fine! So I got a new router (from my neighbour's sister, thank you both) and take it home. Changing my old router by the new one seems to solve the problem :-P Does your DSL router have built in NAT support, and is it enabled? Some of the older SpeedStream routers shipped by some DSL providers have a poor implementation of NAT that interacts poorly with other NAT implementations, such as the FreeBSD and Linksys NAT code. When using a DSL modem provided by ShenTel in the Shenandoah Valley (in .va.us), I've seen TCP connections wedge, close spontaneously, etc, when passing through the NAT box... Robert N M Watson ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
El dom, 29-05-2005 a las 14:27 -0700, Kris Kennaway escribi:
This kind of thing is often caused by duplex mismatch on your NIC.
Ok, I've been playing around with media options (10/100, full and half
duplex) but it didn't work. I suppose that I'll try to get a better NIC
from one of my friends to try again :P
Thank you Kris.
--
EuropeSwPatentFree
(o_.' Imobach Gonzlez Sosa imobachgs en banot.net
//\c{} osoh en jabber.org Usuario Linux #201634
V__)_ http://www.banot.net/~osoh/
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
El lun, 30-05-2005 a las 12:49 +0200, Gunnar Flygt escribi:
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:03:20AM +0100, Imobach Gonzlez Sosa wrote:
El dom, 29-05-2005 a las 14:27 -0700, Kris Kennaway escribi:
This kind of thing is often caused by duplex mismatch on your NIC.
Ok, I've been playing around with media options (10/100, full and half
duplex) but it didn't work. I suppose that I'll try to get a better NIC
from one of my friends to try again :P
The only important thing here is that you have the same settings on the
switch as on the server! For Linux-es I tend to set them auto - auto but
for FreeBSD 100/full (non negotiation) - 100/full wotks best.
Ok, I think I have it correctly with this command:
ifconfig rl0 media 100baseTX -mediaopt full-duplex
(rl0 or dc0, I've used two different NICs).
Moreover, I connected my FreeBSD box to the ADSL router (directly, no
more machines connected) and forced the adapter to 10baseT/UTP and
full-duplex but it didn't work. I also tried with 100baseTX, but then
there was no carrier (the ADSL router is a bit old, and only support
10Mbps).
So, I'm running out of ideas :(
Thank you all for your help!
--
EuropeSwPatentFree
(o_.' Imobach Gonzlez Sosa imobachgs en banot.net
//\c{} osoh en jabber.org Usuario Linux #201634
V__)_ http://www.banot.net/~osoh/
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
Imobach Gonzlez Sosa wrote: Ok, I think I have it correctly with this command: ifconfig rl0 media 100baseTX -mediaopt full-duplex (rl0 or dc0, I've used two different NICs). Moreover, I connected my FreeBSD box to the ADSL router (directly, no more machines connected) and forced the adapter to 10baseT/UTP and full-duplex but it didn't work. I also tried with 100baseTX, but then there was no carrier (the ADSL router is a bit old, and only support 10Mbps). Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:00:23 +0200, Imobach González Sosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: El lun, 30-05-2005 a las 12:49 +0200, Gunnar Flygt escribió: On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:03:20AM +0100, Imobach González Sosa wrote: El dom, 29-05-2005 a las 14:27 -0700, Kris Kennaway escribió: This kind of thing is often caused by duplex mismatch on your NIC. Ok, I've been playing around with media options (10/100, full and half duplex) but it didn't work. I suppose that I'll try to get a better NIC from one of my friends to try again :P The only important thing here is that you have the same settings on the switch as on the server! For Linux-es I tend to set them auto - auto but for FreeBSD 100/full (non negotiation) - 100/full wotks best. Ok, I think I have it correctly with this command: ifconfig rl0 media 100baseTX -mediaopt full-duplex (rl0 or dc0, I've used two different NICs). Moreover, I connected my FreeBSD box to the ADSL router (directly, no more machines connected) and forced the adapter to 10baseT/UTP and full-duplex but it didn't work. I also tried with 100baseTX, but then there was no carrier (the ADSL router is a bit old, and only support 10Mbps). So, I'm running out of ideas :( Thank you all for your help! Don't you need a cross-cable to connect directly to the router? -- Ronald Klop Amsterdam, The Netherlands ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:03:20AM +0100, Imobach Gonz?lez Sosa wrote: El dom, 29-05-2005 a las 14:27 -0700, Kris Kennaway escribi??: This kind of thing is often caused by duplex mismatch on your NIC. Ok, I've been playing around with media options (10/100, full and half duplex) but it didn't work. I suppose that I'll try to get a better NIC from one of my friends to try again :P You could also look at the MTU settings, are the lost packets any particular size? Andrew ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 07:52:13PM +0300, Pertti Kosunen wrote: Imobach Gonz??lez Sosa wrote: Ok, I think I have it correctly with this command: ifconfig rl0 media 100baseTX -mediaopt full-duplex (rl0 or dc0, I've used two different NICs). Moreover, I connected my FreeBSD box to the ADSL router (directly, no more machines connected) and forced the adapter to 10baseT/UTP and full-duplex but it didn't work. I also tried with 100baseTX, but then there was no carrier (the ADSL router is a bit old, and only support 10Mbps). Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. Kris pgp7T7Vy2iizt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
Kris Kennaway wrote: Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. I don't agree to that. I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex. Changing this to autosense made the problems gone. Reason (as some people of the german questions-list told me): Many cheap switches always send their autosensepakets, and have great problems if the nics connected to the switch do not response to the autosensepakets (cause they are configured to 10/100baseTX full/half duplex). Also realtek nics are far away from being good nics, they work without problems with the autosensemode and a cheap switch for me (and many other people I know). I would suggest the starter of this thread to use autosense with his nic (if not tested yet). Kris Best regards Sebastian ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[SOLVED] Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
First of all, THANK YOU all for your help. I tried all your solutions
but I didn't worked for me. Why? Simple: the problem seems to be in may
ADSL router.
I'll explain: I took my desktop computer to my neighbour's home. I
connected it to his ADSL and... worked pretty fine! So I got a new
router (from my neighbour's sister, thank you both) and take it home.
Changing my old router by the new one seems to solve the problem :-P
I'm puzzled, but it works now.
Thank you again!
--
EuropeSwPatentFree
(o_.' Imobach Gonzlez Sosa imobachgs en banot.net
//\c{} osoh en jabber.org Usuario Linux #201634
V__)_ http://www.banot.net/~osoh/
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
- Original Message - From: Sebastian Ahndorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kris Kennaway wrote: Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. I don't agree to that. I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex. Changing this to autosense made the problems gone. Reason (as some people of the german questions-list told me): Many cheap switches always send their autosensepakets, and have great problems if the nics connected to the switch do not response to the autosensepakets (cause they are configured to 10/100baseTX full/half duplex). Also realtek nics are far away from being good nics, they work without problems with the autosensemode and a cheap switch for me (and many other people I know). I would suggest the starter of this thread to use autosense with his nic (if not tested yet). Quite a few 100tx nic / switch combinations misbehave when both sides are not set to the same be that 100fdx or auto sense. I've actually never seen a problem with 100tx autoneg as long as both ends had it selected and there wasn't a cable problem. Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
Sebastian Ahndorf wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is
no config possibility in other end.
autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl.
I don't agree to that.
I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some
realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex.
Changing this to autosense made the problems gone.
I would second that. My cheap rl card performs better with auto than
with either 100TX-full or 100TX-half ('tho its always auto'ed to 100TX
full duplex anyway).
And by way of interest, I have just experienced a similar problem with
NICs + 100 baseT switch - it was a 3Com Office connect card (xl driver)
that I had the issues with, and ended up replacing it with a DLink (vr
driver).
Cheers
Mark
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
Steven Hartland wrote: Quite a few 100tx nic / switch combinations misbehave when both sides are not set to the same be that 100fdx or auto sense. I've actually never seen a problem with 100tx autoneg as long as both ends had it selected and there wasn't a cable problem. I was talking about cheap switches (and that's pretty the same with adsl-routers). There is usually no way to configure (at the switch) which speed/duplex should be used and if you set your nic to a specific mode, the switch doesn't mention this. So it keeps on sending it's autosensepakets and waits for response. It get's timeouts and thats what pulls down the networkperformance. So you have to set your nic to autosense and you'll get a better performance, cause the nic responces to autosense. Steve Good night, Sebastian ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
- Original Message - From: Sebastian Ahndorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Steven Hartland wrote: Quite a few 100tx nic / switch combinations misbehave when both sides are not set to the same be that 100fdx or auto sense. I've actually never seen a problem with 100tx autoneg as long as both ends had it selected and there wasn't a cable problem. I was talking about cheap switches (and that's pretty the same with adsl-routers). There is usually no way to configure (at the switch) which speed/duplex should be used and if you set your nic to a specific mode, the switch doesn't mention this. So it keeps on sending it's autosensepakets and waits for response. It get's timeouts and thats what pulls down the networkperformance. So you have to set your nic to autosense and you'll get a better performance, cause the nic responces to autosense. I think your just repeating what I said in different words :P Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
At 04:56 PM 5/30/2005, Sebastian Ahndorf wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. I don't agree to that. I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex. Changing this to autosense made the problems gone. Reason (as some people of the german questions-list told me): Many cheap switches always send their autosensepakets, and have great problems if the nics connected to the switch do not response to the autosensepakets (cause they are configured to 10/100baseTX full/half duplex). Also realtek nics are far away from being good nics, they work without problems with the autosensemode and a cheap switch for me (and many other people I know). I would suggest the starter of this thread to use autosense with his nic (if not tested yet). The deal is simply this: Autosense must be enabled on both sides to autonegotiate speed/duplex. If you force one side to full duplex, the other side still autosenses (on most unmanaged switches), fail, and will fall back to half duplex causing a duplex mismatch. You have to force the other side to full duplex as well. If you cannot do this, leave it at auto, or set the side you can manage to half so they agree. I personally like to leave everything on auto except links between switches and between routers and switches which I force to full. It always works out well for me on practically any platform or OS. Maybe on one or two occasions I've experienced faulty drivers which cause the autosensing to not work on the NIC and just default to half duplex. Vinny Abello Network Engineer Server Management [EMAIL PROTECTED] (973)300-9211 x 125 (973)940-6125 (Direct) PGP Key Fingerprint: 3BC5 9A48 FC78 03D3 82E0 E935 5325 FBCB 0100 977A Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection http://www.tellurian.com (888)TELLURIAN Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear - not absence of fear -- Mark Twain ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 10:56:22PM +0200, Sebastian Ahndorf wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no config possibility in other end. autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. I don't agree to that. I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex. Changing this to autosense made the problems gone. Your one example does not disprove the statement. I've seen this problem myself, and so have many others. I found this document extremely helpful in understanding ethernet autonegotiation, especially the table on page 7: https://myvision.flukenetworks.com/edocs/efile.asp?oid=2040882 Good luck, -- Tod ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
Hi all,
Ok, I'm new to FreeBSD (for second time :)) and I'm getting an strange
behaviour. I don't know if you could help me, but I've to try. I've read the
handbook, manpages and search google for a while, but I don't know how to
solve it.
I have some machines in my network, connected to Internet with and ADSL line.
All those machines have GNU/Linux systems (and a laptop with Windows). I've
installed FreeBSD recently (5.4) on my desktop machine and it performs badly
in the net.
I'll explain: I've got a lot of timeouts using fetch, firefox, links, ftp...
etc. I thought that could be a hardware problem, but I connected this box and
my laptop to a hub and, using ethereal (on the laptop), I looked the traffic
searching for troubles.
And that's what I saw: sometimes, my FreeBSD box sends a package and receive
no answer. Then, it have to wait for timeout and try again... and again...
Sometimes the other peer finally answer, and sometimes not. DNS, HTTP, FTP...
nothing seems to work properly.
Pretty amazing, huh? Any idea? Something I must know about bsd's TCP/IP? I'm
gonna cry... :(
Thank you all in advance.
--
EuropeSwPatentFree
(o_.' Imobach Gonzlez Sosa imobachgs en banot.net
//\c{} osoh en jabber.org Usuario Linux #201634
V__)_ http://www.banot.net/~osoh/
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 10:10:24PM +0100, Imobach Gonz??lez Sosa wrote: Hi all, Ok, I'm new to FreeBSD (for second time :)) and I'm getting an strange behaviour. I don't know if you could help me, but I've to try. I've read the handbook, manpages and search google for a while, but I don't know how to solve it. I have some machines in my network, connected to Internet with and ADSL line. All those machines have GNU/Linux systems (and a laptop with Windows). I've installed FreeBSD recently (5.4) on my desktop machine and it performs badly in the net. I'll explain: I've got a lot of timeouts using fetch, firefox, links, ftp... etc. I thought that could be a hardware problem, but I connected this box and my laptop to a hub and, using ethereal (on the laptop), I looked the traffic searching for troubles. And that's what I saw: sometimes, my FreeBSD box sends a package and receive no answer. Then, it have to wait for timeout and try again... and again... Sometimes the other peer finally answer, and sometimes not. DNS, HTTP, FTP... nothing seems to work properly. Pretty amazing, huh? Any idea? Something I must know about bsd's TCP/IP? I'm gonna cry... :( This kind of thing is often caused by duplex mismatch on your NIC. Kris pgpHqHXALCdpj.pgp Description: PGP signature
