Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-06 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Am 06.06.2015 um 04:07 schrieb jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com: On June 5, 2015 at 3:14 PM Michael C. Cambria m...@fid4.com wrote: On 06/04/2015 11:28 AM, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: [deleted] snip We appear to be chasing a

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-05 Thread Michael C. Cambria
On 06/04/2015 11:28 AM, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: [deleted] snip We appear to be chasing a compound problem perhaps also involving problems with GRE. As we try to isolate components, one issue we see is TCP Window size. For some reason, even though the w/rmem_max and tcp have

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-04 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On June 3, 2015 at 3:51 PM John A. Sullivan III jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 22:23 -0400, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On June 1, 2015 at 11:48 AM Martin Willi mar...@strongswan.org wrote: Even at these rates, the CPU did not appear to be

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-03 Thread John A. Sullivan III
On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 22:23 -0400, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On June 1, 2015 at 11:48 AM Martin Willi mar...@strongswan.org wrote: Even at these rates, the CPU did not appear to be very busy. We had one at 85% occupied but that was the one running nuttcp. On the

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-03 Thread John A. Sullivan III
On Wed, 2015-06-03 at 15:51 -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 22:23 -0400, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On June 1, 2015 at 11:48 AM Martin Willi mar...@strongswan.org wrote: Even at these rates, the CPU did not appear to be very busy. We had one

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-02 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On June 1, 2015 at 11:48 AM Martin Willi mar...@strongswan.org wrote: Even at these rates, the CPU did not appear to be very busy. We had one at 85% occupied but that was the one running nuttcp. On the outgoing path, the Linux kernel usually accounts ESP encryption under the process

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-01 Thread Martin Willi
Hi, I can see the multiple kworker threads spread across all 12 cores in these fairly high powered systems but I am still dropping packets and performance is not much improved. If all your cores are processing traffic, then pcrypt probably works as it should. What does fairly high powered

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-01 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On June 1, 2015 at 3:49 AM Martin Willi mar...@strongswan.org wrote: Hi, I can see the multiple kworker threads spread across all 12 cores in these fairly high powered systems but I am still dropping packets and performance is not much improved. If all your cores are processing

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-01 Thread Martin Willi
Even at these rates, the CPU did not appear to be very busy. We had one at 85% occupied but that was the one running nuttcp. On the outgoing path, the Linux kernel usually accounts ESP encryption under the process that sends traffic using a socket send() call. So these 85% probably include

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-06-01 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On May 31, 2015 at 8:06 AM Noel Kuntze n...@familie-kuntze.de wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello John, Maybe the pcrypt module has some hidden dependencies to other crypto or xfrm modules. Try figuring out what modules are loaded when the tunnel is up and

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-31 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On May 31, 2015 at 1:14 AM jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On May 30, 2015 at 10:42 PM jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On May 30, 2015 at 6:01 PM Noel Kuntze n...@familie-kuntze.de wrote: -BEGIN

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-31 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello John, Maybe the pcrypt module has some hidden dependencies to other crypto or xfrm modules. Try figuring out what modules are loaded when the tunnel is up and load them before the pcrypt module. I don't know a working solution to the

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-30 Thread Noel Kuntze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello John, It is likely that that is caused by insufficient crypto processing capabilities on either side, so packets need to be dropped, as the transmit/receive buffers are full. A solution to this problem is to distribute the work load over

[strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-30 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
Hello, all. We are attempting to use StrongSWAN on a fast (1 Gbps CIR one side and 4x10Gbps on the other) with about 80ms latency so pretty high bandwidth delay product. The traffic is GRE/IPSec. Our benchmarks show we can saturate the 1 Gbps side with just GRE sustaining high 800 low 900 Mbps.

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-30 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On May 30, 2015 at 6:01 PM Noel Kuntze n...@familie-kuntze.de wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello John, It is likely that that is caused by insufficient crypto processing capabilities on either side, so packets need to be dropped, as the transmit/receive

Re: [strongSwan] Throughput on high BDP networks

2015-05-30 Thread jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com
On May 30, 2015 at 10:42 PM jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: On May 30, 2015 at 6:01 PM Noel Kuntze n...@familie-kuntze.de wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello John, It is likely that that is caused by