We do indeed have a card only policy. I'm planning on applying 127554-03 later this week during a maintenance window.
Your comment regarding your home network is disturbing. I had always assumed our company held the lead in crappy networks. Now I'm going to have to implement FCoE over Pringles cantennas or something so as to preserve our prominent place in the annals of ghetto networking. Thanks, Isaac > Hi, > > I've got a bandwidth latency issue with a 270 at a very small > remote site when it is not in use. > > At our HQ site we have a SRSS 09/07 box. This remote site is > connected to HQ via a private T1. There is a single sunray 2 at the > remote site and it has been perfectly fine. At this remote site there is > an auxiliary building that is connected to the main building with a > 10baseT extender over 2 pair telephone wires, (this is pretty ghetto, I > know) Watch your language - that's how my home network is configured! ;) > and in this auxiliary building is a single 270. > > When a card is inserted (we require smartcards) into the sunray > everything is fine, however when the sunray is not in use bandwidth > utilization on the T1 increases dramatically. Latency goes from ~130ms > to ~750ms. When you reinsert a card latency drops again to around > ~130ms. Performance for the session is acceptable and comparable to the > sunray in the main building of the remote site. Via DHCP we have set the > MTU on the sunrays to 1250 which is just under what we can send over the > routers with out fragmentation. > Do you have a card-only policy by any chance? There was a bug (6605645) related to policy-generated icons which affected bandwidth dramatically, for example "insert card". This was fixed in 4.0 patch: 127553-01 (Solaris SPARC) 127554-01 (Solaris x86) 127555-01 (Linux) -Bob > I imagine that the problem is related to the extenders somehow > but I don't understand why, I especially do not understand why using the > sunray makes a difference. Think clients at this building do not cause > the latency issue. > > So, anyone see anything like this before? Anything I might do to correct > it? I appreciate any help or advice. > > Thanks, Isaac > > _______________________________________________ > SunRay-Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users > _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
