Hi Noel

Thanks for the advice. I installed tcpdump and wireshark and added a rule to log ICMP errors. This is an excerpt from the log file. I assume this line shows something is sent to port 80 but I cannot find the corresponding iptables entry.

Dec 30 21:42:11 localhost kernel: [1423944.393321] IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=210.211.212.213 DST=192.168.2.135 LEN=88 TOS=0x00 PREC=0xC0 TTL=64 ID=38805 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=11 CODE=0 [SRC=192.168.2.135 DST=192.168.1.130 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=1 ID=63979 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=47511 DPT=80 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 ]

Best regards
Martin


On 28.12.2017 01:43, Noel Kuntze wrote:
Hi,

Looks like your firewall rules on the hub are broken and cause the problems or 
you need to configure an additional CHILD_SA to tunnel ICMP errors from the 
hub, because it has no IP in the local TS.
Check both those suspicions.

Kind regards

Noel

On 27.12.2017 23:00, Martin Sand wrote:
Thanks again Noel.

I have executed `traceroute -T --mtu <destination>` and `mtr -rw <destination>` 
on machines at both locations.
I did not do further investigation on the MSS yet since I have this strange 
packet loss.
Based on the route, I assume this happens at the hub which is in between the 
two routers?
Could this be the root cause I need to further investigate?

Kind regards
Martin

traceroute -T --mtu pi-frankfurt
traceroute to pi-frankfurt (192.168.2.135), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
  1  router-freiburg (192.168.1.1)  0.263 ms  0.179 ms  0.172 ms
  2  * * *
  3  router-frankfurt (192.168.2.1)  41.762 ms  41.182 ms  36.716 ms
  4  pi-frankfurt (192.168.2.135)  36.693 ms  43.629 ms  37.051 ms

traceroute -T --mtu pi-freiburg
traceroute to pi-freiburg (192.168.1.130), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
  1  router-frankfurt (192.168.2.1)  0.489 ms  0.381 ms  0.287 ms
  2  * * *
  3  router-freiburg (192.168.1.1)  38.368 ms  47.673 ms  35.441 ms
  4  pi-freiburg (192.168.1.130)  39.456 ms  54.566 ms  36.117 ms

mtr -rw pi-frankfurt
Start: 2017-12-27T22:57:40+0100
HOST: workstation              Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best Wrst StDev
   1.|-- router-freiburg         0.0%    10    0.2   0.2   0.2 0.3   0.0
   2.|-- ???                      100.0    10    0.0   0.0   0.0 0.0   0.0
   3.|-- router-frankfurt        0.0%    10   33.3  35.5  32.5 42.0   2.7
   4.|-- pi-frankfurt              0.0%    10   33.5  34.4  32.7 36.7   1.5


On 27.12.2017 21:08, Noel Kuntze wrote:
Hi,

You can test the convergence speed using `traceroute -T --mtu <destination>`, 
but that only gives you the MTU. You need to manually discover the MSS
using `traceroute -T -O mss=<mss> <destination>`.

The best way to check if the problem continues is to just run tcpdump/wireshark 
and check for ICMP Fragmenation needed packets and TCP errors or timeouts.

Kind regards

Noel

On 27.12.2017 17:12, Martin Sand wrote:
Thanks Noel. Sorry, I had to travel to the other location (350 km).

I adapted the iptable rules. It improved, but I have the impression it only 
improved a bit.
Is there a way to measure MTU discovery time?

Kind regards
Martin


On 14.12.2017 13:51, Noel Kuntze wrote:
Hi,

VPN internal http requests to a web server of another spoke take some time 
until the page is rendered.
I assume this is due to the latency.
Nah. It's extremely more likely that the path MTU discovery takes some time 
(maybe due to some missing/wrong firewall rules on some host(s) in your network 
topology).
Try lowering the MTU and MSS of the tunneled traffic[1].

Kind regards

Noel

[1] 
https://wiki.strongswan.org/projects/strongswan/wiki/ForwardingAndSplitTunneling#MTUMSS-issues

On 14.12.2017 13:41, Martin Sand wrote:
Hi all

I have a Hub and Spoke setup. Connections are working perfectly fine.
Throughput is almost reaching the maximum rate of the upload channel speed, 10 
MBit/s.

Unfortunately the latency is not fulfilling my objectives. I have an average 
ping time of 39 ms (see below) when pinging clients on other spokes.
VPN internal http requests to a web server of another spoke take some time 
until the page is rendered.
I assume this is due to the latency.

Is there any chance to improve the latency? Or is the latency perfectly good?

Best regards
Martin

Hub internet address
64 bytes from vpn.example.com (217.122.5.6): icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=15.2 ms

Internal address of Hub
PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=62 time=40.4 ms

Client on another spoke
PING 192.168.1.130 (192.168.1.130) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=108 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=2 ttl=61 time=41.8 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=3 ttl=61 time=38.0 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=4 ttl=61 time=35.2 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=5 ttl=61 time=36.4 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=6 ttl=61 time=39.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=7 ttl=61 time=38.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=8 ttl=61 time=41.6 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=9 ttl=61 time=36.0 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.130: icmp_seq=10 ttl=61 time=36.7 ms

--- 192.168.1.130 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9013ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 35.295/45.159/108.281/21.146 ms


Reply via email to