Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 May 2003 15:15:43 -0700
From:      "Crist J. Clark" <crist.clark@attbi.com>
To:        Robert Johannes <rjohanne@piper.hamline.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: nfs and ipfw
Message-ID:  <20030501221543.GA85403@blossom.cjclark.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0305011234150.2401-100000@mendeleev.hamline.edu>
References:  <20030428211643.GA41761@blossom.cjclark.org> <Pine.GSO.4.44.0305011234150.2401-100000@mendeleev.hamline.edu>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 12:38:12PM -0500, Robert Johannes wrote:
> I've tried your suggestion, and even added a log option to the frag rule
> below, but I don't see anything being denied or dropped from the
> nfsclient.  Instead, the frags are accepted, but it is as if the server
> doesn't have anything to say back, and so it never says anything back.
> Meanwhile, the nfsclient keeps sending the frag traffic to the
> server.

Is the server sending back any ICMP type 11 code 1?

> I've not tried the tcp option for nfs yet, my main concern being
> performance.  I read that performance for tcp nfs is not on per with udp
> nfs.

That depends on who you ask. Many people insist TCP performance is
better. It depends a lot on how you use it and whether you tune NFS
appropriately for each type of transport. And tuning NFS is much more
an art than a science.
-- 
Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclark@alum.mit.edu
                                   |     cjclark@jhu.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjc@freebsd.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030501221543.GA85403>