From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 18 22:02:16 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A335B16A41F for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:02:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.web-strider.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF8143D4C for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:02:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id jBIM5HP35781; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:05:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Sasa Stupar" , Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:02:02 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <498C0455BE5AC9573152FE62@[192.168.10.249]> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Importance: Normal Cc: Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd Theme Song) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:02:16 -0000 In looking at this again, I didn't realize you were pinging from Win2K Win2K uses the -f option to set the Do Not Fragment bit, UNIX uses the -f option to flood ping. Win2k ping does not have a flood ping option. You can download a ping for Windows from Microsoft here: http://research.microsoft.com/barc/mbone/mping.aspx that does have an option for flooding traffic. ( set the milliseconds between packets very low) but I have not tested it. Doubtless others are available on the Internet. Ted >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Sasa Stupar >Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 6:07 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd Theme >Song) > > >Nothing. From the GUI view it is at 0% of utilisation. > >Sasa > >--On 18. december 2005 3:51 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt > >wrote: > >> >> what does the CPU of the router do when your doing that? >> >> Ted >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Sasa Stupar >>> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 3:00 AM >>> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>> Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd Theme >>> Song) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --On 18. december 2005 2:32 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>>>> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of >Sasa Stupar >>>>> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 2:21 AM >>>>> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>>>> Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd >>>>> Theme Song) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --On 18. december 2005 1:33 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Sasa Stupar [mailto:sasa@stupar.homelinux.net] >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 5:25 AM >>>>>>> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; danial_thom@yahoo.com; Drew Tomlinson >>>>>>> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>>>>>> Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd >>>>>>> Theme Song) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --On 16. december 2005 3:36 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Sasa Stupar [mailto:sasa@stupar.homelinux.net] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 12:34 AM >>>>>>>>> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; danial_thom@yahoo.com; Drew Tomlinson >>>>>>>>> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Polling For 100 mbps Connections? (Was Re: Freebsd >>>>>>>>> Theme Song) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ted >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hmmm, here is test with iperf what I have done with and >>>>>>> without polling: >>>>>>>>> ************** >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> Client connecting to 192.168.1.200, TCP port 5001 >>>>>>>>> TCP window size: 8.00 KByte (default) >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> [1816] local 192.168.10.249 port 1088 connected with >>>>>>>>> 192.168.1.200 port 5001 >>>>>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth >>>>>>>>> [1816] 0.0-10.0 sec 108 MBytes 90.1 Mbits/sec >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is when I use Device polling option on m0n0. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If I disable this option then my transfer is worse: >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> Client connecting to 192.168.1.200, TCP port 5001 >>>>>>>>> TCP window size: 8.00 KByte (default) >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> [1816] local 192.168.10.249 port 1086 connected with >>>>>>>>> 192.168.1.200 port 5001 >>>>>>>>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth >>>>>>>>> [1816] 0.0-10.0 sec 69.7 MBytes 58.4 Mbits/sec >>>>>>>>> *************** >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> BTW: my router is m0n0wall (FBSD 4.11). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> what are the cpu speeds and operating systems of all devices >>>>>>>> in the packet path, what is the make and model of switchs in >>>>>>>> use, provide dmesg output of the bsd box, a network diagram >>>>>>>> of the setup, etc. etc. etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The above test results are not replicatable and thus, worthless. >>>>>>>> Useful test results would allow a reader to build an exact >>>>>>>> duplicate of your setup, config it identically, and get >identical >>>>>>>> results. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ted >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK. The server (192.168.1.200) is FreeBSD 5.4 with Duron 900 >>>>> and 3C905C >>>>>> >>>>>> The 3com 3c905 is not a very good card under FreeBSD the >driver was >>>>>> written >>>>>> without support from 3com and is shakey on a lot of >>> hardware. I would >>>>>> say >>>>>> there's a big question that your server is actually saturating the >>>>>> ethernet. >>>>>> Probably that is why your only getting 90Mbt. >>>>>> >>>>>>> NIC; router is m0n0wall (FreeBSD 4.11) with three Intel >>>>>>> Pro/100S Nics and >>>>>>> Celeron 433; The user computer (192.168.10.249) is Celeron 2400 >>>>>>> with winxp >>>>>>> and integrated NIC Realtek 8139 series. Switch is CNET CNSH-1600. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Once again, the winxp+realtek 8139 is not a particularly >>>>> steller combo, >>>>>> I would question that this system could saturate the >>> ethernet, either. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Diagram: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> dmesg from the router: >>>>>>> ---------------- >>>>>>> $ dmesg >>>>>>> Copyright (c) 1992-2005 The FreeBSD Project. >>>>>>> Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, >>>>> 1992, 1993, 1994 >>>>>>> The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. >>>>>>> FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE-p11 #0: Wed Sep 7 13:49:09 CEST 2005 >>>>>>> root@fb411.neon1.net:/usr/src/sys/compile/M0N0WALL_GENERIC >>>>>>> Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz >>>>>>> CPU: Pentium II/Pentium II Xeon/Celeron (434.32-MHz >686-class CPU) >>>>>>> Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x665 Stepping = 5 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Features=0x183f9ff>>>>>> GE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR> >>>>>>> real memory = 201326592 (196608K bytes) >>>>>>> avail memory = 179142656 (174944K bytes) >>>>>>> Preloaded elf kernel "kernel" at 0xc1006000. >>>>>>> Preloaded mfs_root "/mfsroot" at 0xc100609c. >>>>>>> Pentium Pro MTRR support enabled >>>>>>> md0: Preloaded image 11534336 bytes at 0xc0504d9c >>>>>>> md1: Malloc disk >>>>>>> Using $PIR table, 8 entries at 0xc00fdef0 >>>>>>> npx0: on motherboard >>>>>>> npx0: INT 16 interface >>>>>>> pcib0: on motherboard >>>>>>> pci0: on pcib0 >>>>>>> pcib1: at device >>>>>>> 1.0 on pci0 >>>>>>> pci1: on pcib1 >>>>>>> isab0: at device 7.0 on pci0 >>>>>>> isa0: on isab0 >>>>>>> atapci0: port 0xf000-0xf00f at >>>>>>> device 7.1 on >>>>>>> pci0 >>>>>>> ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0 >>>>>>> ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0 >>>>>>> uhci0: port >>>>>>> 0xd000-0xd01f irq 11 >>>>>>> at device 7.2 on pci0 >>>>>>> usb0: on uhci0 >>>>>>> usb0: USB revision 1.0 >>>>>>> uhub0: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 >>>>>>> uhub0: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered >>>>>>> chip1: port >>>>>>> 0x5000-0x500f at >>>>>>> device 7.3 on pci0 >>>>>>> pci0: (vendor=0x1274, dev=0x1371) at 8.0 irq 11 >>>>>>> fxp0: port 0xd800-0xd83f mem >>>>>>> 0xd0400000-0xd041ffff,0xd0460000-0xd0460fff irq 10 at device >>>>>>> 15.0 on pci0 >>>>>>> fxp0: Ethernet address 00:02:b3:62:f6:06 >>>>>>> inphy0: on miibus0 >>>>>>> inphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto >>>>>>> fxp1: port 0xdc00-0xdc3f mem >>>>>>> 0xd0420000-0xd043ffff,0xd0462000-0xd0462fff irq 12 at device >>>>>>> 16.0 on pci0 >>>>>>> fxp1: Ethernet address 00:02:b3:9c:2a:16 >>>>>>> inphy1: on miibus1 >>>>>>> inphy1: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto >>>>>>> fxp2: port 0xe000-0xe03f mem >>>>>>> 0xd0440000-0xd045ffff,0xd0461000-0xd0461fff irq 7 at device >>>>> 19.0 on pci0 >>>>>>> fxp2: Ethernet address 00:02:b3:8c:e4:f6 >>>>>>> inphy2: on miibus2 >>>>>>> inphy2: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto >>>>>>> pmtimer0 on isa0 >>>>>>> fdc0: at port 0x3f0-0x3f5,0x3f7 irq 6 drq >>>>>>> 2 on isa0 >>>>>>> fdc0: FIFO enabled, 8 bytes threshold >>>>>>> fd0: <1440-KB 3.5" drive> on fdc0 drive 0 >>>>>>> atkbdc0: at port 0x60,0x64 on isa0 >>>>>>> sio0 at port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on isa0 >>>>>>> sio0: type 16550A, console >>>>>>> sio1: configured irq 3 not in bitmap of probed irqs 0 >>>>>>> BRIDGE 020214 loaded >>>>>>> IPsec: Initialized Security Association Processing. >>>>>>> IP Filter: v3.4.35 initialized. Default = block all, >>>>> Logging = enabled >>>>>>> ad0: 3098MB [6296/16/63] at ata0-master PIO4 >>>>>>> acd0: CDROM at ata1-master PIO4 >>>>>>> Mounting root from ufs:/dev/md0c >>>>>>> fxp1: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 >>>>>>> fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 >>>>>>> fxp2: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 >>>>>>> ata0: resetting devices .. done >>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you need more just ask for it. You don't need to be >>> angry. Peace. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> OK, next question: >>>>>> >>>>>> ftp transfer like this uses large packets, rerun the test >>> with ping -f >>>>>> with different ping packet sizes, post the results. >>>>>> >>>>>> Remember, routers have to deal with many sized packets. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ted >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Interesting. I have tested like you've said and I could ping >>>>> with packet >>>>> size 1450 bytes. Everything bigger is telling that "packet must be >>>>> fragmented but DF is set up". This is of course pinging >from winxp to >>>>> server. >>>> >>>> That is normal since under winxp ping sets the DF bit I believe. >>>> >>>> The larger packets are not what matters, the smaller >packets are more >>>> interesting. I find it hard to believe your getting the same >>> throughput >>>> with >>>> flood pinging with 56 byte packets. >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>> >>> Here is the output: >>> ------------- >>> C:\Documents and Settings\nathsasa>ping -t -f -l 56 mig29 >>> >>> Preverjanje dosegljivosti mig29.workgroup [192.168.1.200] z >56 B podatk >>> >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> Odgovor od 192.168.1.200: bajtov=56 čas < 1 ms TTL=63 >>> >>> Statistika preverjanja dosegljivosti za 192.168.1.200: >>> Paketov: Poslanih = 46, Prejetih = 46, Izgubljenih = 0 >(0% izguba), >>> Povprečni čas v milisekundah: >>> Minimum = 0ms, Maksimum = 0ms, Povprečje = 0ms >>> ----------- >>> >>> It's in my native language but the position is the same as >in english. >>> >>> -- >>> Sasa Stupar >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >>> -- >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>> Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: >>> 12/16/2005 >>> >> > > > >-- >Sasa Stupar >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >To unsubscribe, send any mail to >"freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: >12/16/2005 >