Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:22:24 +0200
From:      Sydney Meyer <syd.meyer@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Networking under Xen
Message-ID:  <41967713-C2DE-4657-96ED-F8BE3491D4EA@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B6D4AEF-6107-4F95-9F5A-F0EA137809AC@gmail.com>
References:  <4E7B7075-4E0D-4EA7-9F5D-6D252CFBD487@gmail.com> <1436890526.3162974.323521249.6B73E6E2@webmail.messagingengine.com> <4B6D4AEF-6107-4F95-9F5A-F0EA137809AC@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Also i have noticed, when TSO is disabled IPv4 TCP Performance also =
drops from ~10 Gb/s to ~3 Gb/s, the same as with IPv6. I have read =
threads from around 2010 about the networking stack not having support =
for TSO on IPv6 Packets. May this be the problem in this case?

> On 14 Jul 2015, at 23:44, Sydney Meyer <syd.meyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>> On 14 Jul 2015, at 18:15, Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015, at 07:36, Sydney Meyer wrote:
>>> Hello everybody,
>>>=20
>>> i have noticed some odd behaviour with networking under Xen with =
FreeBSD
>>> 10 as a DomU.
>>>=20
>>> - IPv6 (TCP) bandwith drops from ~10 Gbit/s IPv4 to around 3 Gbit/s =
IPv6.
>>> (measured with iperf)
>>>=20
>>=20
>> What is the "before" and "after" here? When is FreeBSD successfully
>> doing 10Gbit/s and when isn't it? Is pf enabled? Are you scrubbing?
>=20
> With two clean 10.1 AMD64 DomU installations both with a single, =
pinned cpu, without pf enabled the TCP performance between the two =
hosts, measured with iperf, differs between ~10 Gb/s on IPv4 and ~3 Gb/s =
on IPv6. With pf enabled and "scrub in all" the difference is almost the =
same.
>>=20
>>> - Dropped/Stalled Connections with TCP Segmentation Offload and pf
>>> enabled.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> TSO is a known issue. I've been turning it off for years to get =
FreeBSD
>> to play nice on Xen.
>=20
> This one i am still investigating, because it happens only in =
"certain" situations (which are not clear to me, atm), but the host =
seems to drop ACK Packets in some situations like when connected to via =
IPSEC or via double NAT. This happens only when pf it actually enabled. =
Disabling TSO on the xn-interface seems to help.
>>=20
>>> - IPSEC-enabled Kernel TCP Performance drops from ~10 Gbit/s to ~200
>>> Mbit/s (iperf).
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Are you saying FreeBSD non-IPSEC kernel can do 10Gbit/s TCP =
performance,
>> but IPSEC kernel immediately drops it to 200Mbit/s?
>=20
> As for the apparent performance drop with IPSEC enabled Kernels =
without security associations installed, i am unable to reproduce this =
now, not on 10.0 or 10.1 nor 10 STABLE. Only when actually _using_ IPSec =
the performance drops from ~10Gb/s to around ~200Mb/s whether actually =
encrypting esp traffic or not.
> This clearly must have been a mistake on my side, although i could =
have sworn that i checked this two times before asking on the forums and =
the -net mailing list a few weeks ago. Well then, i am sincerely sorry =
about this one.
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-xen-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>=20




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41967713-C2DE-4657-96ED-F8BE3491D4EA>