From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 26 13:53:44 2004 Return-Path: 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 A4FAD16A4CE for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:53:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from web41307.mail.yahoo.com (web41307.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.93.56]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8307D43D2F for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:53:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from alohaguy123@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040226215344.65632.qmail@web41307.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [208.201.244.226] by web41307.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:53:44 PST Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:53:44 -0800 (PST) From: Aloha Guy To: Chris Dillon In-Reply-To: <20040226102832.I23339@duey.wolves.k12.mo.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD box as router adding latency X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:53:44 -0000 Chris Dillon wrote: On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Aloha Guy wrote: > You're right that additional delay while adding a hop is to be > expected, which is less than 0.1ms to the FreeBSD box but everything > past the FreeBSD machine is adding atleast 5ms up to 300ms in the > traceroutes when the normal is no more than 20ms for the same > traceroute. I've already checked the NICs and they are all > configured at their full rated speeds and full duplex. I even try > using a Cardbus PCMCIA fxp0 Intel Pro/100S card on the FreeBSD box > and it still had the same problem. I am using a September 2003 > -CURRENT so I don't know if it's a issue with the current networking > code back then or not. What do you have HZ set to (see sysctl kern.clockrate)? I think I remember your original message showing you using pipes and queues and the HZ setting can affect those. Also see if your latency improves if you remove all pipe and queue rules (other ipfw rules are OK). Here is the HZ setting: kern.clockrate: { hz = 100, tick = 10000, profhz = 1024, stathz = 128 } I'm not sure how to remove the pipe since I don't think the pipe works until the queue is defined. When I removed the queues that are configured for the pipe, the latency is back to normal though. Thanks, John --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail