From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 21 16:05:49 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E7616E4E5 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:05:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4890C13C48E for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:05:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 24418 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2007 15:13:21 -0000 Received: from dotat.atdotat.at (HELO [62.48.0.47]) ([62.48.0.47]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 21 Feb 2007 15:13:21 -0000 Message-ID: <45DC679A.9030304@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:39:06 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8b) Gecko/20050217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andre Guibert de Bruet References: <17850.13146.266196.499166@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <2FE2BC67-A829-4BF9-B606-65DE1393E8DE@siliconlandmark.com> <17883.19584.99616.808623@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrew Gallatin , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: excessive TCP duplicate acks? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:05:49 -0000 Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > On Feb 20, 2007, at 2:31 PM, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > >> Thanks for reporting this. I'm glad I'm not the only one who is >> seeing this! > > > I discovered this while testing out a new multi-homed bonded-T1 > installation. I was wondering why I was getting no more than ~170KB/ s. > So far, here are the data points that I have gathered: > > - It affects more than one type of NIC (em0). > - It happens regardless of hardware checksum enabled status. > - It happens independent of IP aliasing. > - I tested GENERIC as of Feb 19 and it is affected. > - A kernel from December 15th, 2006 exhibits this problem. > - The affected system is connected to a Linksys 24-port unmanaged > gigabit switch (I have the exact same hardware working just fine with > 5.5-STABLE on the same switch). Today I finally got some spare time and tried to track this down. However there is no obvious smoking gun to be seen. I'll dig further. -- Andre