Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 1 Jan 2021 07:19:18 +0700
From:      Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
To:        Victor Gamov <vit@otcnet.ru>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: 'dropped due to full socket buffers' by SNMP
Message-ID:  <7e51a6be-aea1-51c6-c0bd-10d00c19d5d3@grosbein.net>
In-Reply-To: <fef04bda-6aa0-4a80-8999-867b9f37d766@otcnet.ru>
References:  <388da9a7-7b89-89b2-54eb-17d0e818c924@otcnet.ru> <4e41c1d2-19bc-0345-0b03-526e4cb785c7@otcnet.ru> <b279e676-c789-2978-98a0-b8a4b164a111@grosbein.net> <a69d872a-f21e-de66-7677-58beccb0f023@otcnet.ru> <6c780827-e764-8053-356b-a921e0892c15@grosbein.net> <fef04bda-6aa0-4a80-8999-867b9f37d766@otcnet.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
30.12.2020 23:08, Victor Gamov wrote:

> As I understand hw.ix.flow_control=3 to allow flow-control for negotiation.
> Real PAUSE setting will be set during negotiation.

At the moment of congestion.

>  So where I can find active flow-control setting for host interface?

Can't check for ix just now, but for em(4) there is sysctl dev.em.0.fc.
It should be similar for ix.

>> maybe increase kern.ipc.maxsockbuf and then net.inet.udp.recvspace.
> Eugene, at first message you suppose Host-A (sender) "outgoing link for that UDP packets is congested"
> because this host shows non-zero "dropped due to full socket buffers".
> So is net.inet.udp.recvspace increasing on Host-B (mainly receiver) will be affected for this congestion?

Can't tell in details without going deep into your setup :-)
You can try it yourself and verify quickly.

> Or I need to try to increase both kern.ipc.maxsockbuf and net.inet.udp.recvspace on both hosts?

Tune one that drops UDP.

> Also how I can check current sockbuf usage?

netstat -xn




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7e51a6be-aea1-51c6-c0bd-10d00c19d5d3>