From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Oct 26 03:38:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E20895F for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:38:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-x22d.google.com (mail-ob0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4912517FC for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:38:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: by obcqt19 with SMTP id qt19so132559419obc.3 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:38:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=rZN3CxIis0yqoSE34PwbNY0uVpwuNx4YghsvXaSFc/k=; b=BmdtK2DWkrx2+jaZkjDCjxxvHPfuyzvAScJ/Mqz6eRleqyqFEzgzroOu0G0H0CvjIP okTaAwowAh2WIVpTw5wDJ0sUX9K/IWa3fJKVHpLlpYFwavNt9TvVczYi1gemYPwaggKk Kpx8sr/wtnwRuzlaCLiPB5zNu6I3Kxkzxr2azhXiNhfK7zPTTAAG00f+Bpp5E8RTKdFw ECdb6ANHuNsTOK+4dzmXrHqNhcFP7tvIhssIMmgEzGTq6DuCoe76yQMjYlrmJRmaoD1l QtmXkWxxXl7OlGi6QLHlZJDkQWRDhQ2YgdMqU9I61lYl1lGdxV/y01S6oDqqDmmFjGs2 JrXQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.104.130 with SMTP id ge2mr22793842obb.79.1445830711910; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.202.108.210 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:38:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5aae0ee63c44627223d5d179f1901d00@pyret.net> References: <5aae0ee63c44627223d5d179f1901d00@pyret.net> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:38:31 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PuoADiNshkPLYLtl9jgm3aoXv_E Message-ID: Subject: Re: ixl 40G bad performance? From: Kevin Oberman To: Daniel Engberg Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:38:33 -0000 On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:10 AM, Daniel Engberg < daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net> wrote: > One thing I've noticed that probably affects your performance benchmarks > somewhat is that you're using iperf(2) instead of the newer iperf3 but I > could be wrong... > > Best regards, > Daniel > iperf3 is not a newer version of iperf. It is a total re-write and a rather different tool. It has significant improvements in many areas and new capabilities that might be of use. That said, there is no reason to think that the results of tests using iperf2 are in any way inaccurate. However, it is entirely possible to get misleading results if options not properly selected. -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683