From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Jan 16 8:23:39 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from weeble.dyndns.org (ubppp234-243.dialin.buffalo.edu [128.205.234.243]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA93414BEE for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:23:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cjm2@earthling.net) Received: from shithead (shithead.weeble.dyndns.org [10.0.0.2]) by weeble.dyndns.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA29417; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 11:23:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from cjm2@earthling.net) From: "C J Michaels" To: "Andrew Reilly" Cc: "FreeBSD Questions" Subject: RE: (fast) ethernet performance problems/tweaking Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 11:23:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <20000110075748.A29687@gurney.reilly.home> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Well, all I can say is, do you have a switch or a hub? If you have a hub, odds are that it doesn't support full-duplex in the 1st place and that's why you are getting really poor performance. Try forcing the cards to half-duplex and see what happens. -Chris -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Andrew Reilly Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2000 3:58 PM To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: (fast) ethernet performance problems/tweaking Hi, I have a little network at home consisting of my FreeBSD-3.4-STABLE box (a PIII-500) and a Windows-NT 4.0 box (a Celeron-400). Since there are only two machines, I use a crossover cable instead of a hub or switch. In a recent fit of upgrading, I replaced the 10-baseT (PCI) cards in each machine with a pair of 100-baseTX RealTek-8139 cards. I was pleased that everything just seemed to work, but I've just tried to test the performance, and to say that it's short of stellar is an understatement. I have a 16M file in my home directory (FreeBSD), and two successive command-line FTP fetches on the NT box resulted in transfer rates of 70.02k and 99k. Yes, "k". I tried using the "copy /b" command, and gave up timing after five minutes. Where can I look to try to debug what is obviously a problem? Here's a bit of representative output from a netstat -I rl0 -b -w 5 command, while the copy/b was in progress: input (rl0) output packets errs bytes packets errs bytes colls 42 0 2636 81 0 118620 0 41 0 2692 71 0 100806 0 37 0 2336 72 0 104994 0 30 0 1916 57 0 80944 0 32 0 2152 57 0 80950 0 58 0 3712 97 0 141510 0 40 0 2516 72 0 104994 0 35 0 2216 64 0 92882 0 Here's the output of ifconfig rl0: rl0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000 broadcast 10.255.255.255 ether 00:48:54:50:52:83 media: 100baseTX supported media: autoselect 100baseTX 100baseTX 100baseTX 10baseT/UTP 10baseT/UTP 10baseT/UTP Hmm That's interesting. Shouldn't the flags say DUPLEX instead of SIMPLEX when the media is in full-duplex mode? Here's some /var/log/messages output related to rl0: Jan 6 13:35:51 gurney /kernel: rl0: rev 0x10 int a irq 9 on pci0.10.0 Jan 6 13:35:51 gurney /kernel: rl0: Ethernet address: 00:48:54:50:52:83 Jan 6 13:35:51 gurney /kernel: rl0: autoneg not complete, no carrier Jan 6 13:35:51 gurney /kernel: rl0: selecting MII, 100Mbps, half duplex Jan 6 13:35:51 gurney /kernel: rl0: selecting MII, 100Mbps, full duplex in rc.conf I have: ifconfig_rl0="inet 10.0.0.1 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" Unfortunately I know even less about NT networking than I do Unix networking, so I don't know where to start, for checking the NT end of the link. Thanks in advance for any suggestions, -- Andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message