From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Mar  6 17:26:14 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F406F16A4CE
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Sat,  6 Mar 2004 17:26:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u46n208.hfx.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.208])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBAFB43D2F
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Sat,  6 Mar 2004 17:26:13 -0800 (PST)	(envelope-from scrappy@hub.org)
Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id B8A5835012; Sat,  6 Mar 2004 21:26:14 -0400 (AST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B7A8F342A1; Sat,  6 Mar 2004 21:26:14 -0400 (AST)
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:26:14 -0400 (AST)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
In-Reply-To: <20040306211328.H13247@ganymede.hub.org>
Message-ID: <20040306212430.F13247@ganymede.hub.org>
References: <20040306130937.N71806@ganymede.hub.org>
	<20040306210515.M13247@ganymede.hub.org>
	<20040306211328.H13247@ganymede.hub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Odd network issue ... *very* slow scp between two servers
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 01:26:14 -0000


Wow, okay, switching to 10baseT/UTP, full duplex is atrocious too:

1038785 bytes received in 74.30 seconds (13.65 KB/s)

So, bug with full-duplex on the em devices?

Switching to 100baseTX, half-duplex gives me an error though, but seems
to work:

neptune# ifconfig em0 media 100baseTX mediaopt half-duplex
ifconfig: SIOCSIFMEDIA: Device not configured

yet:

media: Ethernet 100baseTX (100baseTX <half-duplex>)


On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

>
> 'k, I'm blind to start with ... I take it that this is the significant
> part of the output:
>
> Name    Mtu Network       Address              Ipkts Ierrs    Opkts Oerrs  Coll
> em0    1500 <Link#1>    00:07:e9:05:1b:2e 760865424 58003349 775965555     0     0
>
> where the fxp devices don't show any Ierrs?  That works out to be ~7% ...
>
> Dropping it to 10baseT/UTP appears to improve things by 10x:
>
> 1038785 bytes received in 6.86 seconds (147.89 KB/s)
>
> And drop'ng it to 100baseTX, half-duplex makes an even larger difference:
>
> 1038785 bytes received in 0.49 seconds (2.01 MB/s)
> 1038785 bytes received in 0.14 seconds (6.89 MB/s)
>
> The fxp devices are all running 100baseTX, full-duplex, and doing 10MB/s
> between each other ...
>
>
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664
>

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664