From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 4 08:11:07 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C96E16A4CF for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 08:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.omnis.com (smtp.omnis.com [216.239.128.26]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7CAC43D49 for ; Tue, 4 May 2004 08:11:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.homeunix.net (24-161-166-146.san.rr.com [24.161.166.146]) by smtp-relay.omnis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24DF41407814; Tue, 4 May 2004 08:11:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr.COM To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 08:11:05 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1 References: <00c301c42dff$1fc2ff80$3200a8c0@cbcoffice> In-Reply-To: <00c301c42dff$1fc2ff80$3200a8c0@cbcoffice> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200405040811.05248.wes@softweyr.com> cc: The Jetman Subject: Re: [4.9-R]Can I Make My DSL Connect Go Faster ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 15:11:07 -0000 On Thursday 29 April 2004 08:18, The Jetman wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Julian Elischer" > To: "Bruce M Simpson" > Cc: "FreeBSD Net" ; "The Jetman" > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 17:20 PM > Subject: Re: [4.9-R]Can I Make My DSL Connect Go Faster ? > > > On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 03:29:58PM -0400, The Jetman wrote: > > > > I'm just confused as to why I lose SO much going thru my FBSD > > > > box and that's essence of my question. I can live w/ *some* > > > > overhead for the sake of using FBSD, but this is ridiculous. > > > > TIA....Jet > > > > > > Are you using user space NAT? If so, this might account for some of > > > the poor performance. Try reconfiguring your system to use IPFILTER, > > > or consider updating to 5-CURRENT and trying pf(4). > > > > I would be surprised if that were the problem.. I've saturated > > ethernets using natd.. > > > > Howver I agree that more info on the setup being used would be > > beneficial.. > > Julian: There isn't much that I can *think* to add. If knowing > which LAN cards I use will help, they're the usu stuf, a dc (forget which > chip) and a Realtek. I admit these aren't superstars, but I just slapped > NAT box together from what was a simple workstation. The IPFW firewall > script is the unmodified 'open' config, that is: None of that would have any bearing at all, unless you've horribly mis-configured something. Did you have to install any special drivers on XP? I'm wondering if they're using some sort of link compression to get the promised speed. Also, try downloading something from one of the well-connected FreeBSD mirrors and see what kind of download speeds you get. I may be the browser you're using or something equally stupid in the test you're using. After all, what really matters is the REAL performance you get, not some number off of a web page, right? -- Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket? Wes Peters wes@softweyr.com