[4.9-R]Can I Make My DSL Connect Go Faster ?
The Jetman
Folks: I just installed an eval ADSL connection (1.5M/128K) yesterday.
I installed it on a dual-boot XP/FBSD box. When the DSL connection is directly
used by the XP box, I can routinely get 1.5Mb download speed, as determined
by ADSLGuide, etc. I took an essentially, unmodified FBSD partition (I added
IPFW2, DIVERT, and DUMMYNET to the kernel config) and turned it into a
NATting gateway. It worked immediately, but running the same speed tests
I got significantly and consistently lower incoming speed results (avg 400
Kb/s).
FWIW, my DSL provider is Verizon and I operate this in Long Island
w/ a Westell 2200 DSL router. I also use a modified version of the
rc.firewall script, but I took it out of the loop by using the open config.
The box I'm using uses a 1.1GHz Celeron w/ 128MB of SDRAM.
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
=============== From the desk of Jethro Wright, III ================
+ If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. +
+ If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. +
+ If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. +
+ If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it. +
=== jetman516 'at' hotmail.com ========================== Anon ===
Bruce M Simpson
> 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).
Regards,
BMS
Julian Elischer
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..
> Regards,
> BMS
> _______________________________________________
> freeb...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net...@freebsd.org"
>
The Jetman
Bruce: I'd heard about this issue on the mail lists/ngroups, but never
dreamed it was as much of a big deal. BTW, yes, I *do* use the stock
NATD. And IPFILTER *is* an option. Thanx again....Jet
The Jetman
From: "Julian Elischer" <jul...@elischer.org>
To: "Bruce M Simpson" <b...@spc.org>
Cc: "FreeBSD Net" <freeb...@freebsd.org>; "The Jetman" <jet...@mycbc.com>
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:
00050 99654 49243070 divert 8668 ip from any to any via dc0
00100 112 26392 allow ip from any to any via lo0
00200 0 0 deny ip from any to 127.0.0.0/8
00300 0 0 deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any
65000 195218 98282299 allow ip from any to any
65535 0 0 allow ip from any to any
Again, I can even live w/ some overhead due to sub-optimal hware.
I only write bec the FBSD NAT speed is less than 30% of XP standalone
speed ! Later....Jet
Mikko Työläjärvi
> Folks: I just installed an eval ADSL connection (1.5M/128K) yesterday.
> I installed it on a dual-boot XP/FBSD box. When the DSL connection is directly
> used by the XP box, I can routinely get 1.5Mb download speed, as determined
> by ADSLGuide, etc. I took an essentially, unmodified FBSD partition (I added
> IPFW2, DIVERT, and DUMMYNET to the kernel config) and turned it into a
> NATting gateway. It worked immediately, but running the same speed tests
> I got significantly and consistently lower incoming speed results (avg 400
> Kb/s).
>
> FWIW, my DSL provider is Verizon and I operate this in Long Island
> w/ a Westell 2200 DSL router. I also use a modified version of the
> rc.firewall script, but I took it out of the loop by using the open config.
> The box I'm using uses a 1.1GHz Celeron w/ 128MB of SDRAM.
>
> 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
I'm getting 1.5 Mb over PPPoE with user space ppp on a 400 MHz Celeron
with a crappy RealTek card, so you should certainly not be limited by
your hardware.
Do you have lots of packet collisions (check with netstat -i)?
Perhaps you can try fiddling with the media/mediaopt flags to ifconfig
on the interface connected to the DSL box - just in case it
autonegotiation is not working at is should.
$.02,
/Mikko
Wes Peters
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 w...@softweyr.com
The Jetman
Wes: I've used a couple of Internet speed tests, at different times, but
always w/ the same configs. Neither config has been modified. All of the
results are the same. I use ADSLGuide and DLSReports as my speed tests,
which are in different continents, but both report the same speeds. I use
different browsers, but Java is what does the deal.
I am still clueless....Jet
Chuck Swiger
[ ... ]
> Wes: I've used a couple of Internet speed tests, at different times, but
> always w/ the same configs. Neither config has been modified. All of the
> results are the same. I use ADSLGuide and DLSReports as my speed tests,
> which are in different continents, but both report the same speeds. I use
> different browsers, but Java is what does the deal.
If you're using a DSL provider like Verizon which uses PPPoE, you might try
adjusting your MTU down to 1490 or so, or else you will fragment large data
packets and encounter quite a slowdown.
Use something like this in your /etc/rc.conf file:
ifconfig_fxp0="inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 mtu 1490"
...or run ifconfig directly and see whether this helps.
--
-Chuck
Wes Peters
And then try downloading something from a real server instead of running the
stupid benchmark. Really! Burn up some bits getting something real, not
running somebody's artifical browser toy.
Darcy Buskermolen
On this exact note (and for sake of saveing hours for someone else...) , I
recently turned a Macintosh G3 box running OSX 10.3 into a firewall/nat box
without using their brain dead "internet shareing" tool. What I found was
their natd sucked wind unless you had the apple vender extention of
"clamp_mss yes" in your natd.conf
From the natd man page:
-clamp_mss
This option enables MSS clamping. The MSS value is derived
from the MTU of the interface specified in the -interface
option.
I know this option isn't valid in FreeBSD's natd and I'm not sure if perhaps
it is handleded transparently. But with out this option under OSX I saw
simular problems as to what you are describing when natting packets, even
though the same download form the gateway were AOK
(Perhaps soemone a bit more versed on the internals of nat can comment on this
under FreeBSD)
--
Darcy Buskermolen
Wavefire Technologies Corp.
ph: 250.717.0200
fx: 250.763.1759
http://www.wavefire.com
kazaa-remove
>I know this option isn't valid in FreeBSD's natd and I'm not sure if perhaps
>it is handleded transparently. But with out this option under OSX I saw
>simular problems as to what you are describing when natting packets, even
>though the same download form the gateway were AOK
>
>(Perhaps soemone a bit more versed on the internals of nat can comment on this
>under FreeBSD)
>
>
with ipnat you can use the option
mssclamp [VALUE]
Else, you can use tcpmssd (from /usr/ports/net/tcpmssd) to change your
MSS on the fly.
Cheers,
Beto