WAN & LAN @ Gigabit but Limited to Sub 100Mbps

stephenw10

@viragomann said in WAN & LAN @ Gigabit but Limited to Sub 100Mbps:

replace the old PC anyway due to its power consumption

Yeah those Pentium Ds were hungry beasts!
Also that's very old, it may fail for numerous reasons at that age.

But it should pass 120Mbps easily. Many years ago now I ran a Pentium 4 based device and that could pass ~300Mbps. The Pentium D is significantly more powerful (in both respects!).

95Mbps does feel a lot like something linked at 100M though. Do you have the modem and test client connected directly to those two NICs in the screenshot?

Steve

JKnott

@silence

Don't lock it at any one speed, unless you can do both ends. Mixing fixed speed and auto negotiate is a bad idea.

stephenw10

Yup that^
Also link negotiation is required for Gigabit even if some hardware allows you set 1G fixed.

Steve

netfly

@stephenw10 said in WAN & LAN @ Gigabit but Limited to Sub 100Mbps:

Yup that^

what do you mean with that?

JKnott

@netfly

He was referring to my comment where I said to not mix locked and autonegotiate connections. Normally, you use auto, unless you have a need to use a fixed speed. One reason I have experienced is when connecting to fibre media converters.

stephenw10

Exactly. You should use autodetect for speed and duplex everywhere unless you have a vert good reason not to. Like some other device is already set at a fixed speed and cannot be changed.

Steve

JKnott

@stephenw10

Does anything use half duplex these days? IIRC, full duplex is mandatory for Gb and above.

If I do an archaeological dig in my junk closet, I may be able to find a 10 Mb hub that's half duplex. It's the only piece of hardware I've owned that was.

stephenw10

Mmm, been a while since I saw any 10base2.

However 100M-Half-Duplex is a common fall-back link for devices if negotiation fails so you do, relatively, often seen that.
IMO there no good reason to be using a fixed speed anywhere either but some ISPs still supply stuff configured for 100M fixed that cannot be changed.

Steve

JKnott

@stephenw10

I started out with 10base5 and hand wiring¹ Ethernet controllers on prototype boards for Data General Eclipse computers. We also had some DEC VAX 11/780 computers on the network. As I mentioned I've had to use fixed speeds with fibre to copper media converters.

I'm probably the only one here who has hand wired an Ethernet controller.

samyboyz

@viragomann Yes, it's costing me lots more in electricity, i just ordered a Qotom i3 for like $319 Canadian Dollers, can't wait to install it :)

viragomann

@samyboyz
I think, this was a good decision.

I've a Qotom i5 with 4 NICs, bought it 4 years ago. I've installed LInux on it and run pfSense on the top of KVM alongside a cloud VM and an LXC.
Measured its power consumption over a 3 days duration, it took about 7 W average.
So I guess, you will have a cost return after about 2 years. :-)

JKnott

@viragomann

I guess your's is similar to mine (see sig). I also tried to measure the power, using apcupsd and concluded it was only a few watts. However, I installed only pfsense on it, as I don't think firewalls should be doing anything else.

viragomann

@jknott said in WAN & LAN @ Gigabit but Limited to Sub 100Mbps:

I guess your's is similar to mine (see sig).

i5-4200U, 8 GB RAM, 120 GB SSD, 2 TB HDD. The i5 is really powerful enough for all my home use and on the other hand, the U models are very energy-efficient. However, they might have a small delay to throttle up.
I have the operating systems on the SSD and the HDD is for data store. So the HDD can go to sleep when no data are requested, which additionally saves power.

Yes, you're right. I know the risk of running a firewall virtualized alongside other VMs. But this is for home use, I'm well familiar with virtualization and the host and VM are well maintained. And I like to have the things compact and tidy.

samyboyz

I just installed the Qotom i3, only had a 2GB memory module so threw it in, getting same speed as the old HP, 95Mbps while getting 115/120 at the Model, connection says 1000 for WAN & LAN so still wondering what might be causing the loss

stephenw10

How are you actually testing the speed?

samyboyz

@stephenw10 with Fast.com or Speedtest.net

stephenw10

Still no errors shown on WAN or LAN? Links show as autoselect 1G-full duplex?

samyboyz

@stephenw10

stephenw10

Hmm, I assume CPU usage is minimal during this test?

Try running at the CLI during the test: top -aSH

Can you see the expected throughput between internal interfaces?

Steve