Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    The curl command is not working correctly

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    33 Posts 3 Posters 2.4k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      Nice! Yup bridges are needed at both ends as you added. ๐Ÿ‘

      G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • G
        G_Costa @stephenw10
        last edited by

        @stephenw10 Hello! I did the same setup as @s_serra and for some reason with that config my network is pretty slow, i usually have 200 download and now went to 50, any idea why?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stephenw10S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          How are you testing? From where? What WAN bandwidths do you have at each end of the tunnel?

          G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • G
            G_Costa @stephenw10
            last edited by

            @stephenw10 On each pf wan I allways have more than 500/500 and i executed an iperf of the vm behind the pf to the local pf and got around 3gbps

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • stephenw10S
              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
              last edited by

              What latency do you have over the tunnel?

              Try an iperf test between the two pfSense instances directly. Try to determine where the throttling is actually happening.

              G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • G
                G_Costa @stephenw10
                last edited by

                @stephenw10
                Iperf between both pf's without going through the tunnel:
                444349cc-f0ff-4a17-a384-9453228cf439-image.png

                Local Pf logs (This pf is on a vm inside the proxmox)
                b4aaa5ec-66ae-4c31-9ca9-db7794defee0-image.png

                SpeedTest on a VM with the tunnel working:
                e7b69782-2fe2-4642-9369-e8d3a409ee13-image.png

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stephenw10S
                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                  last edited by

                  Do you see the same results in both directions?

                  That's a lot of variation in the result, even outside the tunnel.

                  How much traffic is running through that local pfSense? How much RAM does it have?

                  You can increase the state table size in Sys > Adv > Firewall+NAT but exhausting it usually implies some very high use. You may need to reduce the state timeouts so the table is pruned more frequently.

                  G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • G
                    G_Costa @stephenw10
                    last edited by G_Costa

                    @stephenw10

                    There's the iperf of the other direction:
                    fb897e50-0c4e-437b-b4bc-04f341078fa2-image.png

                    The only traffic is from speedtest, im not running anything else and the pf has 8GB Ram and 8 Cores

                    Pflocal:
                    a0bdc2d5-bc7d-4f21-8582-ac82cfcbe034-image.png

                    Pfremote:
                    5276a307-c7d0-4d82-8989-37272dd82e84-image.png

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • stephenw10S
                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                      last edited by

                      Are those showing bits or bytes there?

                      How are you testing across the tunnel? Also with iperf?

                      G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • G
                        G_Costa @stephenw10
                        last edited by

                        @stephenw10 said in The curl command is not working correctly:

                        How are you testing across the tunnel? Also with iperf?

                        Reply

                        It's Bytes
                        71cf078c-6280-4b4d-9a82-53aa71fdfc34-image.png

                        0443c45f-02b5-4d1c-aa7c-4e3f5110fd28-image.png

                        89883e55-fcb8-4d4b-8eb9-5b5298b16fce-image.png

                        This is on the tunnel and the ips are:
                        10.0.8.1 -> OpenVPN remote Tunnel
                        10.0.8.2 -> OpenVPN local Tunnel

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • stephenw10S
                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                          last edited by

                          Hmm, how is the tunnel configured? Is it using UDP? There are a lot of retries there, it could be an MTU issue.

                          Sometime the openvpn interface does not behave as expected when used directly or services like that. Try using an internal IP as source if you can. Though in a bridge it shouldn't really matter.

                          G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • G
                            G_Costa @stephenw10
                            last edited by

                            @stephenw10 Yes UDP, there's all the configurations:
                            be6ed0e8-4f9a-48ad-b6d5-2a218efc2ec6-image.png

                            --

                            225cb46a-56cb-4133-acf7-37a5d2845305-image.png

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stephenw10S
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by

                              You should set AES-GCM and enable UDP Fast I/O for better performance there.

                              However that isn't going to get you to the full rate there.

                              You are seeing ~15ms across the tunnel?

                              Did you bump the state table size?

                              G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • G
                                G_Costa @stephenw10
                                last edited by

                                @stephenw10
                                4b602580-aa15-4f77-b5a2-cba6f5b8ca33-image.png
                                759516ce-cc00-45a6-928d-055e7f3633f9-image.png
                                0a0cbfce-9120-4d18-b212-644e2ffb015e-image.png

                                Remote pf:
                                remotepf.png

                                Local pf:
                                localpf.png

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • stephenw10S
                                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                  last edited by

                                  Those images are too small to read I think. ๐Ÿ˜‰

                                  G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • G
                                    G_Costa @stephenw10
                                    last edited by G_Costa

                                    @stephenw10 Im trying to send them as image instead of attachment but they are too large, do you mind if i send them with imgur?
                                    https://imgur.com/a/7CqmzkO

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stephenw10S
                                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                      last edited by

                                      Mmm, OK so no significant difference to throughput. I assume neither side shows any CPU cores at 100%?

                                      I would try setting a lower MSS value and see if that makes any difference. If it does try to fins the actual tunnel MTU with some large pings.
                                      Packet fragmentation across the tunnel can cause significant throttling.

                                      G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • G
                                        G_Costa @stephenw10
                                        last edited by G_Costa

                                        @stephenw10

                                        While downloading:
                                        9a25d1e9-9061-49af-b96a-271ca17e130e-image.png

                                        While uploading:
                                        f4ec18de-d9d1-4ba5-8aa7-9e45a4b32285-image.png
                                        7f2a9dbc-1837-4f90-b681-6789c0c0ccd3-image.png

                                        MSS -> 576 -> OpenVPN interface and bridge
                                        ea021dcf-0e01-47d3-9a29-4328a4df3bf5-image.png

                                        MSS -> 1152
                                        25d41a17-73e0-4ad8-96ee-58c453e0b77c-image.png

                                        MSS -> 2304
                                        ecef7d46-0564-4999-85be-a0211c4744b2-image.png

                                        MSS -> 4608
                                        53a0e084-214a-4d12-8eab-bbd9bbe7f081-image.png

                                        About the MTU i cant change on the interfaces because it says "This interface is a bridge member, its MTU is controlled by its parent bridge interface."

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stephenw10S
                                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                          last edited by

                                          Hmm, Ok so it looks you are hitting a CPU limit on the upload with a single core at 100%.

                                          Try MSS values at, say, 1400 and 1300. However with bridging in play normal fixes like that can fail since there's no routing.... ๐Ÿค”

                                          G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • G
                                            G_Costa @stephenw10
                                            last edited by

                                            @stephenw10
                                            MSS 1300 Downloading:
                                            b1e817e4-044c-491a-9378-8670eedcdf2d-image.png

                                            MSS 1300 Uploading:
                                            21e7a362-f04c-4ef4-a72b-978c9c5da89d-image.png

                                            MSS 1400 Downloading:
                                            8a850f13-e74c-44a1-9276-ad48ac6b81ca-image.png

                                            MSS 1400 Uploading:
                                            9c65ee6f-b239-4f7b-8552-cfd8e50f8724-image.png

                                            While uploading some cores go to 100% but the speed is good but when downloading the cores dont go to 100% and the speed is low
                                            d5f6d6ab-060b-4ef4-899a-775ec2716097-image.png

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.