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

    Trouble Shooting a PFSENSE box

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    16 Posts 5 Posters 6.5k 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.
    • N
      nambi
      last edited by

      Here is my PF Box hooked to the lan with the normal load on it.

      Name  firewallc****
      Version 1.2.3-RELEASE
      built on Sun Dec 6 23:21:36 EST 2009
      Platform pfSense
      Uptime
      State table size
      Show states
      MBUF Usage 198 /645
      CPU usage 12%
      Memory usage 32%
      SWAP usage 0%
      Disk usage 55%

      How do I test the latency?

      vmstat -i

      $ vmstat -i
      interrupt                          total      rate
      irq0: clk                      59358197      1000
      irq1: atkbd0                          14          0
      irq5: vr0                        1023074        17
      irq6: fdc0                            2          0
      irq8: rtc                        7596142        127
      irq11: ste0 uhci0*              1027182        17
      irq14: ata0                      118493          1
      irq15: ata1                          88          0
      Total                          69123192      1164

      top -S

      $ top -S
      last pid: 45189;  load averages:  0.18,  0.25,  0.19  up 0+16:29:59    09:39:50
      117 processes: 3 running, 91 sleeping, 8 zombie, 15 waiting

      Mem: 83M Active, 170M Inact, 64M Wired, 56M Buf, 141M Free
      Swap: 512M Total, 512M Free

      PID USERNAME  THR PRI NICE  SIZE    RES STATE    TIME  WCPU COMMAND
        11 root        1 171 ki31    0K    8K RUN    941:21 97.56% idle: cpu0
      41069 root        1  -8    0 40712K 13412K piperd  0:19  1.27% php
        33 root        1 -68    -    0K    8K WAIT    5:32  0.39% irq5: vr0
        25 root        1 -68    -    0K    8K WAIT    4:45  0.20% irq11: ste0 uhci0*
        606 root        1  4    0  5144K  3032K kqread  0:15  0.20% lighttpd
        12 root        1 -32    -    0K    8K WAIT    3:10  0.00% swi4: clock sio
        14 root        1 -44    -    0K    8K WAIT    1:38  0.00% swi1: net
        46 root        1  20    -    0K    8K syncer  1:23  0.00% syncer
      3276 proxy      1  4    0 61288K  9240K sbwait  0:46  0.00% squidGuard
          4 root        1  -8    -    0K    8K -        0:15  0.00% g_up
          5 root        1  -8    -    0K    8K -        0:13  0.00% g_down
        15 root        1  44    -    0K    8K -        0:11  0.00% yarrow
      3277 proxy      1  4    0 61288K  9152K sbwait  0:08  0.00% squidGuard
        20 root        1  8    -    0K    8K -        0:08  0.00% thread taskq
          3 root        1  -8    -    0K    8K -        0:06  0.00% g_event
        26 root        1 -64    -    0K    8K WAIT    0:06  0.00% irq14: ata0
      2014 root        1  8    0  3492K  1380K wait    0:06  0.00% sh
      2034 root        1 -58    0  5260K  2364K bpf      0:05  0.00% bandwidthd

      Thank You.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • N
        nambi
        last edited by

        here is the usage graph,

        Why is it that my 4 hour 1 min avr graph doesn't show anything or 16 hour 1 min av & 2 day 5 min avr

        pfgraph.jpg
        pfgraph.jpg_thumb

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • W
          wallabybob
          last edited by

          The top output is not consistent with your claim of 3% idle CPU. How did you come to that conclusion?

          The ping command can be used to estimate latency, e.g.```

          ping -c 20 host

          
          The shell command```
          # netstat -i
          ```will return counters for each interface including error counters. (delays might be caused by corrupted or lost packets)
          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • N
            nambi
            last edited by

            Thank you for all the help.

            "The top output is not consistent with your claim of 3% idle CPU. How did you come to that conclusion?"

            This was what I normally see when I log into the box and go to /status/system

            Here are my ping results. and my netstat results. I think my pings look slow, what would cause this?

            $ ping -c 20 google.com
            PING google.com (173.194.32.104): 56 data bytes
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=11.843 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=11.548 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=11.493 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=10.810 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=12.730 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=11.083 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=11.527 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=10.569 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=11.711 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=11.244 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=10 ttl=56 time=11.023 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=11 ttl=56 time=11.252 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=12 ttl=56 time=11.989 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=13 ttl=56 time=11.579 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=14 ttl=56 time=11.830 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=15 ttl=56 time=12.268 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=16 ttl=56 time=32.353 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=17 ttl=56 time=11.585 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=18 ttl=56 time=11.318 ms
            64 bytes from 173.194.32.104: icmp_seq=19 ttl=56 time=11.428 ms

            –- google.com ping statistics ---
            20 packets transmitted, 20 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
            round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 10.569/12.559/32.353/4.566 ms


            $ ping -c 20 microsoft.com
            PING microsoft.com (207.46.232.182): 56 data bytes

            --- microsoft.com ping statistics ---
            20 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss


            $ ping -c 20 yahoo.com
            PING yahoo.com (69.147.125.65): 56 data bytes
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=0 ttl=54 time=28.310 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=26.832 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=27.967 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=26.968 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=26.622 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=26.420 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=26.669 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=26.749 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=8 ttl=54 time=26.511 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=26.527 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=26.749 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=11 ttl=54 time=26.329 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=12 ttl=54 time=27.077 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=13 ttl=54 time=27.306 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=14 ttl=54 time=26.584 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=15 ttl=54 time=26.323 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=16 ttl=54 time=27.092 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=17 ttl=54 time=27.042 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=18 ttl=54 time=26.741 ms
            64 bytes from 69.147.125.65: icmp_seq=19 ttl=54 time=42.767 ms

            --- yahoo.com ping statistics ---
            20 packets transmitted, 20 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
            round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 26.323/27.679/42.767/3.496 ms


            $ ping -c 20 apple.com
            PING apple.com (17.112.152.57): 56 data bytes
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=0 ttl=243 time=79.368 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=79.317 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=78.288 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=79.355 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=78.635 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=79.386 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=78.455 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=7 ttl=243 time=78.654 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=8 ttl=243 time=78.982 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=9 ttl=243 time=78.985 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=10 ttl=243 time=78.456 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=11 ttl=243 time=79.444 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=12 ttl=243 time=78.749 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=13 ttl=243 time=79.249 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=14 ttl=243 time=78.750 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=15 ttl=243 time=78.992 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=16 ttl=243 time=79.403 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=17 ttl=243 time=80.230 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=18 ttl=243 time=78.417 ms
            64 bytes from 17.112.152.57: icmp_seq=19 ttl=243 time=79.180 ms

            --- apple.com ping statistics ---
            20 packets transmitted, 20 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
            round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 78.288/79.015/80.230/0.463


            $ netstat -i
            Name    Mtu Network      Address              Ipkts Ierrs    Opkts Oerrs  Coll
            ste0  1500 <link#1>00:05:5d:fb:cf:2e  732766    0  968330    0    0
            ste0  1500 192.168.1.0  firewallcanada      16722    -  440684    -    -
            ste0  1500 fe80:1::205:5 fe80:1::205:5dff:        0    -        1    -    -
            vr0    1500 <link#2>00:0a:e6:2d:f3:9f  969580    0  948426    0    0
            vr0    1500 fe80:2::20a:e fe80:2::20a:e6ff:        0    -        2    -    -
            lo0  16384 <link#3>5453    0    5453    0    0
            lo0  16384 your-net      localhost          286242    -      821    -    -
            lo0  16384 ::1          ::1                      0    -        0    -    -
            lo0  16384 fe80:3::1    fe80:3::1                0    -        0    -    -
            enc0  1536 <link#4>314093    0  225432    0    0
            pfsyn  1460 <link#5>0    0        0    0    0
            pflog 33204 <link#6>0    0    5249    0    0
            ng0    1492 <link#7>968505    0  947352    0    0
            ng0    1492 70.25.56.48/3 PTR                1060915    -  758238    -    -
            ng0    1492 fe80:7::205:5 fe80:7::205:5dff:        0    -        2    -    -
            tun0  1500 <link#8>0    0        3    0    0
            tun0  1500 fe80:8::205:5 fe80:8::205:5dff:        0    -        2    -    -
            tun0  1500 192.168.200.1 192.168.200.1            0    -        0    -    -</link#8></link#7></link#6></link#5></link#4></link#3></link#2></link#1>

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • W
              wallabybob
              last edited by

              @nambi:

              "The top output is not consistent with your claim of 3% idle CPU. How did you come to that conclusion?"

              This was what I normally see when I log into the box and go to /status/system

              I presume you are logging in through the web GUI rather than the console or ssh session. On the web page I see a CPU Usage field there, not a CPU idle field. Did you really mean "cpu about 3% idle" rather than "cpu usage about 3%"?

              The ping times to apple.com and yahoo.com are quite consistent. The ping times to google.com are much more variable (10mS to 32mS) but I wouldn't expect that variability to be very noticeable.

              The netstat output doesn't show any received errors.

              I wonder if your DNS is slow. This could explain why your web surfing is "slow" but download speeds are "high". (When you click on a web page link its generally necessary to ask your DNS to translate the host name to an IP address.) What DNS do you use? (People generally end up using their ISP's DNS.)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • T
                tommyboy180
                last edited by

                Forgot about DNS.

                Try setting your DNS servers to OpenDNS with IP 208.67.222.222 and 208.67.220.220.
                I have used OpenDNS for years now and their service has always been 100% reliable not to mention very fast.

                -Tom Schaefer
                SuperMicro 1U 2X Intel pro/1000 Dual Core Intel 2.2 Ghz - 2 Gig RAM

                Please support pfBlocker | File Browser | Strikeback

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • N
                  nambi
                  last edited by

                  Thank you for the info, at first I was using my ISP's DNS (Bell) but I had a lot of time outs then I swtiched them to google.

                  8.8.8.8
                  and
                  8.8.4.4

                  I will try opendns's dns but doesn't opendn filter their content?

                  Thanks will try, to day the net seems responsive.

                  "The top output is not consistent with your claim of 3% idle CPU. How did you come to that conclusion?"
                  I must have read the system wrong I do apologize.

                  And Yes I meant to speak of "CPU usage" meaning when the system system way idle the "CPU usage" seems to be at about 3%

                  My graphs do not display anything for "4 hour 1 min avr, or 16 hour 1 min av & 2 day 5 min avr"

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    dszp
                    last edited by

                    OpenDNS filters only spyware or virus-laden webpages by default (along with phishing sites I believe, found at least by their sister site, phishtank.com), if you just start using them. To do additional content filtering by category for instance, you have to create an account and register your IP address(es) and set the settings.

                    David Szpunar

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • N
                      nambi
                      last edited by

                      Using the open DNS servers seemed to fix the lag, pages are quick to respond and system seems back to normal.

                      Thanks you all for helping me diagnose this issue.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • R
                        rugby
                        last edited by

                        @David:

                        OpenDNS filters only spyware or virus-laden webpages by default (along with phishing sites I believe, found at least by their sister site, phishtank.com), if you just start using them. To do additional content filtering by category for instance, you have to create an account and register your IP address(es) and set the settings.

                        They also do DNS redirecting and sometimes have incorrect records.  Be very careful using their servers, as you won't end up where you wanted to go sometimes.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T
                          tommyboy180
                          last edited by

                          Do you have an example URL. I have never seen a re-direct to anything other than the OpenDNS search engine from URLs that don't exist.

                          -Tom Schaefer
                          SuperMicro 1U 2X Intel pro/1000 Dual Core Intel 2.2 Ghz - 2 Gig RAM

                          Please support pfBlocker | File Browser | Strikeback

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • D
                            dszp
                            last edited by

                            It's been a while and I'm not sure if they still do it, but the other thing I've seen from OpenDNS is that they've (transparent) proxied Google in the past, to resolve a specific issue they were having. I discovered this when I was using it and Google wouldn't load for anyone (a proxy issue on their end) but everything else worked. I forget what the exact reason was (there was a technical reason that went along with the way they were doing "shortcuts" or something), and like I said I don't know if they still do this. I haven't had any issues with that or any other part of the service for a long time, and I use them pretty regularly.

                            David Szpunar

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