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

    Packet loss on LAN interface

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    9 Posts 5 Posters 2.2k 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.
    • R
      robatwork
      last edited by

      Before I yank the NIC out of the pfsense box - maybe someone knows of a configuration issue that may be contributing to this problem.

      Pfsense connected to the network via a switch. Everything on the switch can ping everything else. When pinging the Lan interface on the pfsense we get 1-2% packet loss.
      Logged into the pfsense and ran a ping the other way and got the same result - packet loss to other computers on the Lan:

      278 packets transmitted, 274 packets received, 1.4% packet loss
      round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.065/0.167/13.414/0.807 ms

      CARP is disabled

      This has just become a problem and I am not aware of any other network changes that have been made recently

      thanks

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M
        muswellhillbilly
        last edited by

        Have you checked whether auto-negotiate is enabled on the switch port the PFS is using, or whether the speed/duplex has been set statically? Have you tried plugging the PFS into a different port on the switch? Have you checked the traffic levels on the PFS LAN Nic - could high traffic be having a negative effect on your return pings?

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

          Thanks for the reply…

          @muswellhillbilly:

          Have you checked whether auto-negotiate is enabled on the switch port the PFS is using, or whether the speed/duplex has been set statically? Have you tried plugging the PFS into a different port on the switch? Have you checked the traffic levels on the PFS LAN Nic - could high traffic be having a negative effect on your return pings?

          Autoselect is enabled on the speed/duplex
          Yes tried different port switch. It's a managed switch and have also checked packet errors - none.
          Traffic doesn't seem particularly high - nothing spiking > 10Mbps and generally around a few hundred Kbps in and out.
          This problem has just started and no config has changed which is why I suspect hardware.

          Would you suggest manually setting duplex?

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

            Just attaching my Networking settings - I can't recall if these are defaults or I have altered them in the past for some reason….

            pf1.PNG
            pf1.PNG_thumb

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DerelictD
              Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
              last edited by

              Would you suggest manually setting duplex?

              No. If both sides are auto-neg you should be fine. People run into trouble when both sides are hard-set differently or one side is hard-set and the other side is auto-neg.

              If you want to dig deeper you can run a packet capture on LAN and see if the echo requests are being received and responded to. You can configure a mirror port on the switch and see if they are being sent/received there.

              Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
              A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
              DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
              Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • ?
                Guest
                last edited by

                If there will be really a mirrored port you could try out sniffing with WireShark and capture
                and store this traces to inspect them later.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P
                  pedreter
                  last edited by

                  @Derelict:

                  Would you suggest manually setting duplex?

                  No. If both sides are auto-neg you should be fine. People run into trouble when both sides are hard-set differently or one side is hard-set and the other side is auto-neg.

                  If you want to dig deeper you can run a packet capture on LAN and see if the echo requests are being received and responded to. You can configure a mirror port on the switch and see if they are being sent/received there.

                  With all respects Derelict, i have seen many times situations where "Auto-neg" seems to work well on both ends but it really does not!

                  Robatwork, try to FORCE 100Mbps full duplex on both ends and check it again…

                  Pedreter.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • DerelictD
                    Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                    last edited by

                    Maybe ages ago. Sort of like VLAN hopping. No matter what a duplex mismatch will show as errors on at least one interface.

                    Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                    A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                    DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                    Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

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

                      Still got packet loss despite all software tweaking so this morning I replaced the LAN card.

                      So far so good - 0 packets lost during a few hours so hardware problem was the diagnosis for this one.

                      Thanks for all your input!

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