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

    Loosing 4Mb+ with pfsense firewall - Is this normal?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 1.2.1-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems-RETIRED
    13 Posts 7 Posters 6.0k 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.
    • V
      vorgusa
      last edited by

      Did you turn on Traffic Shaping?  When I configured QoS for my VoIP phone I noticed that if the cable company increased my bandwidth I would not benefit from it till I reconfigured my Traffic Shapping.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cheesyboofs
        last edited by

        have tried with and without traffic shaping enabled

        No matter what I do I can not get more than about 6MB with the router in between the PC and the cable modem. It a worthwhile trade off for the added security and features of pfsense but it does seem quite a big one.

        Author of pfSense themes:

        DARK-ORANGE

        CODE-RED

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • E
          eri--
          last edited by

          Usually it shouldn't be a issue to hanlde that much of a traffic imo.

          Can you describe your setup, nics etc.
          Do you have any errors in the logs?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C
            cheesyboofs
            last edited by

            Jetway J7F4K 1.2GHz + 1 Gb RAM
            D-Link DFE-580TX Quad NIC PCI Card
            CPU temp 37 degrees centigrade

            Together with the occasional lockup this is why Im looking to try new hardware http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,11913.0.html but I will be well upset if I get the same results.

            jpg_1.jpg
            jpg_1.jpg_thumb

            Author of pfSense themes:

            DARK-ORANGE

            CODE-RED

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • E
              eri--
              last edited by

              Does that board have any MSI/MSI-X active?
              If yes try disabling it!

              Other than that i would take a look at the quad port nic if it is behaving well with interrupts and is not just using one for all the for ports.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • C
                cheesyboofs
                last edited by

                Does that board have any MSI/MSI-X active?

                Don't think so.

                pcib0: <host to="" pci="" bridge="">pcibus 0 on motherboard
                pci0: <pci bus="">on pcib0
                pcib1: <pci-pci bridge="">at device 1.0 on pci0
                pci1: <pci bus="">on pcib1
                pci1: <display, vga="">at device 0.0 (no driver attached)
                pcib2: <pci-pci bridge="">at device 8.0 on pci0
                pci2: <pci bus="">on pcib2
                ste0: <d-link 10="" dl10050="" 100basetx="">port 0xef00-0xef7f irq 11 at device 4.0 on pci2
                miibus0: <mii bus="">on ste0
                ukphy0: <generic ieee="" 802.3u="" media="" interface="">on miibus0
                ukphy0:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
                ste0: Ethernet address: 00:05:5d:e6:25:4d
                ste1: <d-link 10="" dl10050="" 100basetx="">port 0xee00-0xee7f irq 11 at device 5.0 on pci2
                miibus1: <mii bus="">on ste1
                ukphy1: <generic ieee="" 802.3u="" media="" interface="">on miibus1
                ukphy1:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
                ste1: Ethernet address: 00:05:5d:e6:25:4e
                ste2: <d-link 10="" dl10050="" 100basetx="">port 0xed00-0xed7f irq 5 at device 6.0 on pci2
                miibus2: <mii bus="">on ste2
                ukphy2: <generic ieee="" 802.3u="" media="" interface="">on miibus2
                ukphy2:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
                ste2: Ethernet address: 00:05:5d:e6:25:4f
                ste3: <d-link 10="" dl10050="" 100basetx="">port 0xec00-0xec7f irq 10 at device 7.0 on pci2
                miibus3: <mii bus="">on ste3
                ukphy3: <generic ieee="" 802.3u="" media="" interface="">on miibus3
                ukphy3:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto
                ste3: Ethernet address: 00:05:5d:e6:25:50

                IRQ, 11, 5 and 10.</generic></mii></d-link></generic></mii></d-link></generic></mii></d-link></generic></mii></d-link></pci></pci-pci></display,></pci></pci-pci></pci></host>

                Author of pfSense themes:

                DARK-ORANGE

                CODE-RED

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

                  If MSI/MSI-X was in use some of the IRQs would be 256 or more.

                  The test provides a measure of speeds between your system(s) and a particular host(s) on the internet. There are a number of factors outside your control which could significantly influence the numbers displayed by the speedtest. For example: does the test always go to the same server (neither the same server name nor the same server IP address is sufficient to guarantee the test always goes to the same server)?, does it always follow the same route? is the route ever congested? These factors are possibly quite difficult to "measure". Hence you should probably be cautious about making too much of a small number of readings.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • C
                    cheesyboofs
                    last edited by

                    Forgive me but I know not to take one reading as gospel. I am basing the data on the view 'all my results' going back many months.

                    I always test with the same server as I only have two to choose from in the UK. The results below where achieved running ipcop which as you know is quite a basic firewall using my existing hardware minus the quad port NIC.


                    I am hopefully going to be in a position to swap the 4 port NIC for a Vlan capable switch very soon so if it is the NIC I can expect the old speeds back.

                    All I was wondering was is this the trade off in having a packet filtering firewall?

                    Author of pfSense themes:

                    DARK-ORANGE

                    CODE-RED

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      Soyokaze
                      last edited by

                      All I was wondering was is this the trade off in having a packet filtering firewall?

                      nope.
                      if you can - try it pure router mode (with disabled packet filtering).

                      Need full pfSense in a cloud? PM for details!

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

                        You could try fetch from console

                        fetch http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
                        or
                        fetch http://mirror.cogentco.com/pub/linux/centos/5/isos/x86_64/CentOS-5.2-x86_64-bin-1of7.iso

                        Extra could be to ssh pfSense and open more windows and use commands like
                        top -SI
                        sysstat -vmstat or -ifstat or -iostat or -tcp

                        http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi for more info on those commands

                        /Perry
                        doc.pfsense.org

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