SG-1000 throughput slow down

yendor

Hi,
I’m getting some strange speed test results when using my SG-1000.

Running some internet-based speed with the SG-1000 in place I get:

speedtest.net 98 Mbps
fast.com 97 Mbps
google search page test (M-Lab) 8.4 Mbps

When I connect directly to the cable modem I get:

speedtest.net 98 Mbps
fast.com 97 Mbps
google search page test (M-Lab) 97 Mbps

I also see the slow down when using NzbGet with it toping out a ~4MB/s going thought the SG-1000 and ~12MB/s when bypassing it.

What would be my steps in finding out why I’m getting slow throughput on some sites / traffic

EDIT:
doing a speed test from the SG-1000 I get:

[2.4.4-RELEASE][root@pfSense.localdomain]/root: fetch -o /dev/null http://download.thinkbroadband.com/50MB.zip
/dev/null                                     100% of   50 MB  306 kBps 02m47s

~2.45Mbps is far from the ~100Mbps i should be getting

EDIT 2:
Did some more testing, I only have a windows laptop available, so I wrote a little powershell script

$fileSize = 10
$Request = Get-Date
$null = Invoke-WebRequest ('http://ipv4.download.thinkbroadband.com/{0}MB.zip' -f $fileSize)
# $null = Invoke-WebRequest ('http://client.akamai.com/install/test-objects/{0}MB.bin' -f $fileSize)
$timeSec = (NEW-TIMESPAN -Start $Request -End (Get-Date)).totalseconds
$speed = (($fileSize / $timeSec) * 8)
Write-host ("File Size: {0} MB, Time: {1:N4} s, Speed: {2:N2} Mbps" -f $fileSize, $timeSec, $speed)

Running this script a few times with just the laptop connected to the cable modem then with the SG-1000 between them I get:

http://ipv4.download.thinkbroadband.com/10MB.zip direct to cable modem
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 6.6559 s, Speed: 12.02 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 6.9133 s, Speed: 11.57 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 7.5968 s, Speed: 10.53 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 7.7176 s, Speed: 10.37 Mbps

http://ipv4.download.thinkbroadband.com/10MB.zip throught SG-1000
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 32.3872 s, Speed: 2.47 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 29.7474 s, Speed: 2.69 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 33.5248 s, Speed: 2.39 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 20.5034 s, Speed: 3.90 Mbps

Now I know my cable connect is not giving me the ~100Mbps that speedtest.net and fast.com report, but it remains to as why the SG-1000 throughput is bad?

What else can I do to get to the bottom of this problem?

Regards,

yendor

@jammcla with regards to: SG-1000 throughput issue did you ever get this fixed?

Look like i maybe having the same issue.

stephenw10

Are you able to get the full 100Mbps downloading that test file from thinkbroadband without the SG-1000 in line?

You might try a different test file if not.

You could also try speedtest command line client directly on the SG-1000:

[2.4.5-DEVELOPMENT][root@1000.stevew.lan]/root: pkg install py27-speedtest-cli
Updating pfSense-core repository catalogue...
pfSense-core repository is up to date.
Updating pfSense repository catalogue...
pfSense repository is up to date.
All repositories are up to date.
The following 1 package(s) will be affected (of 0 checked):

New packages to be INSTALLED:
        py27-speedtest-cli: 2.0.2 [pfSense]

Number of packages to be installed: 1

34 KiB to be downloaded.

Proceed with this action? [y/N]: y
[1/1] Fetching py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2.txz: 100%   34 KiB  35.1kB/s    00:01    
Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting)
[1/1] Installing py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2...
[1/1] Extracting py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2: 100%
[2.4.5-DEVELOPMENT][root@1000.stevew.lan]/root: rehash
[2.4.5-DEVELOPMENT][root@1000.stevew.lan]/root: speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Plusnet (195.123.456.78)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Vodafone UK (London) [10.12 km]: 31.372 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 71.02 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed................................................................................................
Upload: 18.46 Mbit/s

Steve

yendor

@stephenw10 thanks for the reply I'll try the speedtest cli client, see my edit 2 for what I did try so far.

yendor

Running the sppedtest-cli gives me:

[2.4.4-RELEASE][root@pfSense.localdomain]/root: pkg install py27-speedtest-cli
Updating pfSense-core repository catalogue...
pfSense-core repository is up to date.
Updating pfSense repository catalogue...
pfSense repository is up to date.
All repositories are up to date.
The following 1 package(s) will be affected (of 0 checked):

New packages to be INSTALLED:
        py27-speedtest-cli: 2.0.2 [pfSense]

Number of packages to be installed: 1

34 KiB to be downloaded.

Proceed with this action? [y/N]: y
[1/1] Fetching py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2.txz: 100%   34 KiB  35.1kB/s    00:01
Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting)
[1/1] Installing py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2...
[1/1] Extracting py27-speedtest-cli-2.0.2: 100%
[2.4.4-RELEASE][root@pfSense.localdomain]/root: speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Telstra (Brisbane) [12.30 km]: 25.819 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 53.24 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed...............................................................................................
.Upload: 1.90 Mbit/s
[2.4.4-RELEASE][root@pfSense.localdomain]/root: speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Telstra (Brisbane) [12.30 km]: 23.191 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 53.17 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed...............................................................................................
.Upload: 1.91 Mbit/s

But the speed test web interface gives me 87.09 Mbps when run between the above test,

will have a look to see if/how I can run the speedtest-cli on the windows laptop.

yendor

When running the speedtest-cli (in python) from the windows laptop everything looks fine, but I still get a slower throughput when downloading files i.e. http://ipv4.download.thinkbroadband.com/100MB.zip

Laptop speedtest-cli results:
SG-1000 Connection

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (114.77.175.53)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by 'Yes' Optus (Brisbane) [12.30 km]: 13.505 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 98.02 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.82 Mbit/s

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (114.77.175.53)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Telstra (Brisbane) [12.30 km]: 13.838 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 95.90 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.19 Mbit/s

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Foxtel Broadband (Brisbane) [6.75 km]: 15.499 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 85.33 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed.....................................................................................................
.Upload: 1.66 Mbit/s

Direct Connection

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by 'Yes' Optus (Brisbane) [6.75 km]: 14.246 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 91.24 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 2.06 Mbit/s

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by 'Yes' Optus (Brisbane) [6.75 km]: 15.19 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 80.20 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.18 Mbit/s

C:\>cd /

C:\>speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Optus (***.***.***.***)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by 'Yes' Optus (Brisbane) [6.75 km]: 14.002 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 80.74 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.48 Mbit/s

stephenw10

You might check to see it's some sort of flow control issue. The easiest way to test that is to put an unmanaged switch between the SG-1000 WAN and whatever it's connected to if you can.

Steve

yendor

Testing with a Netgear GS108 as an unmanaged switch

Running my ps script I get:

Laptop -> GS108 -> SG-1000 -> Cable Modem -> Internet

File Size: 10 MB, Time: 38.4099 s, Speed: 2.08 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 32.3872 s, Speed: 2.47 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time: 33.5068 s, Speed: 2.39 Mbps

Laptop -> GS108 -> Cable Modem -> Internet

File Size: 10 MB, Time 6.8053 s, Speed: 11.76 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time 6.4167 s, Speed: 12.47 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time 7.2563 s, Speed: 11.02 Mbps

Laptop->SG-1000->GS108> Cable Modem -> Internet

File Size: 10 MB, Time 34.9435 s, Speed: 2.29 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time 36.5176 s, Speed: 2.19 Mbps
File Size: 10 MB, Time 29.9453 s, Speed: 2.67 Mbps

yendor

and don't know if it helpful but under Status / Interfaces

WAN Interface (wan, cpsw0)

Status
up
DHCP
up     Relinquish Lease
// -------
removed ip info
// -------
MTU
1500
Media
1000baseT <full-duplex>
In/out packets
310481711/138808790 (421.37 GiB/9.09 GiB)
In/out packets (pass)
310481711/138808790 (421.37 GiB/9.09 GiB)
In/out packets (block)
19878/13625 (985 KiB/927 KiB)
In/out errors
0/0
Collisions
0

stephenw10

Hmm, that does seem to be an unusually high number of OUT packet blocked on WAN.

Do you see that number increase specifically when you run a test that is slow?

Do you see traffic blocked in the firewall log?

Are you running anything that might be blocking that like Snort or pfBlocker?

Steve

yendor

I'm not running anything that I can think of that would be blocking traffic, I have defaulted the SG-1000 as part of trying to work this out so unless there something in there by default.

the blocked out packet don't move when doing a speed test.

looking at the logs I have a few noisy devices (another rabbit hole to chase down), but most of the traffic look like android devices phones, tablets, tv, etc...

what log does the out block go to? looking at /var/log/filter.log I only see block on the in?

any who, here's a dump from the gui, if it helps.

Action	Time	Interface	Source	Destination	Protocol
Block	Oct 1 16:10:10	LAN	192.168.1.7:51489	45.57.40.1:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:13:55	LAN	192.168.1.163:42009	172.217.167.72:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:19:59	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:PA
Block	Oct 1 16:19:59	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:19:59	LAN	192.168.1.163:47920	68.68.111.42:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:19:59	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:20:00	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:20:32	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:21:15	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:22:04	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:22:56	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:22:56	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:22:58	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:23:00	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:23:06	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:23:16	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:23:38	LAN	192.168.1.167:11025	80.249.99.148:80	TCP:RA
Block	Oct 1 16:27:50	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:15	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:36	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:PA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:36	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:36	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:37	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:PA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:37	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:37	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:37	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:38	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:38	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:38	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:40	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:40	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:44	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:45	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:52	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:28:55	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:29:06	LAN	192.168.1.163:42703	172.217.167.78:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:29:07	LAN	192.168.1.163:38593	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:29:15	LAN	192.168.1.163:38590	172.217.25.170:443	TCP:FPA
Block	Oct 1 16:30:10	LAN	192.168.1.172:37268	198.142.191.76:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:30:10	LAN	192.168.1.172:37268	198.142.191.76:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:30:11	LAN	192.168.1.172:37268	198.142.191.76:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:30:12	LAN	192.168.1.172:37268	198.142.191.76:443	TCP:FA
Block	Oct 1 16:30:13	LAN	192.168.1.172:37268	198.142.191.76:443	TCP:FA

stephenw10

It depends what exactly that is and what logging is enabled. The fact it's not showing as blocked in the firewall log by the default block rule implies it's either something that's blocked by the firewall and not logged or it's something that's blocked for some other reason like it's malformed packets.
The fact the number doesn't increase during the test implies it's probably not the cause there though.

Those blocks that are shown are all out of state TCP packets and they all have destination port 443/80. That is some client acknowledging the closed TCP session after the state has been closed. Not something that should ever cause a problem.

Try running at the command line when you are doing the test top -aSH. Hit q to stop during the test and you can copy-paste the output here. That should show if you're hitting CPU limitation somehow.

Steve

yendor

I don't see any limiting?

last pid:  1645;  load averages:  1.39,  2.81,  2.73 up 11:13:16  05:21:47
143 processes: 2 running, 111 sleeping, 8 zombie, 22 waiting
CPU:  7.0% user,  0.0% nice,  1.3% system, 33.4% interrupt, 58.2% idle
Mem: 22M Active, 96M Inact, 109M Wired, 25M Buf, 256M Free
Swap:

stephenw10

No, 52% idle looks fine. It would be good to see what is using the CPU though.

Steve

yendor

the top -aSH table while running a test looks like:

PID	USERNAME	PRI	NICE	SIZE	RES	STATE	TIME	WCPU	COMMAND
10	root	155	ki31	0K	8K	RUN	108.5H	58.04%	[idle]
11	root	-92	-	0K	176K	WAIT	835:47	32.13%	[intr{aintc0,41: cpswss0}]
16636	root	40	0	7312K	3316K	RUN	0:00	1.14%	top -aSH
42430	unbound	4	0	25860K	19020K	kqread	2:59	0.89%	/usr/local/sbin/unbound -c /var/unbound/unbound.conf
34579	root	-74	0	9612K	5100K	bpf	6:19	0.84%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
34606	root	-74	0	9612K	4988K	bpf	6:21	0.81%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
33594	root	-74	0	9612K	4988K	bpf	6:18	0.80%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
34645	root	-74	0	9612K	4988K	bpf	6:55	0.79%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
33307	root	-74	0	9612K	5100K	bpf	6:17	0.78%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
33845	root	-74	0	9612K	4988K	bpf	6:51	0.78%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
34294	root	-74	0	11660K	5904K	bpf	6:20	0.78%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
33258	root	-74	0	11660K	5904K	bpf	6:19	0.76%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
11	root	-60	-	0K	176K	WAIT	56:17	0.74%	[intr{swi4: clock (0)}]
11	root	-92	-	0K	176K	WAIT	15:11	0.23%	[intr{aintc0,42: cpswss0}]
6	root	-16	-	0K	8K	pftm	13:01	0.15%	[pf purge]
11	root	-88	-	0K	176K	WAIT	3:16	0.09%	[intr{aintc0,28: +}]
5606	root	40	0	10900K	6220K	select	0:00	0.09%	sshd: root@pts/0 (sshd)
55346	root	8	0	6600K	2036K	nanslp	0:52	0.06%	[dpinger{dpinger}]
21670	dhcpd	40	0	10088K	5636K	select	0:25	0.05%	/usr/local/sbin/dhcpd -user dhcpd -group _dhcp -chroot /var/dhcpd -cf /etc/dhcpd.conf -pf /var/run/dhcpd.pid cpsw1
27	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	2:22	0.04%	[schedcpu]
7	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	2:06	0.03%	[rand_harvestq]
25	root	16	-	0K	8K	syncer	1:10	0.03%	[syncer]
42349	root	40	0	9296K	9324K	select	6:23	0.03%	/usr/local/sbin/ntpd -g -c /var/etc/ntpd.conf -p /var/run/ntpd.pid{ntpd}
17	root	-8	-	0K	8K	mmcreq	0:31	0.03%	[mmcsd0: mmc/sd card]
13	root	-8	-	0K	24K	-	0:41	0.02%	[geom{g_up}]
55346	root	4	0	6600K	2036K	sbwait	0:13	0.02%	[dpinger{dpinger}]
345	root	4	0	57004K	20176K	kqread	1:02	0.02%	php-fpm: master process (/usr/local/lib/php-fpm.conf) (php-fpm)
23	root	-16	-	0K	16K	sdflus	0:40	0.01%	[bufdaemon{/ worker}]
15489	root	-74	0	6216K	1968K	bpf	1:24	0.01%	/usr/local/sbin/filterlog -i pflog0 -p /var/run/filterlog.pid
55346	root	8	0	6600K	2036K	nanslp	0:08	0.01%	[dpinger{dpinger}]
13	root	-8	-	0K	24K	-	0:15	0.01%	[geom{g_down}]
20	root	-16	-	0K	24K	psleep	0:30	0.01%	[pagedaemon{dom0}]
14	root	-68	-	0K	80K	-	0:06	0.00%	[usb{usbus0}]
23	root	-16	-	0K	16K	psleep	0:11	0.00%	[bufdaemon{bufdaemon}]
26	root	-4	-	0K	8K	vlruwt	0:08	0.00%	[vnlru]
24	root	-8	-	0K	8K	-	0:07	0.00%	[bufspacedaemon]
14	root	-68	-	0K	80K	-	0:06	0.00%	[usb{usbus1}]
0	root	8	-	0K	56K	-	0:01	0.00%	[kernel{thread taskq}]
11	root	-72	-	0K	176K	WAIT	1:39	0.00%	[intr{swi1: netisr 0}]
67923	root	40	0	5940K	2736K	select	1:22	0.00%	/usr/local/sbin/radvd -p /var/run/radvd.pid -C /var/etc/radvd.conf -m syslog
18908	root	8	20	6500K	2316K	wait	1:19	0.00%	/bin/sh /var/db/rrd/updaterrd.sh
9173	root	40	0	6068K	2144K	select	0:46	0.00%	/usr/sbin/syslogd -s -c -c -l /var/dhcpd/var/run/log -P /var/run/syslog.pid -f /etc/syslog.conf
85600	root	-52	r0	2312K	2332K	nanslp	0:45	0.00%	/usr/sbin/watchdogd -t 128
71064	root	4	0	59316K	27136K	accept	0:40	0.00%	php-fpm: pool nginx (php-fpm){php-fpm}
19538	root	4	0	59316K	26972K	accept	0:37	0.00%	php-fpm: pool nginx (php-fpm){php-fpm}
40648	root	4	0	59184K	25892K	accept	0:34	0.00%	php-fpm: pool nginx (php-fpm)
61446	root	4	0	22092K	6792K	kqread	0:10	0.00%	nginx: worker process (nginx)
61439	root	4	0	22092K	7444K	kqread	0:08	0.00%	nginx: worker process (nginx)
41794	root	8	0	6028K	2056K	nanslp	0:06	0.00%	/usr/sbin/cron -s
0	root	-16	-	0K	56K	swapin	0:06	0.00%	[kernel{swapper}]
60	root	-8	-	0K	8K	mdwait	0:03	0.00%	[md0]
37825	root	8	0	5980K	1868K	nanslp	0:02	0.00%	/usr/libexec/getty al.Pc ttyv0
13084	_dhcp	40	0	6104K	2116K	select	0:02	0.00%	dhclient: cpsw0 (dhclient)
38434	root	8	0	6224K	2052K	nanslp	0:02	0.00%	/usr/local/libexec/sshg-blocker -s 3600{sshg-blocker}
35129	root	40	0	6292K	2248K	select	0:01	0.00%	/usr/local/sbin/xinetd -syslog daemon -f /var/etc/xinetd.conf -pidfile /var/run/xinetd.pid
10315	root	8	0	5864K	1648K	nanslp	0:01	0.00%	minicron: helper /usr/local/bin/ping_hosts.sh (minicron)
400	root	40	0	6988K	3736K	select	0:01	0.00%	/sbin/devd -q -f /etc/pfSense-devd.conf
55346	root	4	0	6600K	2036K	accept	0:00	0.00%	[dpinger{dpinger}]
11	root	-76	-	0K	176K	WAIT	0:00	0.00%	[intr{swi0: uart}]
13	root	-8	-	0K	24K	-	0:00	0.00%	[geom{g_event}]
385	root	4	20	8024K	3604K	kqread	0:00	0.00%	/usr/local/sbin/check_reload_status
9	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	0:00	0.00%	[soaiod2]
15	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	0:00	0.00%	[soaiod3]
16	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	0:00	0.00%	[soaiod4]
8	root	-16	-	0K	8K	-	0:00	0.00%	[soaiod1]
1	root	8	0	4916K	752K	wait	0:00	0.00%	[init]
14040	root	16	0	6820K	3088K	pause	0:00	0.00%	/bin/tcsh
10949	root	8	0	5864K	1652K	nanslp	0:00	0.00%	minicron: helper /usr/local/sbin/fcgicli -f /etc/rc.expireaccounts (minicron)
38037	root	8	0	6392K	2368K	wait	0:00	0.00%	login [pam] (login)
39569	root	40	0	6500K	2308K	ttyin	0:00	0.00%	/bin/sh /etc/rc.initial
6046	root	8	0	6500K	2308K	wait	0:00	0.00%	/bin/sh /etc/rc.initial
5818	root	8	0	6500K	2392K	wait	0:00	0.00%	-sh (sh)
39049	root	8	0	6500K	2396K	wait	0:00	0.00%	-sh (sh)
59918	root	40	0	10848K	5760K	select	0:00	0.00%	/usr/sbin/sshd
38420	root	-8	0	11304K	4876K	piperd	0:00	0.00%	/usr/local/libexec/sshg-parser
38270	root	8	0	6500K	2044K	wait	0:00	0.00%	/bin/sh /usr/local/sbin/sshguard
22	root	155	ki31	0K	8K	pgzero	0:00	0.00%	[pagezero]

stephenw10

Hmm, nothing much happening there besides the NIC interrupt load which is what you would expect. Definitely not CPU limited then. What sort of throughput were you seeing when that was shown?

Steve

yendor

Still had it on the screen

File Size: 50 MB, Time: 118.0096 s, Speed: 3.39 Mbps

yendor

Don't know if this would help, but I found a file with in my ISP network that gave me near top speed for testing.

I now get only ~3% idle cpu and a ~27% reduction in throughput instead of a ~76% reduction when testing

http://speedcheck.cdn.on.net/100meg.test direct to cable modem

File Size: 100 MB, Time: 10.6448 s, Speed: 75.15 Mbps
File Size: 100 MB, Time: 10.4513 s, Speed: 76.55 Mbps
File Size: 100 MB, Time: 10.3895 s, Speed: 77.00 Mbps

http://speedcheck.cdn.on.net/100meg.test throught SG-1000

File Size: 100 MB, Time: 14.1694 s, Speed: 56.46 Mbps
File Size: 100 MB, Time: 14.3546 s, Speed: 55.73 Mbps
File Size: 100 MB, Time: 14.5417 s, Speed: 55.01 Mbps

134 processes: 2 running, 110 sleeping, 22 waiting
CPU: 11.9% user,  0.0% nice, 11.9% system, 73.5% interrupt,  2.7% idle
Mem: 26M Active, 80M Inact, 109M Wired, 25M Buf, 268M Free
Swap:

PID USERNAME	PRI NICE	SIZE	RES STATE	TIME	WCPU COMMAND
11 root	-92	-	0K	176K WAIT	843:37 71.11%
10 root	155 ki31	0K	8K RUN	110.0H	3.66%
53297 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.68%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
53284 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.68%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
53748 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.67%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
54507 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.67%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
54421 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.66%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
54133 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.66%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
53617 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.65%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
54145 root	-74	0 9612K 4460K bpf	0:00	1.62%	/usr/local/bandwidthd/bandwidthd
9275 unbound	4	0 21764K 12948K kqread	0:02	1.19%	/usr/local/sbin/unbound -c /var/unbound/unbound.conf
72982 root	43	0 7312K 3172K RUN	0:00	1.12%	top -aSH

how much of throughput reduction would be expected when putting the SG-1000 inline?

stephenw10

I have tested the SG-1000 to at lest 125Mbps so I would not expect any reduction on a 100Mb line. At least not limited by CPU.

Steve

yendor

Thank you @stephenw10, do you have any suggestions on what I can try next to figure out why I'm seeing a reduction in throughput?

Do I need to capture traffic logs? I should be able to do that on the laptop.

stephenw10

Yes if you're able to capture test traffic we should be able to see any TCP weirdness for example.

Steve

yendor

Sorry for the slow update, work got in the way. anyways got some capture data and anonymised it, They can be found on this onedrive share pcapng files.

I could see anything that jumped out but then again I'm not really sure what I should be looking for.

stephenw10

Great. Ok those captures are ~55Mbps via the SG-1000 and ~75Mbps direct? Rather than one of the very low numbers you saw previously like 2Mbps?

Steve

johnpoz

Take a look at your window size.. Looks be huge different in size between when your running through sg1000 an when not... So yeah that would DRASTICALLY affect your overall download speed..

Also seeing lots of retrans in your sg1000 sniff..

Where exactly was this sniff taken, at the client or on the sg1000?

stephenw10

Hmm, this is interesting. One of us appears to have a borked wireshark and it's probably me. I'm showing that same window scaling issue but it's in the other direction. But that appears to agree with the actual packet data....

The direction I'm interested in, Remote server to private IP, seems ungraphable. Hence probably me!

johnpoz

Well the one sniff has some issues - doesn't look like it caught the syn?

Clearly something going on there.. Would like to see cleaner sniffs and tests - and where exactly is the sniff being done at?

yendor

Hi,
The sniff was done on the laptop as I needed to bypass the SG-1000 for one of the test.

I can do another sniff from the SG-1000 if that would help? You also said you would like to see a clean capture? What would you like me to do here.

All I did on this sniff was to filter for the remote address in src and dst then ran it through a anonymiser for posting.

And yes I found a down load source that gives me a good speed on my ISP but as you see it still has a reduction through the SG-1000.

Thanks for having a look.

johnpoz

Clean in the fact the sg1000 sniff is missing the start of the conversation.. I show it seeming to miss the start of conversation.

So not sure if you caught the tail end of one speed test and then started another, etc..

But from sg1000 sniff having way smaller window size then yeah the speed of that speed test is going to be slower..

yendor

Thanks @johnpoz,
When I get chance I'll redo the sg-1000 sniff, do you have any ideas on why the windows size would be different?

The only thing I can think of is, I was lazy and ran my sg-1000 sniff over my home network i.e laptop->switch->switch->sg-1000->cable modem, I'll try the sniff directly connected to the sg-1000 next time to see if that helps.

For a bit of info:
The two switches ara a WNDR3709 running OpenWRT for AP and a GS108. The laptop was on a wired connection laptop->GS108->WNDR3709->SG-1000->Cable Modem.

stuck at work for the next 10-12hrs so I can't do any test for a bit.

yendor

Ok uploaded 2 more sniffs (got real slow connection tonight) same link pcapng files

this time I connected to the SG-1000 direct and then the cable modem direct, but may have to do the test once ISP network gets back up to speed.

anyways have a look and see if you see anything strange.

Thanks.

johnpoz

Your still not catching the start in the direct sniff.. But again your window resize are no where close to each other... So yeah no shit your download is going to be way slower!!

Your window size when your direct is huge compared to when your on the sg1000 per those sniffs

You running a proxy or something on pfsense? If I had to guess to why your seeing the smaller windowsize have to guess its due to your dupes or fast retrans..

Not allowing the windowsize to grow... But that is just a GUESS!!! If you want to benchmark the sg1000 and what it can do you really need to make sure environment is the same in both your tests. So take the isp and the internet out of the equation and put a server on your wan, and then your client on the lan -- do your speedtesting, iperf, download off a http, etc. But can promise you this if your window size is that small compared to when it grows large then yeah your going to see a real speed difference..

yendor

Ok run a test with ipef3 running on a RPI on the wan side, ran the test 3 time in each setup and the sniffs are only filtered on the RPI address 10.0.0.2 dis and src, so hopefully it should have got all the info.

Test 1:
PC->GS108->SG-1000->RPI: wireshark 20181012_Filter_SG-1000.pcapng

Test 2:
PC->RPI: wireshark 20181012_Filter_Direct.pcapng

Both file can be found at the same link pcapng files

Thanks.

johnpoz

you for such tests you don't need to capture the payload right... That way your sniff is not so LARGE..

What was the speed difference? HUGE amount of out of order packets? Which doesn't seem possible?? And still seeing what wireshark says are retrans and dupes, etc.. The direct see no window size updates they start out and stay there.. While the other tests shows lots of adjustments and higher than the 6000 was seeing before.

But something OFF in that sniff through the sg1000, I don't have a sg1000 but will try and test this weekend on how they should look going through firewall..

yendor

Thanks @johnpoz,
I'm kind of new to wireshark/sniffing and only have done the basics, how should I set it up to run the test. what are you looking for and what can I drop.

Thanks for your help.

johnpoz

in the interface options section just change the snaplen to something only a few bytes vs the default of the whole thing.. We really just need to see the headers we don't need all the data to troubleshoot what is going on.