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

    Slow speed between VLANs

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved L2/Switching/VLANs
    16 Posts 3 Posters 2.5k 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.
    • P
      pbnet
      last edited by

      Hello,
      I have a Netgate XG7100-1U on which I defined 3VLANs on interface ix1 (SFP+ port). alt text

      The Netgate XG7100-1U connects to a Mikrotik switch via a fiber-optics cable. The Mikrotik Switch is also connected to a second Mikrtotik Switch (still via 10Gbps SFP+) and a PC + server are connected to the second switch.

      Network Topology

      Now comes the problem:

      • if I do a speedtest (IPERF3) between the PC (VLAN5) and a VM that is on VLAN5, I get about 9Gbps which is perfect
      • if I do a speedtest (IPERF3) between the PC (VLAN5) and a VM that is on VLAN 10 or VLAN 30, I only get about 2Gbps, which is not OK.

      Any idea what can I do to improve inter-VLAN bandwidth ?

      Thanks.

      bingo600B johnpozJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • bingo600B
        bingo600 @pbnet
        last edited by

        @pbnet
        Assuming this is not pfSense congestion.

        Spread your vlans on multiple pfSense interfaces.
        You if you are just using one pfSense interface it's a "On a stick" setup , where every packet going to another vlan must pass (and share) the same 10G interface.

        There might be some pfSense "tuning parameters too" , but i don't have the knowledge to advice on those.

        /Bingo

        If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

        pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

        QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
        CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
        LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P
          pbnet @bingo600
          last edited by

          @bingo600 I would do that, unfortunately, I only have 1 10Gbps SFP+ available. The only way to use multiple interfaces (I hope you're referring to physical ports) would be to purchase a multi-SFP+ port add-on card.

          bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • bingo600B
            bingo600 @pbnet
            last edited by

            @pbnet
            Yes i meant physical interfaces.

            What is your pfSense utilization when running the inter-vlan transfer ?
            Adding another interface isn't going to do magic, if your CPU is congested.

            /Bingo

            If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

            pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

            QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
            CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
            LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              pbnet @bingo600
              last edited by

              @bingo600 CPU Usage when doing an IPERF3 from VLAN5 to VLAN5 gets me:

              [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 8.85 GBytes 7.60 Gbits/sec sender
              [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 8.83 GBytes 7.58 Gbits/sec receiver

              with a very decent CPU usage:

              CPUUsage

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

                Inter-VLAN CPU usage is about 71%

                InterVLN

                and this is the speed I get in IPFERF3:

                [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 3.72 GBytes 3.20 Gbits/sec sender
                [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 3.71 GBytes 3.19 Gbits/sec receiver

                bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • bingo600B
                  bingo600 @pbnet
                  last edited by

                  @pbnet
                  Sorry .. You will have to inline/upload the graphs , if you want me to have a look.

                  But i guess it's not needed ...

                  Same vlan xfer would be on L2 (handled by the switch) , and not passing pfSense at all.

                  Intervlan xfer is where all the packages have to pass pfsense , and load the pfSense cpu and interface(s) with 2 x 2Gb.

                  I have no idea what the performance level of your current hardware is.
                  You might have to ask Netgate if (71% cpu load) is "normal", in the given test scenario.

                  Ps:
                  A pfSense based iperf would probably not give an optimal answer.
                  Always use iperf on the endpoints, as i suppose you do.

                  /Bingo

                  If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                  pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                  QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                  CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                  LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • johnpozJ
                    johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @pbnet
                    last edited by johnpoz

                    @pbnet said in Slow speed between VLANs:

                    Any idea what can I do to improve inter-VLAN bandwidth ?

                    One thing would be use different physical interfaces for the uplinks of these vlans. When you share the same physical interface for vlans that are talking to each other, you are hairpinning the traffic over the same physical interface it would be expected to not see full wire speed.

                    For optimal performance of intervlan traffic it is best to put these vlans that will be talking a lot between them on different physical interfaces. But seems your limited to the 1 interface via sfp+ so your kind of hindered in doing that.

                    Now that being said I would hope you would see more than what your seeing.. 3Gbps does seem low.. I would expect atleast 1/2 of physical interface speeds or atleast really freaking close or even above etc.. But the 7.x and 3.x something via the hairpin isn't all that out of wack depending..

                    71% cpu does seem a bit high as well for a 7100 (which is a beast).. Are you doing anything that could hinder the speed - say IPS or something? Or ntopng?

                    An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                    If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                    Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                    SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                    P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P
                      pbnet @johnpoz
                      last edited by

                      @johnpoz OK, so I opened a support case with Netgate. They asked me to remove the following packages: snort, darkstat, ntopng, bandwidthd, haproxy, squid

                      After removing them and doing a new test, I got: 4.18Gbps using IPERF3 and still a CPU load of 70%.
                      To be honest it's really far that what they advertise that the XG7100-1U can do.
                      I guess I also have to ask Netgate if adding a 4-Port SFP+ NIC will void my warranty.
                      I already purchased the device last year with an additional 4Port- 1Gbps NIC, so the raiser card should be already in there.

                      Thanks.

                      johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • johnpozJ
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @pbnet
                        last edited by

                        @pbnet said in Slow speed between VLANs:

                        To be honest it's really far that what they advertise that the XG7100-1U can do.

                        Where did they say you would see wirespeed via a hairpin? I don't see any benchmarks for that.

                        Now if your talking the 9.85 in this benchmark

                        IPERF3 Traffic: 9.85 Gbps

                        If you have 2 different sfp+ at 10ge, and route between them what do you see.. Seems to me your doing vlans on same physical interface. Which is hairpin, and yes this would be lower.

                        From the iperf 7.6Gbps test you showed seems to be between 2 devices not even going through pfsense at all? So the rest of your network and test devices can not achieve wirespeed?

                        For a fair test I would think you would have to be using 2 sfp+ connections at 10ge and routing/firewalling between those 2 interface.. If you can only achieve 4 some gbps then I would be disappointed as well.

                        Can you run a test with that scenario?

                        An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                        If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                        Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                        SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P
                          pbnet @johnpoz
                          last edited by

                          @johnpoz The XG7100-1U I have only has 2 SFP+ - one is for WAN and one is for LAN.
                          The tests between 2 machines on the same VLAN (without going though PFSense) is about 7 to 9Gbps.
                          So, sadly, I cannot do more tests since I don't have more SFP+ ports on the XG7100-1U.
                          And the solution offered by netgate to disable all packet filtering is not something I'm comfortable of doing.
                          I get the feeling they are not really trying to help, but rather finding all sorts of workardounds.
                          They also stressed that the performance tests are based on the maximum memory configuration for the device: I have 24GB or RAM in the XG7100-1U out of which only 7% is used, yet they don't want to explain the high CPU usage.
                          Let's see what will they come with next.

                          johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • P
                            pbnet
                            last edited by pbnet

                            OK. Final statement from Netgate: 4.18Gbps is the max I can get on the device based on this article: https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/solutions/xg-7100-1u/switch-overview.html
                            Also based on this article: https://info.netgate.com/hubfs/website-assets/netgate-hardware-comparison-doc.pdf they mentioned that the throughput measurements are based upon maximum bidirectional traffic across all available ports. As all tests were run by maximizing throughput across available ports on the base model physical ports (XG-7100 with 10 ports). I have the max model https://shop.netgate.com/products/7100-base-pfsense, but it doesn't seem to count.
                            Really disappointed by the product :(

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • johnpozJ
                              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @pbnet
                              last edited by

                              @pbnet said in Slow speed between VLANs:

                              has 2 SFP+ - one is for WAN and one is for LAN.

                              There you go - you clearly have 2 that you could "test" with..

                              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                              P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • P
                                pbnet @johnpoz
                                last edited by

                                @johnpoz True.. Just have to do it in week-ends, since I need to move the WAN to another interface.

                                johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • johnpozJ
                                  johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @pbnet
                                  last edited by johnpoz

                                  @pbnet the switch would have a limit routing between vlans because it has a 5gbps uplink lag.. So lets see what you get for test when using 2 different 10ge interface that is not hairpin and not routed through the 5 gbps uplink lagg.

                                  That doc you linked too goes over that..

                                  But that should not be the case when going through 2 different independent interfaces. If that is the case - then yes I feel you would have a valid point that this should be pointed out in the docs that routing between 2 10ge interfaces is not capable of close to wirespeed.

                                  An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                                  If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                                  Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                                  SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

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

                                    OK, so I used IX0 for VLAN10.

                                    alt text

                                    alt text

                                    and here are the results:

                                    alt text

                                    and the CPU usage:
                                    alt text

                                    I'll update also the Netgate ticket

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