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

Interface Interrupt

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
15 Posts 2 Posters 909 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
    powerchords
    last edited by Apr 29, 2024, 8:03 PM

    Hi.
    I have 4 physical interfaces on pfSense Plus 24.03.
    2 WAN
    1 LAN
    1 split into 2 VLANs.

    The main WAN and LAN has HFSC to control upload and download respectively.

    The other WAN and 2 VLANs is running using a TailDrop Limiter.

    My question is about the interrupts only on LAN interface.

    Both WAN are PPPoE.

    What is happening? I cannot achieve the full speed from my ISP. I've changed the cable, switch port, check configurations like auto-negotiation and so forth.

    The netgate support told me to inser the dispatch deferred value on loader.conf.local but, nothing seems to solve this issue, I can barely achieve 50% of the speed and using the ISP modem directly attached to the machine I can run in full speed.

    Does someone have a clue on what to do?

    Thanks in advance.

    Screenshot 2024-04-29 at 17.01.56.png

    Screenshot 2024-04-29 at 16.53.08.png

    Screenshot 2024-04-29 at 16.37.35.png

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by Apr 29, 2024, 9:28 PM

      Which interface is re0?

      What CPU do you have? What rate does the ISP actually provide?

      What sort of CPU usage do you see when testing?

      I would check at the command line using: top -HaSP

      Steve

      P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 12:05 PM Reply Quote 0
      • P
        powerchords @stephenw10
        last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 12:05 PM

        @stephenw10 Good morning!

        Which interface is re0?
        Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 08.50.29.png
        This isn't the LAN interface I'm talking about. re0 is divided into 2 different VLANs.

        What CPU do you have? What rate does the ISP actually provide?
        Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 08.51.41.png
        The ISP provides 600Mb downstream and 300Mb upstream.

        What sort of CPU usage do you see when testing?
        Using top -HaSP during download:
        Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 08.47.54.png

        Using top -HaSP during upload:
        Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 08.48.08.png

        My download speed does not reach beyond 150Mbps.
        The upload speed goes well, near the maximum rate.

        By the way, the em interface where LAN resides is:
        Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 09.02.50.png

        Thank you for the reply Steve.
        Best regards!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 1:04 PM

          Ok so no significant CPU usage. And the re0 NIC is not in use during the test.

          It seems likely to be a traffic shaping issue. If you disable the shaping as a test does it then pass the expected speed?

          P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 1:19 PM Reply Quote 0
          • P
            powerchords @stephenw10
            last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 1:19 PM

            @stephenw10 I've tried this with no success.

            I'm running HFSC because it's the only way to maintain a stable connection for the entire facility, avoiding sudden drops, poor meeting quality and all sort of things that the network administrator will be blamed of.

            The examples above are real.

            Follow below my TS configuration and to justify the reason I built this configuration, the parameters was based on speed metrics running on an empty facility, no link usage at all.

            I can only reach near 50% of the down speed.

            -wan1 hfsc 350Mb
            	-qInternet queue limit 500 bw 330Mb ul 330Mb ls 330Mb
            		-qDNS queue limit 500 sched codel bw 5% ls 5%
            		-qBulk queue limit 600 sched codel bw 26% ls 26%
            		-qACK queue limit 500 sched codel bw 20% rt 20% ls 20%
            		-qVoip queue limit 50 sched codel bw 5% rt 5% ls 5%
            		-qMeet queue limit 300 sched codel bw 27% rt 27% ls 27%
            		-qTech queue limit 500 sched codel bw 4% ul 100Mb ls 4%
            		-qLive queue limit 500 sched codel bw 2% rt 2% ls 2%
            		-qDefault queue limit 500 sched default codel bw 10% ls 10%
            -lan hfsc 350Mb
            	-qInternet queue limit 500 bw 330Mb ul 330Mb ls 330Mb
            		-qDNS queue limit 500 sched codel bw 5% ls 5%
            		-qBulk queue limit 600 sched codel bw 26% ls 26%
            		-qACK queue limit 500 sched codel bw 20% rt 20% ls 20%
            		-qVoip queue limit 50 sched codel bw 5% rt 5% ls 5%
            		-qMeet queue limit 300 sched codel bw 27% rt 27% ls 27%
            		-qTech queue limit 500 sched codel bw 4% ul 100Mb ls 4%
            		-qLive queue limit 500 sched codel bw 2% rt 2% ls 2%
            		-qDefault queue limit 500 sched default codel bw 10% ls 10%
            

            All queues and floating rules was built on bare hands without the wizard usage.

            Please let me know if I can provide any more configurations.

            Thank you.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
              last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 1:30 PM

              Hmm, so with the shaping you are seeing ~150Mbps down out of an expected 600. But without shaping you see close to 300Mbps?

              I assume you have confirmed that 600Mbps is actually possible with a direct connection?

              P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 1:48 PM Reply Quote 0
              • P
                powerchords @stephenw10
                last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 1:48 PM

                @stephenw10 That's correct.

                Reaching approximately 350Mbps from a wired machine (windows 10 I use for hyper V) without TS. Then I built TS based on this flow assuming that this speed is the maximum speed I can achieve under the real usage scenario.

                Using my daily driver (macOS Sonoma 14.4.1) only wireless (UniFi, 5GHz only, 40MHz wide, fully patched, controlling the environment using a self-hosted controlller) with TS active the down speed does not go beyond 150Mbps but the upload speed goes fine almost reaching 300Mbps.

                Without TS it's impossible to work and maintain at least more than 100 wireless devices on a daily basis.

                Using the ISP modem directly it's possible to achieve the full speed.

                At the end of the day I will try to test down and up speed without TS.

                Thank you.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                  last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 2:41 PM

                  Hmm, well the fact you can't get close to 600Mbps even from a machine that isn't shaped seems suspect. Do you see errors on any interface there?

                  I would also always test from a wired connection however much the wifi seems like it should easily pass it!

                  P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 3:00 PM Reply Quote 0
                  • P
                    powerchords @stephenw10
                    last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 3:00 PM

                    @stephenw10 The only interface showing errors is LAN int (em1).
                    Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 11.53.57.png
                    In errors and interrupts.

                    All other interfaces does not show any in/out errors nor interrupts.
                    Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 11.56.42.png

                    Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 11.57.55.png

                    Wireless connection is stable and rock solid but I can't achieve higher speeds.
                    Check my machine status on the UniFi controller.
                    Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 11.59.29.png

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                      last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 5:22 PM

                      Hmm, well you can try running a speed test fro pfSense itslef using the speedtest cli package. That would rule out the LAN NIC.

                      P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 7:45 PM Reply Quote 0
                      • P
                        powerchords @stephenw10
                        last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 7:45 PM

                        @stephenw10 Stephen I can't find this package to install. How can I use it?

                        Thank you.

                        P 1 Reply Last reply Apr 30, 2024, 8:57 PM Reply Quote 0
                        • P
                          powerchords @powerchords
                          last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 8:57 PM

                          @powerchords Hi. I've found the package. Follow below the result:

                          Screenshot 2024-04-30 at 17.56.00.png

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • S
                            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                            last edited by Apr 30, 2024, 9:29 PM

                            Hmm, well that's impressively slow! Is that traffic falling into a default queue maybe? It would only be matched by outbound floating rules on WAN.

                            Does a speedtest run on a client behind pfSense against that same server report a better speed?

                            P 1 Reply Last reply May 2, 2024, 12:15 PM Reply Quote 0
                            • P
                              powerchords @stephenw10
                              last edited by May 2, 2024, 12:15 PM

                              @stephenw10 Hello.

                              Follow below the speedtest result from my macOS.
                              Screenshot 2024-05-02 at 09.13.52.png

                              This traffic flows through default queue because it uses 8080 port, and this port is not mapped on any floating rule.

                              Thank you Stephen.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                last edited by May 2, 2024, 12:36 PM

                                Is that actually the same server you're testing against? The ping time looks different.

                                The default queue doesn't seem to present any restriction from what information you have given us. It wouldn't affect downloads at all since the only queue it can hit is outbound on the WAN. So you should be seeing much better than that from the firewall itself.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                15 out of 15
                                • First post
                                  15/15
                                  Last post
                                Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                                  This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                                  consent.not_received