On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 11:20:06AM -0400, Jim Miller wrote:
> I just reran the test again. I still receive about 600Mbps using iPerf
> however using
>
> client
> # dd if=/dev/zero bs=1000 count=1000000 | nc -v 172.16.2.2 12345
>
> server
> # nc -v -l 12345 > /dev/null
>
> I get numbers around 350Mbps. I tend to think iPerf is more reliable in
> this situation.
> Any ideas why the tests vary so much?
I suspect nc does less efficient buffering.
-Otto
> -Jim
>
> On 9/28/12 9:18 PM, Ryan McBride wrote:
> > 600Mbps seems about right, I tested a pair of E5649-based boxes to
> > 550Mbps last year (with aes-128-gcm):
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=134033767126930
> >
> > You'll probably get slightly more than 600 with with multiple TCP
> > streams.
> >
> > Assuming PF was enabled for your test (the default configuration), the
> > performance should be about the same with a proper ruleset. Traffic for
> > existing states won't hit the ruleset at all.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 06:39:14PM -0400, Jim Miller wrote:
> >> Yes. Let me double check everything again on Monday. Keep in mind that
> >> all devices had 1Gb ethernet interfaces and everything was directly
> >> cabled. No pf rules either. w/o ipsec I could get 900mbps through the
> >> openbsd boxes.
> >>
> >> Now you've got me thinking I need to recheck everything.
> >>
> >> -Jim
> >>
> >> On 9/28/12 5:19 PM, Hrvoje Popovski wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 28.9.2012 22:09, Jim Miller wrote:
> >>>> So using another Mac w/ 1Gb ethernet adapter to a Linux box w/ 1Gb eth I
> >>>> was able to achieve approx. 600Mbps performance through the test setup
> >>>> (via iperf and my dd method).
> >>>>
> >>> 600Mbps via ipsec between two Intel E31220 ?
