On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:04 +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2008-12-15, Toni Mueller <openbsd-m...@oeko.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 15.12.2008 at 10:14:41 +0200, Jussi Peltola <pe...@pelzi.net> wrote: > >> IME forwarded packets seem to somehow have a higher priority than > >> self-originated traffic in most OS's; don't know why this is, just a gut > >> feeling. > > > > I guess that this is true. In any case, if he would be able to maintain > > a bandwidth difference between the routers and his uplink, things > > should start working again. > > > > The bandwidth difference could probably be achieved by trunking. > > Depending on how the hash function works out, trunking might not > help there. > > What isn't clear yet is whether the problem is caused by the *link* > being overloaded, or the *firewalls* being overloaded. Stephan, it > might be interesting to run systat vm .2 on an active firewall > while the big TSM transfer is taking place, look at cpu use, > interrupts/sec etc.
As soon as it happens again I will report all the details. (Un)fortunately, it doesn't occur too often and I can't simulate that very easily. However, I do remember that interupts were >12000/s, which was mainly due to em0 and em2 forwarding the traffic (~6000/s each). The cpu load was ~70% - 80% (it's a Pentium 4, 2.66GHz). The bandwidth utilized was around 280MBit/s. This all leads to my assumption that rather the machine was overloaded and not the link. -- Stephan A. Rickauer ----------------------------------------------------------- Institute of Neuroinformatics Tel +41 44 635 30 50 University / ETH Zurich Sec +41 44 635 30 52 Winterthurerstrasse 190 Fax +41 44 635 30 53 CH-8057 Zurich Web www.ini.uzh.ch
