Il 06/02/10 19:43, Claudio Jeker ha scritto:
Thank you for the clear answer. Anyway, trying to act on tcp.sendspace
isn't affecting the upload capabilities of my OpenBSD server.
I tried downloading a file through httpd, via ftp but results are
still disappointing: 60-70 kbp
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010 11:37:11 +0100 (GMT+01:00)
Vincent Tamet wrote:
> Hi, by the way strange mac-adresse, oui search show a cisco systems
> mac one...
> > > Just logged through ssh on the server, ifconfig reports:
> > >
> > > re0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> > > lladdr 00:b0:c2:02:5e:a0
> > >
Hi, by the way strange mac-adresse, oui search show a cisco systems mac
one...
- Mail Original -
De: "Sebastiano Pomata"
C: misc@openbsd.org
EnvoyC): Lundi 8 FC)vrier 2010 11h17:31 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne
/ Rome / Stockholm / Vienne
Objet: Re: Download rate
On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 19:43:54 +0100
Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > >> Thank you for the clear answer. Anyway, trying to act on
> > >> tcp.sendspace isn't affecting the upload capabilities of my
> > >> OpenBSD server. I tried downloading a file through httpd, via
> > >> ftp but results are still disappoin
On 2010-02-06, James Peltier wrote:
>
> Have you tried another network card, like an Intel (em) based
> card? The Realtek cards have, at least in the past, been poor performers for
> me.
That's mostly the rl(4) ones, re(4) are pretty much ok. Not *great*, but
really nothing to complain about (un
Il 06/02/10 18:45, James Peltier ha scritto:
> Have you tried another network card, like an Intel (em) based
> card? The Realtek cards have, at least in the past, been poor performers for
> me.
> __
I have only available another eth
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 04:09:08PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> Il 06/02/10 15:12, Claudio Jeker ha scritto:
> > On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> >> Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
> I really can understand this, for the sake of system p
--- On Sat, 2/6/10, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
>
From: Kenneth R Westerback
> Subject: Re: Download
rate and sysctl settings
> To: "Sebastiano Pomata"
> Cc: misc@openbsd.org
> Received: Saturday,
February 6, 2010, 11:33 AM
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 04:09:08PM
>
--- On Sat, 2/6/10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> From:
Claudio Jeker
> Subject: Re: Download rate and
sysctl settings
> To: misc@openbsd.org
> Received: Saturday, February 6, 2010,
9:12 AM
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM
> +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> > Il 06/02/10
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 06:27:11PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> Il 06/02/10 17:33, Kenneth R Westerback ha scritto:
> > Optimally you now need to check what the switch port is
> > configured/negotiated to. e.g. if it has ended up in 10/half you
> > have a problem. Ditto for the connections for
Il 06/02/10 17:33, Kenneth R Westerback ha scritto:
> Optimally you now need to check what the switch port is
> configured/negotiated to. e.g. if it has ended up in 10/half you
> have a problem. Ditto for the connections for the other device.
>
> If you have no access to the switch you can try eve
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 04:09:08PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> Il 06/02/10 15:12, Claudio Jeker ha scritto:
> > On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> >> Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
> I really can understand this, for the sake of system p
Il 06/02/10 15:12, Claudio Jeker ha scritto:
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
>> Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
I really can understand this, for the sake of system portability and so
on. Anyway, I really hardly understand why, without
Il 06/02/10 15:12, Claudio Jeker ha scritto:
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
>> Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
I really can understand this, for the sake of system portability and so
on. Anyway, I really hardly understand why, without
Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
I really can understand this, for the sake of system portability and so
on. Anyway, I really hardly understand why, without touching any of the
default settings, download rate from every server would never overcome
the valu
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
> >> I really can understand this, for the sake of system portability and so
> >> on. Anyway, I really hardly understand why, without touching any of the
> >> default settings, downl
Il 06/02/10 03:55, Stuart Henderson ha scritto:
>> I really can understand this, for the sake of system portability and so
>> on. Anyway, I really hardly understand why, without touching any of the
>> default settings, download rate from every server would never overcome
>> the value of 400 kB/s. I
On 2010-02-05, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
> Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
>> On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
>> > As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
>> > network of our academy, and I'm getting almost the same results
>>
Il 05/02/10 16:11, Ted Unangst ha scritto:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Ivo Chutkin wrote:
>> I was about to post the same topic here.
>> I observe 250K/s on any OpenBSD server in my network, versions 4.2, 4.4, 4.5
>> and 4.6, various hardware, using wget -O /dev/null
>> I can start the same
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Ivo Chutkin wrote:
> I was about to post the same topic here.
> I observe 250K/s on any OpenBSD server in my network, versions 4.2, 4.4, 4.5
> and 4.6, various hardware, using wget -O /dev/null
> I can start the same download many times on the same machine with ever
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 12:04:50PM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 10:39:03 +0100
> Claudio Jeker wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:44AM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> > > On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
> > > Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 201
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 10:39:03 +0100
Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:44AM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
> > Stuart Henderson wrote:
> >
> > > On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata
> > > wrote:
> > > > As doublechecking, I tried with an
Yes, our default window size limits download speed. It is known and there
is work ongoing to resolve this in a better way then just bumping the
limit.
Nice Claudio.
?Maybe something likeTCP frame buffer Autotuning available in FreeBSD
since 7.x (1)?
(1) http://fasterdata.es.net/TCP-tuning/Fre
On 05.2.2010 P3. 09:59, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
network of our academy, and I'm getting almost the same results
(while a
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:44AM +0100, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
> Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> > On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> > > As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
> > > network of our academy, and I'm gett
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:05:49 + (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> > As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
> > network of our academy, and I'm getting almost the same results
> > (while absolute speeds are different from befor
On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
> network of our academy, and I'm getting almost the same results (while
> absolute speeds are different from before, the gap is almost the same
> in magnitude).
>
> I've read the page abou
On 2010-02-04, Sebastiano Pomata wrote:
> Why on the FAQ (chapter 6) it says that tweaking
> net.inet.tcp.recvspace and
> net.inet.tcp.sendspace won't led to great improvements, while actually
> I got them?
$ cvs annotate faq6.html|grep very.few
Annotations for faq6.html
***
1.234
As doublechecking, I tried with another fast server inside the wan
network of our academy, and I'm getting almost the same results (while
absolute speeds are different from before, the gap is almost the same
in magnitude).
I've read the page about tcptune, it's pretty clear now (values are
almost
Read about bandwidth delay product:
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/tcptune/
John
On \!Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:36:01PM +0100, Jean-Francois wrote:
> Le jeudi 04 fivrier 2010 20:00:54, Sebastiano Pomata a icrit :
> > If I may ask, I post to the list this question (I have no purpose on
> > c
Le jeudi 04 fivrier 2010 20:00:54, Sebastiano Pomata a icrit :
> If I may ask, I post to the list this question (I have no purpose on
> creating flames/trolls/os wars, just for my personal knowledge).
>
> On the same box (Core 2 Duo, Realtek Gigabit ethernet) I've performed
> today this simple test
If I may ask, I post to the list this question (I have no purpose on
creating flames/trolls/os wars, just for my personal knowledge).
On the same box (Core 2 Duo, Realtek Gigabit ethernet) I've performed
today this simple test, downloading a big file from wu-wien FTP site
(it's one of OpenBSD main
32 matches
Mail list logo
