|
||||||||
Hi All, I posted a little while ago asking what hardware would be required to allow a throughput of around 100mbit between interfaces. I got some interesting answers and have gone away and done some testing and experimentation and thought people might be interested. My test environment has been 2 laptops, 1 on either side of the firewall, 1 centrino 1.6 ghz running Centos4, 1 P4 2 ghz running FreeBSD 6.1, with the throughput testing carried out with Iperf running all default settings. (http://dast.nlanr.net/Projects/Iperf/). The centino has a 1Gig nic, the P4 has a 100mbit nic, all are connected together with Cat5e through Netgear FS116 and FS105 100Mbit switches. Neither laptop has broken much of a sweat in any test, with load averages around .5. In testing my WRAPs running m0n0 1.22 are not able to get the 35mbit Chris B has been able to achieve (http://lists.soekris.com/pipermail/soekris-tech/2005-April/008125.html). With no traffic shaping and with device polling I am able to achieve approx 18mbit at best, with a cpu load of 0-3%. Without device polling I get an average or around 16mbit and a cpu load of 100%. I also tested a 2 year old HP ML110 G1 2.6ghz Celeron also running m0n0 1.22 via CF. This has 2 * 2 port Intel Pro1000MT Server adapters using the em driver and one onboard 1 gig adapter using bge. Identical throughput (93Mbit) is achieved with and without device polling, with cpu usage being 0-1% with polling enabled and 25% - 30% without, and no difference is observed if two ports on the same em card or a port on either em card are used. If the bge card and one em port is used throughput is again around 92.8 - 93mbit and cpu usage is 8-15% with device polling and 25 - 35% without. Testing laptop to laptop via the switches also gives me 93.2 mbit so I think the bottle neck is either the switches or the 100mbit fxp laptop adapter. I dont have gigabit switches in the lab to play with, so I cant push the hardware any harder, but from observation it would seem like the ML110 will push several hundred Mbit quite easily with the Intel cards and gigabit switches. Not bad for a box that cost £250 with £180 worth of network cards added! Any observations gratefully received. If the WRAPs can be tweaked to gain better throughput I'd love to hear an tips. Charlie **WRAP** ##Device poling enabled [root@ctlaptop charlest]# iperf -c 192.168.11.10 -t 60 ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.11.10, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 192.168.10.201 port 39900 connected with 192.168.11.10 port 5001 [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 133 MBytes 18.6 Mbits/sec ## No Device poling ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.11.10, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 192.168.10.201 port 42928 connected with 192.168.11.10 port 5001 [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 115 MBytes 16.1 Mbits/sec **ML110** [root@ctlaptop charlest]# iperf -c 192.168.30.10 -t 60 ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.30.10, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 192.168.10.201 port 45176 connected with 192.168.30.10 port 5001 [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 666 MBytes 93.2 Mbits/sec **Laptop to Laptop** [root@ctlaptop charlest]# iperf -c 192.168.10.190 -t 60 ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.10.190, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 192.168.10.201 port 46145 connected with 192.168.10.190 port 5001 [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 667 MBytes 93.2 Mbits/sec |