Perhaps you should try to use the traffic shaper to give dns a higher 
priority...

It's running in this constellation at all my systems and it's running fine...

It's obvious that when the wan-pipe is heavily loaded, dns packets have to wait 
if there's not qos...

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: tester [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. September 2007 23:18
An: support@pfsense.com
Betreff: [pfSense Support] Poor DNS performances and websurfing...

Hello,
In the last week I noticed poor DNS performances and
obviously web surfing suffers, too.
This is the output from a PC configured to use the IP
address of the main pfSense machine:

$time nslookup www.google.com

nslookup can take from 0.022s to 5.004s or even
10.04s!
I have to click twice or three times a link in a web
page to successfully connect to it without timeout
error.
Bandwidth from the ISP seems to be OK.
I noticed if a PC download near at the max speed from
a HTTP page, DNS performance becomes worst. I didn't
experience this behaviour in the previous release of
pfSense. Previous one seemed to handle better a high
load.
Maybe a re-installation of pfSense (1.2RC2) can
improve this situation or some network settings have
been changed in the latest release?
Notice that no P2P programs were or are running.

I heard about BIND: does pfSense already offer its
features?

I've a further question to pfSense's developer about
the 'at' command: is it broken in the 1.2RC-2 version
(see message entitled: "How to schedule shutdown and
box heartbeat")?

Thanks.


      ___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/ 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to