Re: bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530

2017-03-12 Thread John Jasen
n 03/12/2017 07:18 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 06:13:46PM -0400, John Jasen wrote: > > what traffic you generated (TCP? UDP? ICMP? other?), what reported in > dmesg | grep txq ? UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for Chelsio. ___

Re: bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530

2017-03-12 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 06:13:46PM -0400, John Jasen wrote: > I think I am able to confirm Mr. Caraballo's findings. > > I pulled a Dell PowerEdge 720 out of production, and upgraded it to > 11-RELEASE-p8. > > Currently, as in the R530, it has a single Chelsio T5-580, but has two > v2 Intel E5-2

bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530

2017-03-12 Thread John Jasen
I think I am able to confirm Mr. Caraballo's findings. I pulled a Dell PowerEdge 720 out of production, and upgraded it to 11-RELEASE-p8. Currently, as in the R530, it has a single Chelsio T5-580, but has two v2 Intel E5-26xx CPUs versus the newer ones in the R530. Both ports are configured for

Problem reports for freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org that need special attention

2017-03-12 Thread bugzilla-noreply
To view an individual PR, use: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users, which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and ob

Re: ipsec with ipfw

2017-03-12 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 09:53:39PM -0800, Ermal Luçi wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 12:53:44AM +0330, Hooman Fazaeli wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > As you know the ipsec/setkey provide limited syntax to define security > > > po