Bene, ora puoi ripetere le prove cambiando l'algoritmo di controllo di congestione sul client iperf. Cosa stai usando ora? Reno?
Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 14:09, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurc...@gmail.com>ha scritto: > altri test fissando la quantita' > > [ 4] 0.0-62.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 270 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-55.3 sec 2.00 MBytes 304 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-64.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 261 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-58.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 285 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-99.6 sec 2.00 MBytes 169 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-96.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 174 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-89.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 187 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-66.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 253 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-99.9 sec 2.00 MBytes 161 Kbits/sec > [ 4] 0.0-88.1 sec 2.00 MBytes 190 Kbits/sec > > > Il 03 luglio 2011 13:57, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> ha > scritto: > > senza tinc la configurazione rimane uguale ma il traffico al posto di > > passare dal tunnel via internet passa solo attraverso i link wireless > > > > Il 03 luglio 2011 13:51, Antonio Quartulli <or...@autistici.org> ha > scritto: > >> On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 01:48:37 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote: > >>> il test e' sempre PC( iperf -c ) <-- cavo lan --> Piconstation ( > >>> btman-adv + tinc )<-- tinc ---> PC( batman-adv + tinc + iperf -s) > >> > >> anche senza TINC la configurazione rimane uguale? scusa ma non ho capito > >> questo daalle mail precedenti > >> > >>> > >>> >usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo > >>> >deviati.. > >>> > >>> quei test non sono fatti in parallelo sono fatti in modo sequenziale > >>> quindi volta per volta c'e' ne e' attivo solo uno > >>> > >>> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:40, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: > >>> > Magari se scegliessi un test "unico" sarebbe anche meglio, > >>> > usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo > >>> > deviati.. > >>> > Se non mi dicessi della CPU a palla, guardando sta roba ti direi che > è > >>> > congestione.. > >>> > > >>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:31, Gioacchino Mazzurco < > gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> > ha scritto: > >>> >> > >>> >> altra serie di test > >>> >> > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.8 sec 384 KBytes 167 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.5 sec 384 KBytes 180 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.0 sec 384 KBytes 157 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.1 sec 384 KBytes 149 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-32.3 sec 384 KBytes 97.3 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.8 sec 384 KBytes 151 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-27.7 sec 256 KBytes 75.8 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.8 sec 256 KBytes 96.3 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.3 sec 512 KBytes 294 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.0 sec 512 KBytes 299 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-37.6 sec 512 KBytes 112 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.7 sec 512 KBytes 224 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.3 sec 384 KBytes 148 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.9 sec 640 KBytes 293 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-24.8 sec 512 KBytes 169 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-16.4 sec 384 KBytes 192 Kbits/sec > >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.4 sec 384 KBytes 147 Kbits/sec > >>> >> > >>> >> ho spento dnsmasq che non serviva a niente e andiamo di poco ma > meglio > >>> >> > >>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:16, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: > >>> >> > Il sintomo è abbastanza chiaro, ma dubito sia colpa della CPU o > meglio, > >>> >> > secondo me qualcosa > >>> >> > è stata scritta male, 100Kbps sono davvero ridicoli. A maggior > ragione > >>> >> > quando ste cpu hanno anche qualche set dedicato > >>> >> > alla crittografia simmetrica... > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:04, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >>> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> >> > ha scritto: > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> ma il problema sembra proprio l'eccessivo utilizzo di cpu per la > vpn > >>> >> >> perche' stando in ssh sulla picostation mentre c'e' traffico che > passa > >>> >> >> sulla vpn diventa completamente unresponsive non sente nemmeno > ctrl+c > >>> >> >> sulla shell... quando il traffico finisce mi esegue tutto quello > che > >>> >> >> gli avevo mandato nel fratempo > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:01, Gioacchino Mazzurco < > gmazzurc...@gmail.com> ha > >>> >> >> scritto: > >>> >> >> >>Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal PC)? > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > dovrei installarmi anche batman-adv sul pc... > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > Il 03 luglio 2011 12:58, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha > scritto: > >>> >> >> >> E' chiaro che non può essere il tuo upstream, > >>> >> >> >> ma sei certo che il collo di bottiglia non sia nella capacità > di sta > >>> >> >> >> rete > >>> >> >> >> mesh tunnellata? > >>> >> >> >> Hai provato a lanciare 2 iperf in parallelo? > >>> >> >> >> Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal > PC)? > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:34, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >>> >> >> >> <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> >> >> >> ha scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >>> la picostation a e la z sono la stessa picostation... dalla > >>> >> >> >>> picostation a posso decidere se accendere tinc e quindi far > passare > >>> >> >> >>> traffico mesh su internet oppure se usare solo i link > wireless > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >>> dal computer pocco decidere sia di usare la picostation come > gw sia > >>> >> >> >>> di > >>> >> >> >>> usare il router adsl > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >>> le casistiche quindi sono 3 > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >>> iperf via internet senza tinc >500KB/s > >>> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh senza tinc ~ 20Kb/s > >>> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh tunnellata su internet con tinc ~100Kb/s > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >>> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:27, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha > scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> > Fammi capire: > >>> >> >> >>> > - tra le tua pico(A) e quella(Z) con l'adsl ci sono diversi > nodi > >>> >> >> >>> > e > >>> >> >> >>> > con > >>> >> >> >>> > iperf > >>> >> >> >>> > hai risultati di 20Kbps (A->Z) in L3 puro ? Mentre se usi > tinc va > >>> >> >> >>> > a > >>> >> >> >>> > 100Kbps? > >>> >> >> >>> > - chi sono gli end-point tinc? > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:12, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >>> >> >> >>> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> >> >> >>> > ha scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> senza tinc praticamente non c'e' connettivita' ( a volte > va ma > >>> >> >> >>> >> roba > >>> >> >> >>> >> tipo 20k perche' sono un sacco di op alcuni dei quali > fanno > >>> >> >> >>> >> schifo...) > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> se invece faccio iperf passando per internet senza tinc > ottengo > >>> >> >> >>> >> risultati sempre sopra i 500KB/s > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:01, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha > >>> >> >> >>> >> scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> >> > Hai gia controllato i valori tra le 2 pico con e senza > tinc? > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:45, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >>> >> >> >>> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> >> >> >>> >> > ha scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> iperf -c su computer che usa una picostation come > gateway -> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Picostation con tinc <- adsl 8 megabit -> iperf > --server su > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> eigenlab.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 11:33, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> > ha > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > 100kbps mi pare davvero troppo poco anche per quelle > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > cessonanocpu. > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Come li hai ottenuti sti valori? > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:10, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > ha scritto: > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Ciao a tutti! > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Facendo dei test mi sono accorto che le vpn con > tinc > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> installato > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> sui > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> nodi ci vanno max a 100k anche se la banda dell'adsl > e' > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> molta > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> di > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu'... ho cominciato a cercare ed ho letto che la > causa > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e' > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> probabilmente la CPU che non ce la fa a fare > encryption > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> decryption > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu' velocemente di cosi' > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> leggendo il man di tinc ho trovato questo > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Cipher = cipher (blowfish) > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> The symmetric cipher algorithm used to > encrypt > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> UDP > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packets. Any cipher supported by OpenSSL is > recognised. > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Fur†> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> thermore, specifying "none" will turn > off > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packet > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption. It is best to use only those ciphers > which > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> support > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> CBC mode. > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> mettendo none dovrebbe essere disabilitata l' > encryption e > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> quindi > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> avere piu' banda, il meccanismo degli host con il > file con > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> la > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> chiave > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> pubblica continua a funzionare disabilitando la > cifratura, > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> soprattutto bastera' aggiungere quell'opzione li > oppure > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> bisogna > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cambiare altre conf? > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> > > >>> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> > Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> > > >>> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >>> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >>> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >>> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> >> > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > >>> >> > Wireless mailing list > >>> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> Wireless mailing list > >>> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > Wireless mailing list > >>> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Wireless mailing list > >>> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >> > >> -- > >> Antonio Quartulli > >> > >> ..each of us alone is worth nothing.. > >> Ernesto "Che" Guevara > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wireless mailing list > >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org > >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@ml.ninux.org http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless