10Mbps+ throughput usb based ethernet recommendation

Tue Mar 23 03:13:42 UTC 2010

On Mon, March 22, 2010 23:29, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, March 1, 2010 16:10, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 03:57:02PM -0300, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
>>> hail,
>>>
>>> I need an usb nic that is able to push more then 10Mbps on wire. if is
> altq capable better.
>>>
>>
>> AFAIK all USB ethernet drivers support altq(4).
>>
>>> I use pfsense as router, but my next upgrade will use 10Mbps link and
> my aue and rue nic's can't pass the 5Mbps barrier. I need to use three
> to make 11Mbps on it, and its not a good thing for me in production.
>>>
>>> I've seen some axe based on its manual page, but I'm afraid to buy and
>>> it
>>> won't solve my problem. if anyone has any leads/experience on this
>>> please
>>> broadcast :)
>>>
>>
>> Last time I tried AX88178 based axe(4) controller, I can push more than
> 200Mbps. Related change already MFCed to stable/8.
>
> well, I did that but using that chip on windows :(
>
> I got two nics based on these chips but they are unstable as hell in
> FreeBSD. on pfSense (FreeBSD 7.1 and 7.2 versions) I never got the axe0
> media to be active. on 8-stable (this box), one got issues with media link
> and the other can set link state ok, but looses 10% of ping packets. iperf
> gets cut every now and then and this makes the throughput suffer :(
>
> I plan to use pfSense 1.2.3 (7.2 based) and when available pfSense 2.0
> (8.0 based).
>
> are there any patches to try ? it is really unstable here ...
>
> some logs:
>
> Client connecting to 192.168.1.2, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [  3] local 192.168.1.1 port 42556 connected with 192.168.1.2 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
> [  3]  0.0-32.7 sec  69.5 MBytes  17.8 Mbits/sec
> [root at darkside ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.2 -t 30
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 192.168.1.2, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [  3] local 192.168.1.1 port 45725 connected with 192.168.1.2 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
> [  3]  0.0-30.6 sec    128 MBytes  35.1 Mbits/sec
> [root at darkside ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.2 -t 30
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 192.168.1.2, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [  3] local 192.168.1.1 port 38546 connected with 192.168.1.2 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
> [  3]  0.0-31.0 sec    129 MBytes  35.0 Mbits/sec
>
> this is:
>
> FreeBSD xxx 8.0-STABLE FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE #7: Sun Mar 21 03:45:47 BRT 2010
>     root at xxx:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/xxx  amd64
>
> and on both ends there is a nic using this chip, here is this freebsd and
> the other on windows xp.
>
> as said above, when run iperf on this nic on windows and my nfe gigabit I
> got those 228Mbps said above.
>
> thanks,
>
> matheus
>
> --
> We will call you cygnus,
> The God of balance you shall be
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q:
> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
>
>
>
> --
> We will call you cygnus,
> The God of balance you shall be
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-usb at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-usb
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-usb-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>

Just adding info, I keep getting these outputs from ifconfig:

ue0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
	ether 00:11:50:e7:39:e9
	inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
	media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
	status: active
and:
ue0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
	ether 00:11:50:e7:39:e9
	inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
	media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex,hw-loopback>)
	status: active

and this keeps repeating over and over. iperf and on the other end an
intel gigabit pcie nic:

[root at xxx ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.2 -t 30
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.2, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 192.168.1.1 port 52180 connected with 192.168.1.2 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-50.9 sec    392 MBytes  64.6 Mbits/sec
[root at xxx ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.2 -t 30
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.2, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 192.168.1.1 port 62772 connected with 192.168.1.2 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-30.0 sec    489 MBytes    137 Mbits/sec

again it is 32MBps and gets cut down to some KBps, then again 32MBps. I
think those link negotiations are to blame, but that's a "I think" :)

matheus

-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style