11:58 p.m.
Since I upgraded to Fedora 25, I've had terrible network performance, and
I'm not sure what's causing it.
Any suggestions for troubleshooting or optimization?
Any known issues with the "Intel Wireless 7265D" card or the
"iwlwifi"
driver in F25?
Everything worked great in F24, but since F25, I get poor download speeds,
and *REALLY* poor upload speeds. I should get a steady 25/25 Mbps down/up.
Instead, I get an unsteady 6-20 Mbps down, and only ~1 Mbps up. I've ruled
out everything but Fedora 25 (same hardware works fine in F24 and Windows),
and it's making me kinda want to go back to F24. :(
--
Christopher
1:29 a.m.
Did you checked the lsmod witch driver is gonna loaded under f24, and witch
one is under 25?
Z
2017-01-05 6:58 GMT+01:00 Christopher <ctubbsii(a)fedoraproject.org>:
Since I upgraded to Fedora 25, I've had terrible network
performance, and
I'm not sure what's causing it.
Any suggestions for troubleshooting or optimization?
Any known issues with the "Intel Wireless 7265D" card or the
"iwlwifi"
driver in F25?
Everything worked great in F24, but since F25, I get poor download speeds,
and *REALLY* poor upload speeds. I should get a steady 25/25 Mbps down/up.
Instead, I get an unsteady 6-20 Mbps down, and only ~1 Mbps up. I've ruled
out everything but Fedora 25 (same hardware works fine in F24 and Windows),
and it's making me kinda want to go back to F24. :(
--
Christopher
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
PGP: 06853DF7
9:52 a.m.
On 01/04/2017 09:58 PM, Christopher wrote:
since F25, I get poor download speeds, and *REALLY* poor upload
speeds
It might not be too helpful, but I think I'm seeing the same thing. I
haven't looked at it previously, but a very cursory look shows that when
uploading the "Invalid misc:" counter increases pretty steadily, at a
rate of 20-30/second.
4:29 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:53 AM Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 01/04/2017 09:58 PM, Christopher wrote:
> since F25, I get poor download speeds, and *REALLY* poor upload speeds
It might not be too helpful, but I think I'm seeing the same thing. I
haven't looked at it previously, but a very cursory look shows that when
uploading the "Invalid misc:" counter increases pretty steadily, at a
rate of 20-30/second.
I'm going to try playing with the module's parameters. A lot of forums seem
to indicate that messing with 11n_disable in particular can help.
--
Christopher
10:54 p.m.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 5:29 PM Christopher <ctubbsii(a)fedoraproject.org>
wrote:
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:53 AM Gordon Messmer
<gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 01/04/2017 09:58 PM, Christopher wrote:
> since F25, I get poor download speeds, and *REALLY* poor upload speeds
It might not be too helpful, but I think I'm seeing the same thing. I
haven't looked at it previously, but a very cursory look shows that when
uploading the "Invalid misc:" counter increases pretty steadily, at a
rate of 20-30/second.
I'm going to try playing with the module's parameters. A lot of forums
seem to indicate that messing with 11n_disable in particular can help.
I wasn't able to find any module parameters that showed any improvement. I
also tried forcing the driver to use older firmware, with no effect.
I did see "Invalid misc" counter going up also.
--
Christopher
12:28 p.m.
I spent a little while looking at this today, and I'm not able to
reproduce the problem. I've definitely had trouble with uploads in the
recent past, but I've compared the firmware versions between F24 and F25
and found no difference. I've uploaded files using the F24 kernel and
F25 kernel and see no difference. It's possible that the trouble I've
seen was environmental. I'll have to wait for it to recur and do more
testing then.
6:19 p.m.
networking like molasses - I am not as sophisticated about this as you all are (do not
know where to look for what causing the problem), just know even in Fedora 13 things moved
far faster...will watch this thread for updated info, thanks for posting re: slow wi-fi
(Note: not just slow wi-fi, even cabled connections speeds seem way slow).
cheers
2:46 a.m.
Allegedly, on or about 08 January 2017, mgolterhere(a)yahoo.com sent:
Note: not just slow wi-fi, even cabled connections speeds seem way
slow
Traditionally, *everything* going slowly in a network often pointed the
finger at a couple of things:
MTU
A misconfigured firewall that blocks everything, including the things
that networks use to manage themselves. For instance, blocking all ICMP
traffic is bad.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
Boilerplate: All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.
I reserve the right to be as hypocritical as the next person.
1:19 p.m.
I've only had Fedora 25 and Windows 10 on this new HP laptop, so I
can't compare to Fedora 24 to see if there's a regression. But I get
~9MB/s transfers with Windows 10, and ~3.2MB/s transfers on Fedora 25.
That's a big difference.
The test is done with the laptop in the same location relative to the
AP which is an ISP provided box, and the server is an Intel NUC
running F25 server with wired ethernet to the ISP provided box; and
F25 server is running Samba to host the files I'm copying over.
Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
I've used kernel 4.8.15, 4.8.17, 4.9.0, and 4.10-rc3 to test this with
all the same results. So it could be firmware related, reported
firmware is
[ 4.009396] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0: loaded firmware version
22.361476.0 op_mode iwlmvm
Chris Murphy
1:30 p.m.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds like
to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
--
Chris Murphy
1:44 p.m.
On 01/10/2017 11:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us>
wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
>> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
>
>
> No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds like
to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
I believe you said the F25 server is running Samba to supply the files.
Are you certain it isn't the F25 Samba client that's causing this? Try
having the F25 server share the same directory via NFS and use the F25
NFS client for testing. See if that improves things.
I'm only suggesting that since you're using the same firmware across
multiple kernels (and on F24).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- You possess a mind not merely twisted, but actually sprained. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1:46 p.m.
On 01/10/2017 11:44 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 01/10/2017 11:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
>>> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
>>
>>
>> No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
>
> It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds like
> to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
> some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
>
> The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
I believe you said the F25 server is running Samba to supply the files.
Are you certain it isn't the F25 Samba client that's causing this? Try
having the F25 server share the same directory via NFS and use the F25
NFS client for testing. See if that improves things.
I'm only suggesting that since you're using the same firmware across
multiple kernels (and on F24).
Oh, and you could try "iperf" on both ends to test raw network
performance without an intervening file transfer protocol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Is it progress if a cannibal uses a knife and fork? -
- -- Stanislaw J. Lec -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3:56 p.m.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 01/10/2017 11:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
>>> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
>>
>>
>> No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
>
> It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds like
> to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
> some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
>
> The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
I believe you said the F25 server is running Samba to supply the files.
Are you certain it isn't the F25 Samba client that's causing this?
No.
Try
having the F25 server share the same directory via NFS and use the F25
NFS client for testing. See if that improves things.
How about ssh? When I use ssh on Fedora 25 to drag down a file I'm
getting slightly different results, 4.4MB/s. So it's faster than the
GNOME samba client, whatever that's using, but it's still slower by 2x
than the Windows 10 samba client.
--
Chris Murphy
5:40 p.m.
On 01/10/2017 01:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Rick Stevens
<ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 11:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent with
>>>> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
>>
>> It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds like
>> to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
>> some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
>>
>> The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
>
> I believe you said the F25 server is running Samba to supply the files.
> Are you certain it isn't the F25 Samba client that's causing this?
No.
> Try
> having the F25 server share the same directory via NFS and use the F25
> NFS client for testing. See if that improves things.
How about ssh? When I use ssh on Fedora 25 to drag down a file I'm
getting slightly different results, 4.4MB/s. So it's faster than the
GNOME samba client, whatever that's using, but it's still slower by 2x
than the Windows 10 samba client.
Have you tried the iperf suggestion? First on the server, open up
TCP port 5001 on the firewall (just is just temporarily--iperf
defaults to port 5001), then run "iperf -s" on the server.
On the client, run "iperf -c ip-address-of-server" and wait, oh, 15
seconds or so. Both the client and server should show some results.
This is from my laptop as the client over a 100Mbps wired link to my
server (yes, it's an old laptop with a built-in 100Mbps NIC):
[root@golem4 ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.50
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.50, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.52 port 38964 connected with 192.168.1.50 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 112 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec
So, over my 100Mbps wired link, I got 94.2Mbps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Where there's a will, I want to be in it. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
6:29 p.m.
On 01/10/2017 03:40 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 01/10/2017 01:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 11:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
>>>> On 01/10/2017 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ostensibly this is an 802.11n connection, so 9MB/s is consistent
with
>>>>> that, where 3MB/s is consistent with half that of 802.11g.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, it's one third of what Windows is getting.
>>>
>>> It's both. 802.11g is 54Mbps, I'm getting 24-26Mbps. So it sounds
like
>>> to me the kernel or firmware being used when using Fedora, is doing
>>> some kind of aggressive fallback and thus a much lower rate.
>>>
>>> The distance laptop to AP is about 8 feet, and unimpeded line of site.
>>
>> I believe you said the F25 server is running Samba to supply the files.
>> Are you certain it isn't the F25 Samba client that's causing this?
>
> No.
>
>> Try
>> having the F25 server share the same directory via NFS and use the F25
>> NFS client for testing. See if that improves things.
>
> How about ssh? When I use ssh on Fedora 25 to drag down a file I'm
> getting slightly different results, 4.4MB/s. So it's faster than the
> GNOME samba client, whatever that's using, but it's still slower by 2x
> than the Windows 10 samba client.
Have you tried the iperf suggestion? First on the server, open up
TCP port 5001 on the firewall (just is just temporarily--iperf
defaults to port 5001), then run "iperf -s" on the server.
On the client, run "iperf -c ip-address-of-server" and wait, oh, 15
seconds or so. Both the client and server should show some results.
This is from my laptop as the client over a 100Mbps wired link to my
server (yes, it's an old laptop with a built-in 100Mbps NIC):
[root@golem4 ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.50
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.50, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.52 port 38964 connected with 192.168.1.50 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 112 MBytes 94.2 Mbits/sec
So, over my 100Mbps wired link, I got 94.2Mbps.
I'm just trying to isolate this by getting file I/O, filesystems and
network filesystem protocols out of the way. iperf is fairly close to
"being on the bare wire" so we're really just checking the hardware,
firmware and kernel network stack using iperf.
You can do similar tests using netcat (nc), but that requires
filesystem I/O and not just raw bytes as iperf does.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- su -; find / -name someone -exec touch \{\} \; -
- - The UNIX way of touching someone -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:30 p.m.
[chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
[chris@f25h Downloads]$
[chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
9:53 p.m.
This is on a 2nd client, wired connection.
[20:43 chris ~ (master *%)]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.0.0.13 port 48554 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.10 GBytes 942 Mbits/sec
And on the same 2nd client, wireless connection which is firmware
limited to 802.11b/g support:
[20:45 chris ~ (master *%)]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.0.0.7 port 34438 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.2 sec 4.12 MBytes 3.39 Mbits/sec
Egads!
noon
On 01/10/2017 07:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
[chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
[chris@f25h Downloads]$
[chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
Yeah, OK, that's pretty sucky. So it does look like it's the driver
or firmware or some setting on the interface that's limiting the speed.
I guess you could try "iw dev wlan0 link" to see what speed it thinks
it's running at and "iw dev wlan0 scan dump" to see more details, but
I don't know what else to try. Are you using any special hardware
drivers (e.g. nVidia binaries, etc.)? They might have an effect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Reality: A crutch for those who can't handle science fiction -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1:35 p.m.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 01/10/2017 07:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$
>
>
>
> [chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
Yeah, OK, that's pretty sucky. So it does look like it's the driver
or firmware or some setting on the interface that's limiting the speed.
I guess you could try "iw dev wlan0 link" to see what speed it thinks
it's running at and "iw dev wlan0 scan dump" to see more details, but
I don't know what else to try. Are you using any special hardware
drivers (e.g. nVidia binaries, etc.)? They might have an effect.
My output from those looks like:
$ iw dev wlp1s0 link
Connected to xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlp1s0)
SSID: mywifi
freq: 2412
RX: 762410485 bytes (555995 packets)
TX: 33098952 bytes (236527 packets)
signal: -52 dBm
tx bitrate: 130.0 MBit/s MCS 15
bss flags: short-preamble short-slot-time
dtim period: 1
beacon int: 100
$ iw dev wlp1s0 scan dump
BSS xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx(on wlp1s0) -- associated
TSF: 338136964783 usec (3d, 21:55:36)
freq: 2412
beacon interval: 100 TUs
capability: ESS Privacy ShortPreamble ShortSlotTime (0x0431)
signal: -50.00 dBm
last seen: 29084 ms ago
Information elements from Probe Response frame:
SSID: mywifi
Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 6.0 9.0 12.0 18.0
DS Parameter set: channel 1
Power constraint: 0 dB
RSN: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: CCMP
* Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
* Capabilities: 1-PTKSA-RC 1-GTKSA-RC (0x0000)
WPA: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: CCMP
* Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
ERP: <no flags>
Extended supported rates: 24.0 36.0 48.0 54.0
WMM: * Parameter version 1
* BE: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 3
* BK: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 7
* VI: CW 7-15, AIFSN 2, TXOP 3008 usec
* VO: CW 3-7, AIFSN 2, TXOP 1504 usec
HT capabilities:
Capabilities: 0x138c
HT20
SM Power Save disabled
TX STBC
RX STBC 3-streams
Max AMSDU length: 3839 bytes
DSSS/CCK HT40
Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003)
Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 8 usec (0x06)
HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-15
HT TX MCS rate indexes are undefined
HT operation:
* primary channel: 1
* secondary channel offset: no secondary
* STA channel width: 20 MHz
* RIFS: 1
* HT protection: no
* non-GF present: 0
* OBSS non-GF present: 0
* dual beacon: 0
* dual CTS protection: 0
* STBC beacon: 0
* L-SIG TXOP Prot: 0
* PCO active: 0
* PCO phase: 0
Country: US Environment: Indoor/Outdoor
Channels [1 - 11] @ 27 dBm
This should be 802.11n (only n, no backwards compatibility for b),
WPA2-PSK. I'm not quite sure how to interpret the above, to know if
anything stands out.
--
Christopher
1:40 p.m.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 01/10/2017 07:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$
>
>
>
> [chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
Yeah, OK, that's pretty sucky. So it does look like it's the driver
or firmware or some setting on the interface that's limiting the speed.
I guess you could try "iw dev wlan0 link" to see what speed it thinks
it's running at and "iw dev wlan0 scan dump" to see more details
[chris@f25h ~]$ dmesg | grep wlan0
[ 5.489106] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0 wlo1: renamed from wlan0
[chris@f25h ~]$ iw dev wlo1 link
Connected to 00:ac:e0:57:33:00 (on wlo1)
SSID: HOME-3302
freq: 2462
RX: 2732414 bytes (5093 packets)
TX: 853871 bytes (3683 packets)
signal: -42 dBm
tx bitrate: 144.4 MBit/s MCS 15 short GI
bss flags: short-slot-time
dtim period: 1
beacon int: 100
[chris@f25h ~]$ iw dev wlo1 scan dump
BSS 00:ac:e0:57:33:00(on wlo1) -- associated
TSF: 213169679188 usec (2d, 11:12:49)
freq: 2462
beacon interval: 100 TUs
capability: ESS Privacy ShortSlotTime (0x0411)
signal: -41.00 dBm
last seen: 33598 ms ago
Information elements from Probe Response frame:
SSID: HOME-3302
Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 9.0 18.0 36.0 54.0
DS Parameter set: channel 11
ERP: Barker_Preamble_Mode
Extended supported rates: 6.0* 12.0* 24.0* 48.0
HT capabilities:
Capabilities: 0x1ec
HT20
SM Power Save disabled
RX HT20 SGI
RX HT40 SGI
TX STBC
RX STBC 1-stream
Max AMSDU length: 3839 bytes
No DSSS/CCK HT40
Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003)
Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 4 usec (0x05)
HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-15
HT TX MCS rate indexes are undefined
HT operation:
* primary channel: 11
* secondary channel offset: no secondary
* STA channel width: 20 MHz
* RIFS: 0
* HT protection: no
* non-GF present: 1
* OBSS non-GF present: 0
* dual beacon: 0
* dual CTS protection: 0
* STBC beacon: 0
* L-SIG TXOP Prot: 0
* PCO active: 0
* PCO phase: 0
Secondary Channel Offset: no secondary (0)
WPA: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: TKIP
* Pairwise ciphers: TKIP CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
RSN: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: TKIP
* Pairwise ciphers: TKIP CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
* Capabilities: 1-PTKSA-RC 1-GTKSA-RC (0x0000)
WMM: * Parameter version 1
* BE: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 3
* BK: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 7
* VI: CW 7-15, AIFSN 2, TXOP 3008 usec
* VO: CW 3-7, AIFSN 2, TXOP 1504 usec
BSS Load:
* station count: 1
* channel utilisation: 0/255
* available admission capacity: 31250 [*32us]
Extended capabilities: HT Information Exchange Supported
Country: US Environment: Indoor/Outdoor
Channels [1 - 11] @ 16 dBm
WPS: * Version: 1.0
* Wi-Fi Protected Setup State: 2 (Configured)
* Response Type: 3 (AP)
* UUID: 28802880-2880-1880-a880-00ace0573300
* Manufacturer: ARRIS
* Model: TG862G
* Model Number: RT2860
* Serial Number: 12345678
* Primary Device Type: 6-0050f204-1
* Device name: ARRIS TG862 Router
* Config methods: Keypad
* RF Bands: 0x1
* Unknown TLV (0x1049, 6 bytes): 00 37 2a 00 01 20
[chris@f25h ~]$
, but
I don't know what else to try. Are you using any special
hardware
drivers (e.g. nVidia binaries, etc.)? They might have an effect.
No out of tree modules, this is stock Fedora 25 from a clean
installation, not an upgrade. The main differences from default is
Btrfs for root and home, and frequently using Rawhide kernels for
testing.
--
Chris Murphy
2:07 p.m.
On 01/11/2017 11:35 AM, Christopher wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM Rick Stevens
<ricks(a)alldigital.com
<mailto:ricks@alldigital.com>> wrote:
On 01/10/2017 07:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
> [chris@f25h Downloads]$
>
>
>
> [chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Server listening on TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
Yeah, OK, that's pretty sucky. So it does look like it's the driver
or firmware or some setting on the interface that's limiting the speed.
I guess you could try "iw dev wlan0 link" to see what speed it thinks
it's running at and "iw dev wlan0 scan dump" to see more details, but
I don't know what else to try. Are you using any special hardware
drivers (e.g. nVidia binaries, etc.)? They might have an effect.
My output from those looks like:
$ iw dev wlp1s0 link
Connected to xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlp1s0)
SSID: mywifi
freq: 2412
RX: 762410485 bytes (555995 packets)
TX: 33098952 bytes (236527 packets)
signal: -52 dBm
tx bitrate: 130.0 MBit/s MCS 15
bss flags:short-preamble short-slot-time
dtim period:1
beacon int:100
$ iw dev wlp1s0 scan dump
BSS xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx(on wlp1s0) -- associated
TSF: 338136964783 usec (3d, 21:55:36)
freq: 2412
beacon interval: 100 TUs
capability: ESS Privacy ShortPreamble ShortSlotTime (0x0431)
signal: -50.00 dBm
last seen: 29084 ms ago
Information elements from Probe Response frame:
SSID: mywifi
Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 6.0 9.0 12.0 18.0
DS Parameter set: channel 1
Power constraint: 0 dB
RSN:* Version: 1
* Group cipher: CCMP
* Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
* Capabilities: 1-PTKSA-RC 1-GTKSA-RC (0x0000)
WPA:* Version: 1
* Group cipher: CCMP
* Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
ERP: <no flags>
Extended supported rates: 24.0 36.0 48.0 54.0
WMM:* Parameter version 1
* BE: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 3
* BK: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 7
* VI: CW 7-15, AIFSN 2, TXOP 3008 usec
* VO: CW 3-7, AIFSN 2, TXOP 1504 usec
HT capabilities:
Capabilities: 0x138c
HT20
SM Power Save disabled
TX STBC
RX STBC 3-streams
Max AMSDU length: 3839 bytes
DSSS/CCK HT40
Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003)
Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 8 usec (0x06)
HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-15
HT TX MCS rate indexes are undefined
HT operation:
* primary channel: 1
* secondary channel offset: no secondary
* STA channel width: 20 MHz
* RIFS: 1
* HT protection: no
* non-GF present: 0
* OBSS non-GF present: 0
* dual beacon: 0
* dual CTS protection: 0
* STBC beacon: 0
* L-SIG TXOP Prot: 0
* PCO active: 0
* PCO phase: 0
Country: USEnvironment: Indoor/Outdoor
Channels [1 - 11] @ 27 dBm
This should be 802.11n (only n, no backwards compatibility for b),
WPA2-PSK. I'm not quite sure how to interpret the above, to know if
anything stands out.
It's interesting that your n bitrates show up in the "extended supported
rates" rather than the "standard rates". I'm not a wifi guru so I
can't
interpret a lot of that either. Here's what I have:
[root@golem4 ~]# iw dev wlan0 link
Connected to 38:2c:4a:a1:0b:d8 (on wlan0)
SSID: AD
freq: 2437
RX: 18784014 bytes (126013 packets)
TX: 56599 bytes (408 packets)
signal: -25 dBm
tx bitrate: 57.8 MBit/s MCS 5 short GI
bss flags: short-preamble short-slot-time
dtim period: 3
beacon int: 100
You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/root
[root@golem4 ~]# iw dev wlan0 scan dump
BSS 38:2c:4a:a1:0b:d8(on wlan0) -- associated
TSF: 7695565369786 usec (89d, 01:39:25)
freq: 2437
beacon interval: 100 TUs
capability: ESS Privacy ShortSlotTime RadioMeasure (0x1411)
signal: -25.00 dBm
last seen: 71897 ms ago
Information elements from Probe Response frame:
SSID: AD
Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 18.0 24.0 36.0 54.0
DS Parameter set: channel 6
ERP: <no flags>
ERP D4.0: <no flags>
RSN: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: CCMP
* Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
* Capabilities: 16-PTKSA-RC 1-GTKSA-RC (0x000c)
Extended supported rates: 6.0 9.0 12.0 48.0
BSS Load:
* station count: 17
* channel utilisation: 55/255
* available admission capacity: 0 [*32us]
HT capabilities:
Capabilities: 0x19ad
RX LDPC
HT20
SM Power Save disabled
RX HT20 SGI
TX STBC
RX STBC 1-stream
Max AMSDU length: 7935 bytes
DSSS/CCK HT40
Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003)
Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 4 usec (0x05)
HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-23
HT TX MCS rate indexes are undefined
HT operation:
* primary channel: 6
* secondary channel offset: no secondary
* STA channel width: 20 MHz
* RIFS: 1
* HT protection: nonmember
* non-GF present: 1
* OBSS non-GF present: 1
* dual beacon: 0
* dual CTS protection: 0
* STBC beacon: 0
* L-SIG TXOP Prot: 0
* PCO active: 0
* PCO phase: 0
Overlapping BSS scan params:
* passive dwell: 20 TUs
* active dwell: 10 TUs
* channel width trigger scan interval: 300 s
* scan passive total per channel: 200 TUs
* scan active total per channel: 20 TUs
* BSS width channel transition delay factor: 5
* OBSS Scan Activity Threshold: 0.25 %
Extended capabilities: HT Information Exchange Supported, Extended
Channel Switching, BSS Transition, 6
WPS: * Version: 1.0
* Wi-Fi Protected Setup State: 2 (Configured)
* Response Type: 3 (AP)
* UUID: dcd55186-d913-1df1-3a01-d06461bf5d81
* Manufacturer: ASUSTeK Computer Inc.
* Model: Wi-Fi Protected Setup Router
* Model Number: RT-AC87U
* Serial Number:
* Primary Device Type: 6-0050f204-1
* Device name: RT-AC87U
* Config methods: Display
* RF Bands: 0x1
* Unknown TLV (0x1049, 6 bytes): 00 37 2a 00 01 20
WMM: * Parameter version 1
* u-APSD
* BE: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 3
* BK: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 7
* VI: CW 7-15, AIFSN 2, TXOP 3008 usec
* VO: CW 3-7, AIFSN 2, TXOP 1504 usec
My link shows a 57.8Mbit transmit rate and my access point (from the
"scan dump" shows the n rates in the "supported rates" area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- LOOK OUT!!! BEHIND YOU!!! -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2:32 p.m.
On 01/11/2017 11:40 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Rick Stevens
<ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 07:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> [chris@f25h Downloads]$ iperf -c 10.0.0.3
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
>> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 52272 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>> [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 35.4 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec
>> [chris@f25h Downloads]$
>>
>>
>>
>> [chris@f25s ~]$ iperf -s
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Server listening on TCP port 5001
>> TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 4] local 10.0.0.3 port 5001 connected with 10.0.0.4 port 52272
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>> [ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
>
> Yeah, OK, that's pretty sucky. So it does look like it's the driver
> or firmware or some setting on the interface that's limiting the speed.
> I guess you could try "iw dev wlan0 link" to see what speed it thinks
> it's running at and "iw dev wlan0 scan dump" to see more details
[chris@f25h ~]$ dmesg | grep wlan0
[ 5.489106] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0 wlo1: renamed from wlan0
[chris@f25h ~]$ iw dev wlo1 link
Connected to 00:ac:e0:57:33:00 (on wlo1)
SSID: HOME-3302
freq: 2462
RX: 2732414 bytes (5093 packets)
TX: 853871 bytes (3683 packets)
signal: -42 dBm
tx bitrate: 144.4 MBit/s MCS 15 short GI
bss flags: short-slot-time
dtim period: 1
beacon int: 100
[chris@f25h ~]$ iw dev wlo1 scan dump
BSS 00:ac:e0:57:33:00(on wlo1) -- associated
TSF: 213169679188 usec (2d, 11:12:49)
freq: 2462
beacon interval: 100 TUs
capability: ESS Privacy ShortSlotTime (0x0411)
signal: -41.00 dBm
last seen: 33598 ms ago
Information elements from Probe Response frame:
SSID: HOME-3302
Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 9.0 18.0 36.0 54.0
DS Parameter set: channel 11
ERP: Barker_Preamble_Mode
Extended supported rates: 6.0* 12.0* 24.0* 48.0
HT capabilities:
Capabilities: 0x1ec
HT20
SM Power Save disabled
RX HT20 SGI
RX HT40 SGI
TX STBC
RX STBC 1-stream
Max AMSDU length: 3839 bytes
No DSSS/CCK HT40
Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003)
Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 4 usec (0x05)
HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-15
HT TX MCS rate indexes are undefined
HT operation:
* primary channel: 11
* secondary channel offset: no secondary
* STA channel width: 20 MHz
* RIFS: 0
* HT protection: no
* non-GF present: 1
* OBSS non-GF present: 0
* dual beacon: 0
* dual CTS protection: 0
* STBC beacon: 0
* L-SIG TXOP Prot: 0
* PCO active: 0
* PCO phase: 0
Secondary Channel Offset: no secondary (0)
WPA: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: TKIP
* Pairwise ciphers: TKIP CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
RSN: * Version: 1
* Group cipher: TKIP
* Pairwise ciphers: TKIP CCMP
* Authentication suites: PSK
* Capabilities: 1-PTKSA-RC 1-GTKSA-RC (0x0000)
WMM: * Parameter version 1
* BE: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 3
* BK: CW 15-1023, AIFSN 7
* VI: CW 7-15, AIFSN 2, TXOP 3008 usec
* VO: CW 3-7, AIFSN 2, TXOP 1504 usec
BSS Load:
* station count: 1
* channel utilisation: 0/255
* available admission capacity: 31250 [*32us]
Extended capabilities: HT Information Exchange Supported
Country: US Environment: Indoor/Outdoor
Channels [1 - 11] @ 16 dBm
WPS: * Version: 1.0
* Wi-Fi Protected Setup State: 2 (Configured)
* Response Type: 3 (AP)
* UUID: 28802880-2880-1880-a880-00ace0573300
* Manufacturer: ARRIS
* Model: TG862G
* Model Number: RT2860
* Serial Number: 12345678
* Primary Device Type: 6-0050f204-1
* Device name: ARRIS TG862 Router
* Config methods: Keypad
* RF Bands: 0x1
* Unknown TLV (0x1049, 6 bytes): 00 37 2a 00 01 20
[chris@f25h ~]$
, but
> I don't know what else to try. Are you using any special hardware
> drivers (e.g. nVidia binaries, etc.)? They might have an effect.
No out of tree modules, this is stock Fedora 25 from a clean
installation, not an upgrade. The main differences from default is
Btrfs for root and home, and frequently using Rawhide kernels for
testing.
I replied to Chris (ctubbsii(a)fedoraproject.org) with my iw results.
Note that I just tried an iperf over the wireless as well and my
results suck as badly as yours:
[root@golem4 ~]# iperf -c 192.168.1.50
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 192.168.1.50, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 192.168.1.247 port 36768 connected with 192.168.1.50 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 19.6 MBytes 16.4 Mbits/sec
I'm using:
[root@golem4 ~]# ethtool -i wlan0
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.8.15-300.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: 18.168.6.1
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:01:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: no
supports-eeprom-access: no
supports-register-dump: no
supports-priv-flags: no
laptop->wireless->access point->1000BaseT->switch->1000BaseT->server
The switch in the middle is an Extreme Networks Summit 400-48T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
6:01 p.m.
the line starting with "A misconfigured firewall" lit up a red flash in my mind.
Not only is my box just slow slow slow but I am now unable to connect to a secure server
(one that requires a CA certificate) whereas with fedora 13 this was possible. How would
I test for a firewall problem (have done nothing/no changes since the simple install).
Any info would be appreceiated
Note re: mail to your inbox = was that message meant for me (in particular? Have been
unable to post to ask.fedora (won't accept my -password when posting) so tried this
email list. Many pardons if I am doint this incorrectly...argh, hope not! Thanks for any
help.
6:39 p.m.
$ ethtool -i wlo1
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.8.17-200.fc24.x86_64
firmware-version: 22.361476.0
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:6c:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: no
supports-eeprom-access: no
supports-register-dump: no
supports-priv-flags: no
$ lspci
6c:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Intel Corporation Wireless 8260
[8086:24f3] (rev 3a)
$ dmesg | grep firmware
[ 5.036668] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0: Direct firmware load for
iwlwifi-8000C-24.ucode failed with error -2
[ 5.037902] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0: Direct firmware load for
iwlwifi-8000C-23.ucode failed with error -2
[ 5.043887] iwlwifi 0000:6c:00.0: loaded firmware version
22.361476.0 op_mode iwlmvm
$ dnf provides /usr/lib/firmware/iwlwifi-8000C-22.ucode
Last metadata expiration check: 1:14:21 ago on Wed Jan 11 16:01:02 2017.
iwl7260-firmware-1:25.30.13.0-68.fc25.noarch : Firmware for Intel(R)
Wireless WiFi Link 7260 Series Adapters
$ rpm -q linux-firmware
linux-firmware-20160923-68.git42ad5367.fc25.noarch
In koji, I'm finding the current version of that is
linux-firmware-20161205-69.git91ddce49.fc25 from over a month ago, has
not been submitted as an update. Inside is
iwl7260-firmware-25.30.13.0-69.fc25.noarch.rpm so then I do:
$ koji download-build --arch=noarch 822926
$ sudo dnf update *rpm
$ sudo ls -l /lib/firmware | grep 8000C
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1745176 Dec 5 09:39 iwlwifi-8000C-13.ucode
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2351636 Dec 5 09:39 iwlwifi-8000C-16.ucode
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2394060 Dec 5 09:39 iwlwifi-8000C-21.ucode
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2120860 Dec 5 09:39 iwlwifi-8000C-22.ucode
Those are the same as I had before (different date, same versions and
lengths). The kernel either wants -24 or -23 or those are just place
holder versions *in-case* they get released; I'm not sure how that
works.
Chris Murphy
8 p.m.
Try enabling TX aggregation. This setting boosted my iperf results
from 21M/s to 78M/s:
# cat /etc/modprobe.d/iwlwifi.conf
options iwlwifi 11n_disable=8
8:27 p.m.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:01 PM Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Try enabling TX aggregation. This setting boosted my iperf results
from 21M/s to 78M/s:
# cat /etc/modprobe.d/iwlwifi.conf
options iwlwifi 11n_disable=8
This had a negligible effect when I tried it.
--
Christopher
8:39 p.m.
On 01/11/2017 07:27 PM, Christopher wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:01 PM Gordon Messmer
<gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com <mailto:gordon.messmer@gmail.com>> wrote:
Try enabling TX aggregation. This setting boosted my iperf results
from 21M/s to 78M/s:
# cat /etc/modprobe.d/iwlwifi.conf
options iwlwifi 11n_disable=8
This had a negligible effect when I tried it.
--
Christopher
Have you compared it's performance in fedora with that of windoze?
If performance in windoze is better, then you might be able to use the
windoze driver
with a Linux wrapper.
9:12 p.m.
OK so this is bat guano...
Boot off Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20170110.n.0.iso USB
stick and retest:
[root@localhost liveuser]# iperf -c 10.0.0.3
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.0.0.3, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.0.0.4 port 45208 connected with 10.0.0.3 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 70.8 MBytes 59.2 Mbits/sec
For reference the previous result on Fedora 25 with kernel 4.8.17 was:
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.4 sec 35.4 MBytes 28.5 Mbits/sec
I retested Fedora 25 to match the same kernel used by Rawhide, and I get:
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 49.9 MBytes 41.6 Mbits/sec
Firmware versions are the same in all three cases. And the iw outputs
are all the same. And the laptop is in the same location. So there is
something in the ether affecting the result, but it does seem pretty
clear there's something awry with Fedora 25 and it's not the kernel or
the firmware. Maybe wpa_supplicant? OK this is weird....
wpa_supplicant-2.5-5.fc24.x86_64
When I check koji, there are newer versions available for some time.
wpa_supplicant-2.6-1.fc25 lkundrak 2016-11-23 12:12:48
That's listed as being in updates-testing for 2 months.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=wpa_supplicant
OK so update to that and reboot...
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 48.4 MBytes 40.5 Mbits/sec
Nope. Maybe it's a NetworkManager issue? I can't really update that,
or at least, I'm not willing to mix Rawhide's Network Manager on F25.
Chris
10:15 p.m.
On 01/11/2017 07:12 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I retested Fedora 25 to match the same kernel used by Rawhide, and I
get:
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 49.9 MBytes 41.6 Mbits/sec
Is that consistent on retries? I get really variable results on WiFi.
I'd run the test several times...
# rmmod iwldvm iwlwifi ; modprobe iwlwifi
# iperf -c 10.1.10.4
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.1.10.4, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.1.10.94 port 57528 connected with 10.1.10.4 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 17.8 MBytes 14.9 Mbits/sec
...
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 22.1 MBytes 18.5 Mbits/sec
...
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 23.4 MBytes 19.5 Mbits/sec
...
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 23.1 MBytes 19.3 Mbits/sec
...
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 23.0 MBytes 19.2 Mbits/sec
Of course, I get better results with TX aggregation enabled:
# rmmod iwldvm iwlwifi ; modprobe iwlwifi 11n_disable=8
# iperf -c 10.1.10.4
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 10.1.10.4, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 10.1.10.94 port 57554 connected with 10.1.10.4 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 88.6 MBytes 73.7 Mbits/sec
...
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 88.2 MBytes 74.0 Mbits/sec
Firmware versions are the same in all three cases. And the iw
outputs
are all the same. And the laptop is in the same location. So there is
something in the ether affecting the result, but it does seem pretty
clear there's something awry with Fedora 25 and it's not the kernel or
the firmware. Maybe wpa_supplicant? OK this is weird....
If I'm not mistaken, with the rawhide kernel you got better results than
you've posted previously in this thread. I don't think it's entirely
clear that the problem isn't the kernel.
11:04 p.m.
Damn strange.
The computer is in a static location for all tests. This is still using
iperf in all cases, but abbreviated since I'm copying by hand. Each test is
about five seconds apart.
Fedora 25 live
58 Mbit/sec
61
41
Fedora 24 live
54 Mbit/sec
46
38
65
Fedora 25 installed
29
42
38
38
There are a total of three wireless devices connected to this AP. All are
connected at the same time but only the test client is actively being used
when the testing is happening. But it's in an apartment building, with
hundreds of units all of which have wireless APs.
3:51 a.m.
Allegedly, on or about 12 January 2017, mgolterhere(a)yahoo.com sent:
the line starting with "A misconfigured firewall" lit up a
red flash
in my mind. Not only is my box just slow slow slow but I am now
unable to connect to a secure server (one that requires a CA
certificate) whereas with fedora 13 this was possible. How would I
test for a firewall problem (have done nothing/no changes since the
simple install).
I would have thought that the default settings were okay, unless you
were in a special situation (unusual network).
You're going to have to say more about what you mean by connecting to a
secure server. VPN, SSH, HTTPS, something else?
Note re: mail to your inbox = was that message meant for me (in
particular? Have been unable to post to ask.fedora (won't accept my
-password when posting) so tried this email list. Many pardons if I
am doint this incorrectly...argh, hope not! Thanks for any help.
Nah, that's my boilerplate. Years of massive amount of spam from
participation in mailing lists mean that I have the server auto-delete
all mail sent to the address I post to the mailing lists with. And I
read the list from another address. It kills the spam, and I don't
really want private messages from people I don't really know.
Your message came through here fine, I've never used, or even looked at,
ask.fedora, so I can't say anything about its requirements. Though I
seem to recall some thread about it a few weeks back saying you needed
to post using an address that would have been verified by that external
service. i.e. If gmail or facebook verify you before they let you use
their service, which they do, that's considered good enough for other
people to let you use their service. Not quite sure that I agree with
the methodology.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
Boilerplate: All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.
ZNQR LBH YBBX!
7:40 p.m.
On 12 January 2017 at 05:04, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
Damn strange.
The computer is in a static location for all tests. This is still using
iperf in all cases, but abbreviated since I'm copying by hand. Each test is
about five seconds apart.
Fedora 25 live
58 Mbit/sec
61
41
Fedora 24 live
54 Mbit/sec
46
38
65
Fedora 25 installed
29
42
38
38
co
There are a total of three wireless devices connected to this AP. All are
connected at the same time but only the test client is actively being used
when the testing is happening. But it's in an apartment building, with
hundreds of units all of which have wireless APs.
Did anyone get to the bottom of this? I installed F25 a couple of
weeks ago and network performance is noticeably poorer on this
machine. When browsing the internet, or particularly on Ajax based
sites like gmail or google search connections seem to just drop. The
previous Fedora that was on this machine (23 I think) was fine, and my
laptop (still on an older Fedora) and other devices have not
experienced any change. Looking in journalctl as root I see frequent
renegotiation with the AP, e.g.:
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: SME: Trying to
authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: disconnect from AP
xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx for new auth to 00:a4:23:17:18:e5
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: send auth to xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticated
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: associate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: Trying to associate
with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
While the machine is supposedly connected.
There's also this,
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas systemd-udevd[5658]: Process '/usr/sbin/crda'
failed with exit code 249.
which can't be a good sign.
--
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk
9:30 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:05 PM Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 03/23/2017 05:40 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> Did anyone get to the bottom of this?
I found that enabling aggregated TX provided a tremendous performance
boost. It's off by default due to problems in some situations:
$ cat /etc/modprobe.d/iwlwifi.conf
options iwlwifi 11n_disable=8
When I tried changing that, it had no effect. I've not been able to figure
out what's wrong. I've just been begrudgingly ignoring the poor performance.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
11:46 a.m.
On 03/23/2017 05:40 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
On 12 January 2017 at 05:04, Chris Murphy
<lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
> Damn strange.
>
> The computer is in a static location for all tests. This is still using
> iperf in all cases, but abbreviated since I'm copying by hand. Each test is
> about five seconds apart.
>
> Fedora 25 live
> 58 Mbit/sec
> 61
> 41
>
> Fedora 24 live
> 54 Mbit/sec
> 46
> 38
> 65
>
> Fedora 25 installed
> 29
> 42
> 38
> 38
> co
> There are a total of three wireless devices connected to this AP. All are
> connected at the same time but only the test client is actively being used
> when the testing is happening. But it's in an apartment building, with
> hundreds of units all of which have wireless APs.
>
Did anyone get to the bottom of this? I installed F25 a couple of
weeks ago and network performance is noticeably poorer on this
machine. When browsing the internet, or particularly on Ajax based
sites like gmail or google search connections seem to just drop. The
previous Fedora that was on this machine (23 I think) was fine, and my
laptop (still on an older Fedora) and other devices have not
experienced any change. Looking in journalctl as root I see frequent
renegotiation with the AP, e.g.:
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: SME: Trying to
authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: disconnect from AP
xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx for new auth to 00:a4:23:17:18:e5
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: send auth to xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticated
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: associate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: Trying to associate
with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
While the machine is supposedly connected.
There's also this,
Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas systemd-udevd[5658]: Process '/usr/sbin/crda'
failed with exit code 249.
which can't be a good sign.
The first things I'd do is see what hardware you actually have:
# lspci | grep -i wireless
Then see which driver your wifi is using via
# ethtool -i wlp2s0
See if perhaps there's another driver or perhaps newer firmware you can
use for that chipset. Sometimes the kernel or udev don't necessarily
make the right decisions about which driver to use. My F25 machines with
wifi are both using the iwlwifi driver (both use Intel wireless chips):
(Desktop)
# lspci | grep -i wireless
04:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 3165 (rev 81)
#ethtool -i wlp4s0
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.9.13-201.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: 22.361476.0
...
(Laptop)
# lspci | grep -i wireless
01:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Centrino Wireless-N 1030
[Rainbow Peak] (rev 34)
# ethtool -i wlan0
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.9.14-200.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: 18.168.6.1
...
I've had no issues with performance or the ability to stay connected
and the laptop goes LOTS of places with me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Duct Tape + Magic Marker = Label Maker! -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5:52 p.m.
On 24 March 2017 at 16:46, Rick Stevens <ricks(a)alldigital.com> wrote:
On 03/23/2017 05:40 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 12 January 2017 at 05:04, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
>> Damn strange.
>>
>> The computer is in a static location for all tests. This is still using
>> iperf in all cases, but abbreviated since I'm copying by hand. Each test is
>> about five seconds apart.
>>
>> Fedora 25 live
>> 58 Mbit/sec
>> 61
>> 41
>>
>> Fedora 24 live
>> 54 Mbit/sec
>> 46
>> 38
>> 65
>>
>> Fedora 25 installed
>> 29
>> 42
>> 38
>> 38
>> co
>> There are a total of three wireless devices connected to this AP. All are
>> connected at the same time but only the test client is actively being used
>> when the testing is happening. But it's in an apartment building, with
>> hundreds of units all of which have wireless APs.
>>
>
> Did anyone get to the bottom of this? I installed F25 a couple of
> weeks ago and network performance is noticeably poorer on this
> machine. When browsing the internet, or particularly on Ajax based
> sites like gmail or google search connections seem to just drop. The
> previous Fedora that was on this machine (23 I think) was fine, and my
> laptop (still on an older Fedora) and other devices have not
> experienced any change. Looking in journalctl as root I see frequent
> renegotiation with the AP, e.g.:
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: SME: Trying to
> authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: disconnect from AP
> xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx for new auth to 00:a4:23:17:18:e5
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: send auth to xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: authenticated
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas kernel: wlp2s0: associate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (try 1/3)
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas wpa_supplicant[864]: wlp2s0: Trying to associate
> with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='X' freq=5200 MHz)
> While the machine is supposedly connected.
>
> There's also this,
> Mar 24 00:21:29 atlas systemd-udevd[5658]: Process '/usr/sbin/crda'
> failed with exit code 249.
> which can't be a good sign.
The first things I'd do is see what hardware you actually have:
# lspci | grep -i wireless
Then see which driver your wifi is using via
# ethtool -i wlp2s0
See if perhaps there's another driver or perhaps newer firmware you can
use for that chipset. Sometimes the kernel or udev don't necessarily
make the right decisions about which driver to use. My F25 machines with
wifi are both using the iwlwifi driver (both use Intel wireless chips):
(Desktop)
# lspci | grep -i wireless
04:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 3165 (rev 81)
#ethtool -i wlp4s0
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.9.13-201.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: 22.361476.0
...
(Laptop)
# lspci | grep -i wireless
01:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Centrino Wireless-N 1030
[Rainbow Peak] (rev 34)
# ethtool -i wlan0
driver: iwlwifi
version: 4.9.14-200.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: 18.168.6.1
...
I've had no issues with performance or the ability to stay connected
and the laptop goes LOTS of places with me.
The hardware hasn't changed, and was picked specifically because it
has good (and long standing) linux support:
02:00.0 Network controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR93xx Wireless Network
Adapter (rev 01)
driver: ath9k
version: 4.9.14-200.fc25.x86_64
firmware-version: N/A
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:02:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: no
supports-eeprom-access: no
supports-register-dump: no
supports-priv-flags: no
Which is the correct driver, unless there's been a regression. It
seems like key rotation or something is not taking place smoothly. I
see quite a lot of this while it's connected (journactl output, lines
may be truncated):
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas wpa_supplicant[898]: wlp2s0:
CTRL-EVENT-REGDOM-CHANGE init=CORE type=WORLD
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas kde5-nm-connection-editor[2310]:
networkmanager-qt: virtual void
NetworkManager::DevicePrivate::propertyChanged(co
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas wpa_supplicant[898]: wlp2s0: Associated with
xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas kdeinit5[1192]: networkmanager-qt: virtual void
NetworkManager::DevicePrivate::propertyChanged(const QString&, con
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas wpa_supplicant[898]: wlp2s0:
CTRL-EVENT-SUBNET-STATUS-UPDATE status=0
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas kdeinit5[1192]: networkmanager-qt: virtual void
NetworkManager::DevicePrivate::propertyChanged(const QString&, con
Mar 24 22:46:13 atlas wpa_supplicant[898]: wlp2s0:
CTRL-EVENT-REGDOM-CHANGE init=USER type=COUNTRY alpha2=GB
In my case might be related to
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18935 going to try with
regdomain set to GB for a while and see if it helps.
--
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk
2583
days inactive
2661
days old
36 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Chris Murphy -
Christopher -
Gordon Messmer -
Ian Malone -
JD -
Joe Zeff -
mgolterhere＠yahoo.com -
Rick Stevens -
Tim -
Zoltan Hoppar