similar to: Jumbo Frame performance or lackof?

I was trying to do some performance testing between using iSCSI on the host as a diskfile to a guest vs the VM guest using the iSCSI device directly. However, in the process of trying to establish a baseline performance figure, I started increasing the MTU settings on the PCI-express NICs with RTL8168B chips. First bottleneck was discovering the max MTU allowed on these is 7K instead of 9K but

Hello all, Not sure if I am completely missing something but here goes. I have XCP 1.0 running without any issues. I have the mtu set on both the storage network, the corresponding PIF, and the VIF to 9000 and when displayed in ifconfig it shows that this is indeed true. I have several CentOs 5.6 VMs running in HVM mode (i.e. no xen kernel) which attach to the the storage network through these

Hi, Has anyone using CentOS 6 been able to successfully set an mtu larger than 9710 on an interface. I am seeing super jumbo frames with length > 10000. ... IP 10.79.4.53.64327 > 10.79.2.53.24294: Flags [.], seq 16060:29200, ack 1, win 32767, length 13140 ... CentOS release 6.7 (Final) Thanks, -- Stephen Clark *NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.* Director of Technology Phone:

We are utilizing the xen hypervisor on nexenta with ISCSI as our method of communication with the guests (currently ubuntu but could be moving to centos). Obviously jumbo packet support would be nice to have. The last time I see that on the xen roadmap http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenRoadMap . Is there a canonical place that spells out if jumbo frames are now supported or still on the

On the network theme again. The adapters on the management/storage network all default to an mtu of 1500. Are there plans to be able to indicate when a network supports jumbo frames? Cheers, Justin.

Hello, I have 2 network cards on my 2 of my computers that I am trying to transfer data on. The second network cards are specifically for transferring files between the two so I enabled jumble frames by setting the mtu to 9000. I seem to be able to connect between the two via ssh and other methods using this setting so I thought everything was working right until I tried rsync. I used the

Hi, I have an XCP 0.5 box running a few DomUs some of the DomU''s data is stored at (clustered lvm volumes on) a Coraid etherdrive box which is connected via an Ethernet cable to a dedicated card of the XCP box, for which in the network config I'' ve specified: MTU=9344: xe network-param-list uuid=.... gives: MTU ( RW): 9344 on the DomUs if I leave the MTU at 1500 (default

The documentation says the bridge will work as far as all interfaces have the same MTU, but I also read on this and other mailing lists people having problems when using jumbo frames. What is the current status of jumbo frames support in the bridge? It could also be useful to have the same info on the wiki page. Thanks. -- Luca Lesinigo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

When using OCFS2 in a Oracle RAC set, one would configure OCFS2 to use the private interconnect address ( in cluster.conf). Are there any known issues / reasons not to have the private interconnect set up for jumbo frames when using in conjunction with OCFS2 ? Thanks -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, I am trying to optimize my gigabit network. I have two Intel 1000 MT Gigabit Server Adapters, which support Jumbo Frames -- as well as a Switch that supports Jumbo Frames. However, I am observing some strange behavior in my file transfers from Windows XP to Linux and I am wondering if it has anything to do with the way the Samba variables are set on my Linux box? The "strange

On 11/09/2015 12:36 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 11/09/2015 08:34 AM, Steve Clark wrote: >> Has anyone using CentOS 6 been able to successfully set an mtu larger >> than 9710 >> on an interface. > Maximum frame size varies from implementation to implementation: > http://pages.uoregon.edu/joe/jumbo-clean-gear.html > > It's also worth noting that that due to

I would like to use jumbo frame for local interfaces, but I am not sure in which order to set it up. Should it be set on the physical interface first, then on the bridge and on the guest, or in another way? On some servers there are configurations with vlan on the bridge

Hi everyone, I have looked through the list archives and seen a few posts about jumbo frame support, but there is no definitive answer on whether or not it has been tested or is working for anyone. I tried using an MTU of 9000 in a domU and encountered some very interesting and not-so-great results. My machines used in this test are: * NFS (physical) * dom0 (physical) * domU (virtual)

Hi, Increasing MTU beyond 1500 in Linux dom0 results in ooopses. I did not find any statement whether 2.0 series support jumbos or not in dom0. Does it? TIA, Teemu -- _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

I have a bridge that has gigabit interfaces. The machine in question has the fun job of being a Bridge, Firewall and SMB server. Both of the Gigabit interfaces are connected to workstations directly via Xover cable (well MDI-X to be exact). My question is, if I enable jumbo frames on the gigabit interfaces will that make any difference in overall transfer rate of the bridge? I was thinking it

Hello; I've been playing with a nifty Open Source java based report writer called Datavision (datavision.sourceforge.net) and I've managed to write enough logic to calculate phone bills at different rates from the MySQL cdr's. (cdr_addon_mysql) Eventually I want to have sets of rate structures for each user of the system - so I can bill client A at 3 cents a minute and client B at 2

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Kip Warner <kip at thevertigo.com> wrote: > Hey list, > > I've read the man page for both the client and server daemon, so either > I missed something or this isn't an SSH issue but something going on > with perhaps routers or MTUs. > > I am having problems with already established connections to a remote > server timing out

Hello listmates, As some of you may know we have been having a really bad problem with Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 cards. See here for details: http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?24,140124,140224 So now my question is, what PCI 1 Gbit/s Ethernet adapters should I use under CentOS? If you have had a consistent positive experience with any particular chipset/brand please speak up.

We have a cluster (212 nodes) that are on a gig-e network useing jumbo frames (mtu 6000) To reload a node we have to plug it into a regular 1500 mtu that is running off a differnt port on the head node to install. Is there a way to tell in the 'append' line of /pxelinux.cfg/default to have the bcm5700 module run wiht jumbo frames. this is our append right now append load_ramdisk=1

On 11/09/2015 08:34 AM, Steve Clark wrote: > > Has anyone using CentOS 6 been able to successfully set an mtu larger > than 9710 > on an interface. Maximum frame size varies from implementation to implementation: http://pages.uoregon.edu/joe/jumbo-clean-gear.html It's also worth noting that that due to offloading features in modern NICs, there's often very little benefit