[176657] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 10Gb iPerf kit?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy Hirst)
Mon Dec 8 11:37:02 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 08:36:51 -0800
From: Roy Hirst <rhirst@xkl.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <5485D1D6.3060104@xkl.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
For RFC2444, please read RFC2544, and forgive the spam.
*Roy Hirst* | 425-556-5773 | 425-324-0941 cell
XKL LLC | 12020 113th Ave NE, Suite 100 | Kirkland, WA 98034 | USA
On 12/8/2014 8:29 AM, Roy Hirst wrote:
> Can't help with faster adapters, but I believe there are some
> underlying architectural issues here as to why the speeds are hard to
> achieve, and why some people can and others maybe can't achieve them.
> For Carrier Ethernet, I believe most of these are covered in RFC2444
> and the related RFC6815. Even with bit speeds up to spec, traffic
> speeds are impacted non-linearly by customer protocols including the
> usual suspect, TCP. This is documented in ITU-T Y.1564, clearly enough
> for simple folk like me. A good example for your corkboard is slide
> (page) 28 of the excellent
> 20140409-Tierney-100G-experience-Internet2-Summit.pdf, included as
> part of a report on 100GE performance test methodologies. Which is how
> I stumbled across it.
> Roy
>
> *Roy Hirst* | 425-556-5773 | 425-324-0941 cell
> XKL LLC | 12020 113th Ave NE, Suite 100 | Kirkland, WA 98034 | USA
>
> On 12/7/2014 8:48 AM, Teleric Team wrote:
>>> From: pete@fiberphone.co.nz
>>> Subject: Re: 10Gb iPerf kit?
>>> Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 09:24:41 +1300
>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>>>
>>> On 11/11/2014, at 1:35 PM, Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have not tried doing that myself, but the only thing that would
>>>> even be possible that I know of is thunderbolt.
>>>> A new MacBook Pro and one of these maybe:
>>>> http://www.sonnettech.com/product/echoexpresssel_10gbeadapter.html
>>> Or one of these ones for dual-10Gbit links (one for out of band
>>> management or internet?):
>>>
>>> http://www.sonnettech.com/product/twin10g.html
>>>
>>> I haven't tried one myself, but they're relatively cheap (for 10gig)
>>> so not that much outlay to grab one and try it (esp if you already
>>> have an Apple laptop you can test with).
>>>
>> How would you use it? with iperf still?I don't think you will go
>> nearly close to 14.8Mpps per port this way.Unless you are talking
>> about bandwidth testing with full sized packet frames and low pps rate.
>> I personally tested a 1Gbit/s port over a MBP retina 15 thunderbot
>> gbe with BCM5701 chipset. I had only 220kpps on a single TX
>> flow.Later I tried another adapter with a marvel yukon mini port. Had
>> better pps rate, but nothing beyond 260kpps.
>>
>>> I've done loads of 1Gbit testing using the entry-level MacBook Air
>>> and a Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter though, and I disagree
>>> with Saku's statement of 'You cannot use UDPSocket like iperf does,
>>> it just does not work, you are lucky if you reliably test 1Gbps'. I
>>> find iperf testing at 1Gbit on Mac Air with Thunderbolt Eth
>>> extremely reliable (always 950+mbit/sec TCP on a good network, and
>>> easy to push right to the 1gbit limit with UDP.
>> Again, with 64byte packet size? Or are you talking MTU?
>> With MTU size you can try whatever you want and it will seem to be
>> reliable. A wget/ftp download of a 1GB file will provide similar
>> results, but I dont think this is useful anyway since it won't test
>> anything close to rfc2544 or at least an ordinary internet traffic
>> profile with a mix of 600bytes pkg size combined with a lower rate of
>> smaller packets (icmp/udp, ping/dns/ntp/voice/video).
>> I am also interested in a cheap and reliable method to test 10GbE
>> connections. So far I haven't found something I trust.
>>> Pete
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential and protected from disclosure.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution
> or copying is strictly prohibited.
> If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error,
> please e-mail the sender at the above e-mail address.
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited.
If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender at the above e-mail address.
