Unfortunately no one can be told what fun_plug is - you have to see it for yourself.
You are not logged in.
Cannot get JF working on the DNS-323. I have it wired via Cat6 to my DIR-685 (JF supported) and also enabled JF in the NAS interface.
I first tried 9000 and then SSH'd into the NAS and did a `ping -s 8076 192.168.11.1` but no response. But when I try `ping -s 1476 192.168.11.1` I get a response.
Then changed to 3000 (lowest JF) and did `ping -s 2076 192.168.11.1`, no response.
Am I missing something? Shouldn't the DNS-323 be able to ping the router using a 9kb packet when JF is enabled?
Offline
If jumbo frames are enabled on both ends and the switch supports jumbo frames, then the ping you specified should work.
root@nas02:~# ping -c2 -s 8076 server
PING server (172.16.253.75) 8076(8104) bytes of data.
8084 bytes from server (172.16.253.75): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.760 ms
8084 bytes from server (172.16.253.75): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.679 ms
Offline
Interesting question - technically - it should, but, I have a feeling it won't.
Here's the reason why.
Although the DIR685 is advertised as supporting jumbo frame, there is a strong probability that the actual router silicon in the 685 is not even gigabit (the router and the switch will be separate ASICs), and the jumbo frame support will be for the switch only.
Under normal circumstances, the NAS and the router should automatically negotiate an acceptable MSS and the NAS should communicate with the router, and you should find that with the NAS configured for jumbo frame you can ping the router (using a standard sized ping packet) as well as pinging another host through the router (meaning on the internet), again with a standard ping packet.
The problem as I see it, is that you have one host configured for jumbo frame (the NAS), and the other (the router) cannot be configured for jumbo frame, so the "jumbo" ping fails.
Offline
How can I use it as a switch then? Can the switch serve up wireless DHCP?
I have a DIR-655 that i KNOW does not support JF, so can I hook it up like this?:
Modem-->DIR-655-->DIR-685--->JF Clients (wireless and wired)
Assuming that the 655 will give the 685 an IP (or maybe set a static one) and then the 685 will serve up DHCP to wireless and wired clients enabling JF?
I might be misunderstanding your response, sorry if I am.
Offline
I suspect you haven't quite grasped my point - which is that the switch portion of the DIR685 might support jumbo frame, but the router portion probably does not, and the problem you're running into is that you're pinging the router portion, so the ping is discarded.
If the DIR685 is advertised as supporting jumbo frame, then simply use it as intended, and stop trying to ping the DIR685 itself. Connect another host that supports jumbo frame to it and ping that instead.
By the way - to all intents & purposes, jumbo frame is gigabit only, so a wireless jumbo frame client is not possible
Offline
Ok gotcha now. I've come to the conclusion my router just sucks. Ok I know some JF settings are better (or worse) than others, but I've tried every setting on the NAS (and subsequently on the NIC for the Macbook Pro I'm using) from 3000 to 9000 and the MB/s doesn't go above 8MB/s. That's some shit.
I WAS able to ping the DIR-685 with a 8.76K packet `ping -s 8076 192.168.11.1` (saving room for overhead, etc) and it responded fine, 0.43ms. This is wired of course, thank you for the wireless rule out. Whereas BEFORE I enabled JF on the NAS I could not. So at least I know the packets are getting there and not defragmenting because they would have defragmented when JF on the NAS was off but instead they just failed.
I just want a damn router (or maybe a router + switch) combo that can serve up JF and have a DHCP server for wired and wireless clients. This thing is capable of so much more than 8MB/s and the router is the bottleneck. Hell, I can't even stream wireless to my PS3 without hiccups every 10 secs in the video. I've used built-in AV server as well as Twonky. FML!
Last edited by bound4h (2011-03-12 06:19:26)
Offline
Just a comment on the "8MB/s". That is pretty low considering I can get 18-19 MB/s even though my router/switch doesn't support JF. (I have the DNS-323 connected to an old DLink DLG-4100 and it also goes through a DLink DGS-1005G to get to the DLG-4100 from my computer).
Fri Mar 11 21:11:30 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Push --- 5.26 seconds --- 838860800 Bits --- 152.21 MBits/Sec --- 19.02625 MBytes/Sec
Fri Mar 11 21:11:36 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Pull --- 5.42 seconds --- 838860800 Bits --- 147.66 MBits/Sec --- 18.4575 MBytes/Sec
Fri Mar 11 21:11:41 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Push --- 5.18 seconds --- 838860800 Bits --- 154.35 MBits/Sec --- 19.29375 MBytes/Sec
Fri Mar 11 21:11:47 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Pull --- 5.66 seconds --- 838860800 Bits --- 141.28 MBits/Sec --- 17.66 MBytes/Sec
Fri Mar 11 21:11:47 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Push Total --- 10.44 seconds --- 153.27 MBits/Sec --- 19.15875 MBytes/Sec
Fri Mar 11 21:11:47 2011 --- CHRIS-PC --- DLink-NAS --- Pull Total --- 11.08 seconds --- 144.40 MBits/Sec --- 18.05 MBytes/Sec
The above numbers are through Samba (Windows 7 machine).
And actually it might be so low that what is really happening is that you are enabling jumbo frames they messing up and retrying and giving you less performance then what you would get if you didn't enable them at all.
Last edited by chriso (2011-03-12 07:45:31)
Offline
Before blaming the router, set static ip addresses on both the NAS and the Macbook and run your tests again, both with & without jumbo frame - that's how I did my first jumbo frame tests several years ago, I didn't not have a switch that supported jumbo frame at the time, and wasn't certain if I wanted to spend the coin.
Offline
Set a static on the NAS as well as set a static on my macbook. Set the NAS to JF 9k, and my macbook to JF 9k using all Cat6.
Cannot ping router with 8076 byte packet (or even 2000 for that matter). No worries I guess.
No problems pinging the NAS with 8076, responds fine. File transfers, with and without JF, never top 5-6MB/s. Pitiful.
Reset router (dir685) to factory defaults, using latest FW with no wireless security set (literally just reset the device and tried to transfer after clients were connected) and still no difference. I have nothing left but to assume it's the router. Thanks for the help..
Last edited by bound4h (2011-03-14 02:40:33)
Offline
Whoops - I guess I slipped there - I meant for you to connect the NAS directly to the Macbook, taking the router completely out of the loop, that's why the static addresses are needed.
Offline
Connect the NAS via Cat6 to my macbook? Now I'm confused. What IP would I set for both? How can both have each its own IP over one ethernet cable?
Offline
Think of it as a very small network with no connection to the internet - each host needs it's own address, for example 192.168.0.32 on the NAS; and 192.168.0.33 on the macbook - it's easier if you use the ip addresses that the router would normally assign and set them as static address (temporarily - just for the duration of the test), before you disconnect them from the router.
If you get faster speeds with the router removed then the problem is the router; if the speeds stay the same, then the problem is not the router, but must lie with one of the two hosts, and I would suspect the macbook - for two reasons - the DNS-323 will typically deliver 8~10MB/sec on a 100mbps network and roughly double that, 16~20MB/sec on gigabit without jumbo frame - with jumbo, you'll get a little more maybe 25MB/sec, but under optimum circumstances 30MB/sec is possible.
You do need to use large files ~2GB or so for this test.
Offline
Did as you suggested. I did this with two different MBP's I have.
With router in the loop, I was getting 6-7MB/s R and W.
1st MBP without router with 1.5 GB file:
Read (10 times average): 10MB/s
Write (10 times average): 10MB/s
2nd MBP without router with 1.5 GB file:
Read (10 times average): 11MB/s
Write (10 times average): 10MB/s
So pretty consistent between both computers. But an improvement over the original setup.
Mind you, this is with JF enabled (9k). I am doing this through AFP (using avahi), would that do anything? Also, I've shut down a lot of programs on the NAS (twonky, transmission, etc) to free up memory during tests.
Last edited by bound4h (2011-03-15 06:07:22)
Offline
Well - I guess there's the proof that the router is slowing things up - it's still pretty slow in my opinion, in my early tests I could get that sort of throughput using 100 mbps, and perhaps double that on gigabit with jumbo frame. You could try all of the frame size settings one at a time and see if there's any change, the "sweet spot" will vary from one network to the next.
I shouldn't comment on avahi & afp, I'm not a mac user and have absolutely no experience there, but, I suppose that is one possible cause that your throughput is low.
Offline