Jumbo Frames = Jumbo Headache!

[TechLarry]

I'd like to try using Jumbo Frames on my Gigabit Network, but I'm really confused about some stuff.

Most documentation for a devices Jumbo Frames setting says something like "Set to the same value as the other devices on your network"

Well, that's the issue. NONE of them support the same frame sizes!

My DGL-4300 Router is gigabit, but doesn't support Jumbo Frames, so any device I wanted to use Jumbo Frames with I was going to run off the switch only.

The Switch is a DLink DGS-2205, which supports Jumbo Frames "up to 9600"

My Intel/Pro 1000 MT Adapters support Jumbo Frame Sizes of "4088, 9014 and 16128"

My QNAP TS-201 NAS supports Jumbo Frames of "4074 and 7418"

My QNAP TS-209 Pro NAS supports Jumbo Frames of "4074, 7418 and 9000"

WTH am I supposed to make of all that when everyone says "use the same size on all your networ devices" ?

 

[Madwand]

I set them to the max supported by each device, up to around 9000. TCP MSS exchange will take care of communicating the maximum supported MSS, and then TCP will only use the maximum size supported by each side of the communication.

If anything tries to send large frames via a non-TCP protocol, e.g. UDP, this scheme might fail, which is why the general advice is that everything should be set to the same max size. But if that happens it probably won't be subtle, and you can just turn off jumbo frames at the NIC level to fix the problem at that time.

Some devices happen to work better with a frame size around 4k, so another alternative is to use that as the target -- use whatever's available around 4000.

 

[imzjustplayin]

Get matching hardware? Not to mention D-link isn't exactly what I'd call "quality".

 

[Xipher]

I wouldn't worry too much, and just set every thing as high as you can while staying under what the switch can handle. Also concerning Dlinks "quality" I think that depends on what grade hardware of theirs you are using. The stuff they let us use at QuakeCon (the business grade switches) seem to be pretty good for the price. It may not be Cisco, but then again it's not at a Cisco price.

 

[TechLarry]

The DGL-4300 is the best router I've ever owned, and the switch works just fine.

We can't all afford enterprise class hardware.

Get matching hardware? Not to mention D-link isn't exactly what I'd call "quality".

 

[TechLarry]

I'll try the 4k thing. Thanks

-Larry

I set them to the max supported by each device, up to around 9000. TCP MSS exchange will take care of communicating the maximum supported MSS, and then TCP will only use the maximum size supported by each side of the communication.

If anything tries to send large frames via a non-TCP protocol, e.g. UDP, this scheme might fail, which is why the general advice is that everything should be set to the same max size. But if that happens it probably won't be subtle, and you can just turn off jumbo frames at the NIC level to fix the problem at that time.

Some devices happen to work better with a frame size around 4k, so another alternative is to use that as the target -- use whatever's available around 4000.

 

[Grentz]

Get matching hardware? Not to mention D-link isn't exactly what I'd call "quality".

Dlink's high end stuff is good stuff, but I agree, most of their lower end stuff fails like no other.

Kinda like netgear...I LOVE their higher end business class stuff but the consumer stuff I wouldn't touch with a 100ft ethernet cord


and to the OP, ya Jumbo Frames are a PITA. Gigabit in general is a PITA if you are trying to go for speed. One of my clients is all setup for full Gigabit with a lot of throughput, but they have all high quality enterprise class stuff that makes it easier. At my house I still am just plugged into Gigabit but no where near the proper speeds...probably should be a project I undertake soon

 

[Rabidfox]

Yeah, when a device makes a TCP connection, it negotiates the MSS, so it shouldn't be ignored, if your traffic is being dropped, fire up wireshark and sniff the traffice, I'll be the MSS is being ignored. It's happened to me once with a customer and a VPN setup once, so it shouldn't be a big deal. Just set it up and see if it works.

 

[Madwand]

and to the OP, ya Jumbo Frames are a PITA. Gigabit in general is a PITA if you are trying to go for speed. One of my clients is all setup for full Gigabit with a lot of throughput, but they have all high quality enterprise class stuff that makes it easier. At my house I still am just plugged into Gigabit but no where near the proper speeds...probably should be a project I undertake soon

You don't need enterprise hardware to get good throughput. I've pretty much saturated gigabit with Windows file transfers using consumer hardware including a D-Link DGS-2205.

But yes, it's not easy to do this, and you'd probably not be able to do this using current off-the-shelf consumer NAS boxes (although you could build your own to perform better).

Moreover, a better way to look at gigabit is with reference to 100 Mb/s, not with reference to the theoretical maximum performance which you'll never reach. Even run-of-the-mill hardware can do 2-3x 100 Mb/s using gigabit, and that's a relatively large improvement.

 

[Grentz]

You don't need enterprise hardware to get good throughput. I've pretty much saturated gigabit with Windows file transfers using consumer hardware including a D-Link DGS-2205.

But yes, it's not easy to do this, and you'd probably not be able to do this using current off-the-shelf consumer NAS boxes (although you could build your own to perform better).

Moreover, a better way to look at gigabit is with reference to 100 Mb/s, not with reference to the theoretical maximum performance which you'll never reach. Even run-of-the-mill hardware can do 2-3x 100 Mb/s using gigabit, and that's a relatively large improvement.

Ya, I know you dont need enterprise class stuff. I was more saying just on the failure rate and other issues that arise with consumer grade a lot of the time Too bad really....there is some good consumer grade stuff out there though.

 

[Madwand]

Ya, I know you dont need enterprise class stuff. I was more saying just on the failure rate and other issues that arise with consumer grade a lot of the time Too bad really....there is some good consumer grade stuff out there though.

I haven't had any issues with the DGS-2205, and as you can get it for around < $30 AR on a good day / site, in the unlikely event that it fails, it wouldn't be a big deal in terms of cost and loss of productivity as it would be in an enterprise. I don't see any failure reports at present in NewEgg's customer reviews for example. I think that an inexpensive switch from a major brand like this being sold on NewEgg would have lots of complaints if reliability was a significant problem. It's also got a 3-year warranty for everything but the wall wart (1 year).

I think people look at the $30 or so figures and think that there must be some problems with these devices just because they're surprised by the prices and don't have much experience with the value to be found in consumer networking gear these days.

 

[imzjustplayin]

I haven't had any issues with the DGS-2205, and as you can get it for around < $30 AR on a good day / site, in the unlikely event that it fails, it wouldn't be a big deal in terms of cost and loss of productivity as it would be in an enterprise. I don't see any failure reports at present in NewEgg's customer reviews for example. I think that an inexpensive switch from a major brand like this being sold on NewEgg would have lots of complaints if reliability was a significant problem. It's also got a 3-year warranty for everything but the wall wart (1 year).

I think people look at the $30 or so figures and think that there must be some problems with these devices just because they're surprised by the prices and don't have much experience with the value to be found in consumer networking gear these days.

Yeah Ok..

 

[Madwand]

Yeah Ok..

Post some specific problems with that device instead of just random badmouthing then.

 

[imzjustplayin]

Post some specific problems with that device instead of just random badmouthing then.

To imply that $30 networking equipment is anywhere near the quality of $100+ switches(and those are cheap) is just making you look like a fool. How long have you had this for? What exactly do you do on there? Just because it doesn't fail for 4 years doesn't make it a solid peice of equipment whatsoever. I know this because I've had consumer routers that cost well over $150 that lasted for four years simply because the demands were low, add bittorrent into the mix and they died a slow and painful death shortly thereafter.

 

[Madwand]

To imply that $30 networking equipment is anywhere near the quality of $100+ switches(and those are cheap) is just making you look like a fool.

The bigger fool assumes that spending $100 is going to get him a better device without any data to back that up. To spend the difference "just in case", when for most people it just doesn't matter. Thanks for proving my point about making assumptions based on price.

 

[imzjustplayin]

The bigger fool assumes that spending $100 is going to get him a better device without any data to back that up. To spend the difference "just in case", when for most people it just doesn't matter. Thanks for proving my point about making assumptions based on price.

There is no decent gigabit hardware to be had for $30, shit even at $100 you'd be hard pressed to find anything decent. There is a great difference between $30 and $100, if it's difficult to find anything of quality at $100, what makes you think $30 is an any better price point? In terms of hardware, you get what you pay for. We're not talking about fashion, not talking about some asshole at geeksquad, we're talking about hardware, components, etc. Unless this is stolen and made by cisco or any other half decent company, YOU have nothing to prove that this won't fail in short order.

Give me an example of widely praised networking switch that normally is very very expensive but through some revolutionary garbage, some company rocked the IT world when they debut with "X" product simply because they could bring enterprise level equipment at consumer friendly prices. While I do believe in your arguement that high price doesn't always equate to higher quality such as the iPod, Windows, MacOS, etc. etc. I feel that in this case, you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[TechLarry]

All I know is my DLink stuff (DGL-4300 and DGS-2205) has worked flawlessly.

I cannot say the same for the 'blue-box' Netgear junk I've had. Every single Netgear 'blue-box' piece I've had (two routers and two switches, one hub) has died within their first year and I found the tech support so frustrating I just threw then in the trash.

I've also lost faith in Linksys, especially with their habits of de-contenting devices without changing the part numbers.

 

[imzjustplayin]

All I know is my DLink stuff (DGL-4300 and DGS-2205) has worked flawlessly.

I cannot say the same for the 'blue-box' Netgear junk I've had. Every single Netgear 'blue-box' piece I've had (two routers and two switches, one hub) has died within their first year and I found the tech support so frustrating I just threw then in the trash.

I've also lost faith in Linksys, especially with their habits of de-contenting devices without changing the part numbers.

yeah when I discovered that linksys was actually garbage, I was quite surprised considering that they're owned by cisco but what can you expect with consumer hardware?

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

yeah when I discovered that linksys was actually garbage, I was quite surprised considering that they're owned by cisco but what can you expect with consumer hardware?

Their business level products are quite good, especially since the Cisco merger....I have oodles of them out in service, reliable products. I've actually tossed a few DLink DES series biz grade switches from failure.

That being said..back to OT, I agree with a prior poster...uniformity across the board, similar to wireless..when mixing so many brands/products..bound to run into issues.

 

[imzjustplayin]

Their business level products are quite good, especially since the Cisco merger....I have oodles of them out in service, reliable products. I've actually tossed a few DLink DES series biz grade switches from failure.

That being said..back to OT, I agree with a prior poster...uniformity across the board, similar to wireless..when mixing so many brands/products..bound to run into issues.

You say their business products are good, how can you prove this? Unless you run bittorrent 24/7 on there for over 2 years with over 10K concurrent connections, I can't believe you.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

You say their business products are good, how can you prove this? Unless you run bittorrent 24/7 on there for over 2 years with over 10K concurrent connections, I can't believe you.

I wouldn't call torrenting a test of network gear..yeah it can bog down sub 100 dollar home grade routers...yes familiar with concurrent connections, various different routers have different CPUs and RAM, it's mostly just math....but can't even make a 19 dollar switch break a sweat.

I don't torrent or any of that P2P warez junk...I won't let that cr@p near my computer...but matter of fact, last year I did have a weekend gathering at my pad...a friend of mine was over with his laptop downloading stuff like a champ on my at that time Comcast w/Powerboost..and he was going nuts enjoying the Powerboost. I was playing bf'42 online at the same time he was going nuts with downloads..and my RV082 didn't break a sweat.

I've deployed probably over 60 RV0 routers to various clients...how can I say that they're good? Well...with some products...I'd frequently get phone calls from a client complaining that their internet is down. If powercycling the router brings back their internet..you know it was the routers fault. If the phone calls complaining of the internet going down stop after I replace whatever they had..with an RV0 series...that to me is a good gauge that that router is doing its job. Does it compare to Sonicwall, Fortinet, or Juniper routers? No..not in the same league. But sitting square inbetween home grade, and enterprise grade...the RV0 series fits the bill nicely, great bang for the buck.

And regarding their switches...no they aren't Cisco Catalyst equivelant...but in supporting many small business clients...I've deployed several dozen SRW series switches...as well as many other brands, Netgear, DLink, Trendnet, SMC, Dells, HPs, ...and I just haven't found issues with their SR and SRW series of switches. Another great "bang for the buck" product that does well in small business setups.

 

[Madwand]

Do any of those routers have gigabit switches which support 9k jumbo frames?

 

[imzjustplayin]

I wouldn't call torrenting a test of network gear..

Well I would, unless there is a test that will kill a router faster than bittorrrent, please let me know. Sure you can go about 6months-a year with bittorrent and have no issue, but eventually it'll catchup and kill the router. A one time thing with bittorrent won't kill a router but if you use it enough, it definately will.

yeah it can bog down sub 100 dollar home grade routers...

Yes well I've seen it kill $200 routers as well...

I don't torrent or any of that P2P warez junk...I won't let that cr@p near my computer...but matter of fact, last year I did have a weekend gathering at my pad...a friend of mine was over with his laptop downloading stuff like a champ on my at that time Comcast w/Powerboost..and he was going nuts enjoying the Powerboost. I was playing bf'42 online at the same time he was going nuts with downloads..and my RV082 didn't break a sweat.

If you could play BF42 online and not have a decrease in ping, then obviously he wasn't downloading enough to really stress the connection now was he? You'll know when you need a better router with QOS capability when you connection starts to bog from using bittorrent/downloading. In my experience bittorrent can screw up pings far quicker than downloading from an FTP/HTTP server regardless of how much you're utilizing the connection. (Downloading on bittorrent yet only getting 100KB/s down while the connection supports 1MB/s down).

 

[TechLarry]

Anyone running Bittorent 24/7 for 2 years with 10K concurrent connections either has their own pipe to the internet, or has a VERY liberal Cable Company

And I suspect is, or will be, a huge target of the RIAA/MPAA

You say their business products are good, how can you prove this? Unless you run bittorrent 24/7 on there for over 2 years with over 10K concurrent connections, I can't believe you.

 

[TechLarry]

The DLink DGS-2205 and 2208 support Jumbo Frames up to 9600.

Do any of those routers have gigabit switches which support 9k jumbo frames?

 

[TechLarry]

The DGL-4300 has enough horsepower to support most 'normal' high-end users. 10K bittorrent sessions is NOT normal by anyone's definition.

It supports 1000 concurrent connections and a wan-to-lan throughput in excess of 90MB/Sec, which exceeds the abilities of many high-end routers, including Cisco.

The later DIR-655 and upcomming DIR-855 do even better.

Don't underestimate the DGL-4300. It's an amazing product, it really is. If it has any failing, it is that it does not support Jumbo frames. My switch does so I just keep all the gigabit stuff running through the DGS-2205 to get around that issue, and the Router only routes basic internet traffic.

Well I would, unless there is a test that will kill a router faster than bittorrrent, please let me know. Sure you can go about 6months-a year with bittorrent and have no issue, but eventually it'll catchup and kill the router. A one time thing with bittorrent won't kill a router but if you use it enough, it definately will.
Yes well I've seen it kill $200 routers as well...


If you could play BF42 online and not have a decrease in ping, then obviously he wasn't downloading enough to really stress the connection now was he? You'll know when you need a better router with QOS capability when you connection starts to bog from using bittorrent/downloading. In my experience bittorrent can screw up pings far quicker than downloading from an FTP/HTTP server regardless of how much you're utilizing the connection. (Downloading on bittorrent yet only getting 100KB/s down while the connection supports 1MB/s down).

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Well I would, unless there is a test that will kill a router faster than bittorrrent, please let me know. Sure you can go about 6months-a year with bittorrent and have no issue, but eventually it'll catchup and kill the router.

If you could play BF42 online and not have a decrease in ping, then obviously he wasn't downloading enough to really stress the connection now was he?

After 6 months of warez and ad/spyware infested P2P stuff...it's probably the infestation of backdoor trojans and botz on your now infested rig that kill your connection...not just "torrent will catchup and kill a router". Sorry..traffic is traffic..it's a measurable amount, whatever amount it takes to overwhelm a router..it'll do the day it hits it..first day...10th day, or whatever.

And no obviously it wouldn't only be my connection that he might be stressing..as having a lesser grade router in place...he could easily have swamped the router..but me having (at that time) a better biz grade router with adequate horsepower (a 533MHz CPU and 32 megs of RAM)...it didn't even hiccup with his traffic. It's not just killing the internet pipe..but concurrent connections that the router has to deal with.

 

[imzjustplayin]

After 6 months of warez and ad/spyware infested P2P stuff...it's probably the infestation of backdoor trojans and botz on your now infested rig that kill your connection...not just "torrent will catchup and kill a router". Sorry..traffic is traffic..it's a measurable amount, whatever amount it takes to overwhelm a router..it'll do the day it hits it..first day...10th day, or whatever.

And no obviously it wouldn't only be my connection that he might be stressing..as having a lesser grade router in place...he could easily have swamped the router..but me having (at that time) a better biz grade router with adequate horsepower (a 533MHz CPU and 32 megs of RAM)...it didn't even hiccup with his traffic. It's not just killing the internet pipe..but concurrent connections that the router has to deal with.

Thank you for insulting me by assuming I don't know how to maintain/take care of my computers. Also thanks for insulting my intelligence by telling me that I'm unable to determine on my own the root cause of my networking equipment failure. Having one connection to the router at 90MB/s is not nearly as strenuous as having 10K concurrent connections at less than 500KB/s. Bittorrent will infact catchup and kill a router, death does NOT have to be imminent and clean cut for it to occur, infact if you've worked with hardware, you'll see that a lot of failures include intermittent operation. And I know this because of my experience with bittorrent and other's routers.

 

[movax]

There is no decent gigabit hardware to be had for $30, shit even at $100 you'd be hard pressed to find anything decent. There is a great difference between $30 and $100, if it's difficult to find anything of quality at $100, what makes you think $30 is an any better price point?

My $90 24-port Belkin GigE switch and $30 D-Link 8-port (DGS-2208) beg to differ; they are both solid-state devices that have been running happily in a dusty unfinished basement for a little over a year and a half now (I should take care better care of them...). I use a PC running ipcop (two Intel PRO1000 NICs) so I can't comment on any consumer-grade routers, but I'm more than impressed with consumer-priced switches. They're cheap, do what's advertised, and don't die.

 

[imzjustplayin]

My $90 24-port Belkin GigE switch and $30 D-Link 8-port (DGS-2208) beg to differ; they are both solid-state devices that have been running happily in a dusty unfinished basement for a little over a year and a half now (I should take care better care of them...). I use a PC running ipcop (two Intel PRO1000 NICs) so I can't comment on any consumer-grade routers, but I'm more than impressed with consumer-priced switches. They're cheap, do what's advertised, and don't die.

I wouldn't expect to be getting over 700Mb/s with those switches anytime soon, well unless you can prove otherwise.

 

[movax]

I wouldn't expect to be getting over 700Mb/s with those switches anytime soon, well unless you can prove otherwise.

I think only the 8-port is Jumbo capable, but even then, I don't have any I/O subsystem capable of saturating it; the most I can do is have simultaneous HDTV streams / transfers going as a stress test, and it doesn't choke at all. Not scientific, but like I said, I don't have anything that just blast 700 megabits of a data a second from one source to another.

 

[Madwand]

I wouldn't expect to be getting over 700Mb/s with those switches anytime soon, well unless you can prove otherwise.

Do you make up this stuff by yourself or do you pay someone on the street for this wealth of info?

Edited to fix misunderstanding of Movax's reference.

 

[feigned]

Thank you for insulting me by assuming I don't know how to maintain/take care of my computers. Also thanks for insulting my intelligence by telling me that I'm unable to determine on my own the root cause of my networking equipment failure. Having one connection to the router at 90MB/s is not nearly as strenuous as having 10K concurrent connections at less than 500KB/s. Bittorrent will infact catchup and kill a router, death does NOT have to be imminent and clean cut for it to occur, infact if you've worked with hardware, you'll see that a lot of failures include intermittent operation. And I know this because of my experience with bittorrent and other's routers.

BT will kill equipment if it's being overworked without adequate cooling. I would bet dollars to donuts that's why SOHO devices fail left and right. Slap a few heasinks inside and solder in a low low low power fan, bet you'd never have a problem again.

But no, 10k concurrent connections on a 500Kb/sec line doesn't necessarily kill anything. It'll just be slower to react because of the bandwidth given the same device.

 

[imzjustplayin]

BT will kill equipment if it's being overworked without adequate cooling. I would bet dollars to donuts that's why SOHO devices fail left and right. Slap a few heasinks inside and solder in a low low low power fan, bet you'd never have a problem again.

But no, 10k concurrent connections on a 500Kb/sec line doesn't necessarily kill anything. It'll just be slower to react because of the bandwidth given the same device.

It's possible that it's not that the line is 500Kb/s it just so happens that's the connection speed you can get when connected to the peers.

 

[Nate7311]

After 6 months of warez and ad/spyware infested P2P stuff...it's probably the infestation of backdoor trojans and botz on your now infested rig that kill your connection...not just "torrent will catchup and kill a router". Sorry..traffic is traffic..it's a measurable amount, whatever amount it takes to overwhelm a router..it'll do the day it hits it..first day...10th day, or whatever.

QFT! There's just TOO MUCH crap out in the wild for anyone to have a truly 100% effective defense. If you are going to jump into some of the murkier BT/P2P circles, you WILL get hit with something. It's not always easy to find. Spybot, Webroot, AdAware, etc. will not find EVERYTHING, period, end of story. Anyone believing themselves clean and/or safe while in those circles is simply deluding themselves.

 

[imzjustplayin]

QFT! There's just TOO MUCH crap out in the wild for anyone to have a truly 100% effective defense. If you are going to jump into some of the murkier BT/P2P circles, you WILL get hit with something. It's not always easy to find. Spybot, Webroot, AdAware, etc. will not find EVERYTHING, period, end of story. Anyone believing themselves clean and/or safe while in those circles is simply deluding themselves.

ok... lol

 

[Nate7311]

Just believe what you want, then... And keep on making posts asking for help...

But anyway... I assume the Op has his question answered.

 

[imzjustplayin]

Just believe what you want, then... And keep on making posts asking for help...

But anyway... I assume the Op has his question answered.

I didn't say it was wrong but it was funny how serious you were about what you said.

 

[TechLarry]

If I'm going to be doing a session of browsing that involves a lot of searching, research, or software testing, I use a throw-away VirtualPC 2007 image running XP. If it gets hit, I just delete it, and make a new copy of the drive from the master image and I'm all set. A 2 minute re-image

QFT! There's just TOO MUCH crap out in the wild for anyone to have a truly 100% effective defense. If you are going to jump into some of the murkier BT/P2P circles, you WILL get hit with something. It's not always easy to find. Spybot, Webroot, AdAware, etc. will not find EVERYTHING, period, end of story. Anyone believing themselves clean and/or safe while in those circles is simply deluding themselves.

 

[TechLarry]

Actually, yes. Thanks

Just believe what you want, then... And keep on making posts asking for help...

But anyway... I assume the Op has his question answered.