[clue] a networking riddle

Jim Bucks jbucks at procci.com
Tue Oct 15 05:37:41 MDT 2013


This is a GREAT explanation!

I've had some personal experience setting these up, and have had more 
then a few "head scratcing" moments, too.

The worst one was (all 10 Gig MM Fiber):
   Sun NAS (4541 - Thumper) <-> HP Procurve Switch  <-> Isilon NAS
                                                    <-> Windows XP 
Workstations


No matter what I did, the only way I could get this to work reliably 
(and a config that should NOT have worked) was to set the Switch, 
Isilon, and Sun NAS to use Jumbo Frames and to set the Windows XP W/S's 
to standard Frame sizes (1500).  Any other combination resulted in 
laboriosly slow file (gargantuan HD Video Files) transfers / access.

Oh, and tried the file access via both SMB/CIFS and NFS no real 
difference in ether one.

Sometimes you have to just do what works in spite of whether it should 
(or not).

Jim





On 10/14/2013 08:25 PM, Mark G. Harvey wrote:
> Having worked tech support on several of jumbo frames calls, here's 
> what I learned
>
> To cover the overhead of Jumbo Frames, the switch & its ports have to 
> be set at a higher MTU to pass the additional headers added when a 
> packet leaves eth0   Important: every interface that handles a packet 
> needs to be set for Jumbo Frames.  At the hosts, 9000 ... at the 
> switch globally & at each port 9216
>
>        HostOne
> eth0 w/ MTU=9000
>              |
>          cable
>              |
> switch w/ MTU=9216 set globally PLUS
> MTU=9216 set at specific ports passing Jumbo Frames
>              |
>          cable
>              |
>       HostTwo
> eth0 w/ MTU=9000
>
> Given that it works in your system one way, but not the reverse, there 
> could be just one switch port that still has the default MTU=1500
>
> Google this:  jumbo frames switch mtu 9216   ... a lot of good info there
>
>
> Best of luck on solving the problem.
>
>
>
> On Monday, October 14, 2013 4:37 PM, Quentin Hartman 
> <qhartman at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, what do the logical groupings of servers have to do with the 
> network topology? What exactly lies between server A and B? Are there 
> any weird tunnels? Do all the switches support jumbo frames? All the 
> routers correctly translating between networks?
>
> MTU is a fiddly thing, and if every device in the path isn't correctly 
> configured you will get weird behavior.
>
> QH
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Mike Bean <beandaemon at gmail.com 
> <mailto:beandaemon at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Well, I don't mean OU in the windows sense, I mean logical
>     groupings of servers.  Clusters. I'm trying to get my head around
>     this, because intuitively, it just doesn't make any sense.
>
>     If you're coming home from the grocery store, and you have more
>     groceries then you can carry, you make multiple trips to the car.
>
>     but I don't think it's quite that simple.  Think networks aren't
>     as smart as I think they are,  intuitively, something configured
>     to send as 1500, should be able to receive 1500 only, not
>     necessary 9000, but something that's configured as 9000 should be
>     able to send and receive as 9000 or 1500. (scratches head.)
>
>     In actuality, B (9000) can send to A (1500)
>     and A (1500) can send to B (9000)
>
>     but if we set A to 9000, it can no longer send to B (9000)
>     (scratches head)
>
>     Boy, if you know someone who's in school looking for a secure job,
>     tell them to become a network person.    REALLY GOOD network
>     people are worth their weight in gold.
>
>
>     On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Quentin Hartman
>     <qhartman at gmail.com <mailto:qhartman at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         By OU, do you mean broadcast domain? ie - two LANs connected
>         by a router? If so, it sounds like you have the (usually
>         default) MTU of 1500 set on side A, but the 9000 set on B, and
>         your router isn't correctly doing MTU management when crossing
>         from one to the other.
>
>         Going the other way works because the fragments are already
>         small enough to be handled correctly at the other end. The
>         complexity of making this work reliably is the primary reason
>         so few people bother to use jumbo frames, even though they
>         technically are better most of the time anymore.
>
>         The wikipedia article on MTU is actually pretty good:
>         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_transmission_unit
>
>         QH
>
>
>         On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Mike Bean
>         <beandaemon at gmail.com <mailto:beandaemon at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>             So I've been scratching my head for a long time trying to
>             understand this, and it makes no sense to me.   We have to
>             discrete OU's.   SCP transmissions of any real size tend
>             to fail from A to B, but not from B to A.
>
>             My colleagues have been arguing that the fix is to set the
>             MTU at side B to 1500.  And Lo, and behold, when we do, it
>             works, increase the MTU to 9000, and it fails again.
>
>             http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/14187/why-does-scp-hang-on-copying-files-larger-than-1405-bytes
>
>             What I have difficulty understanding, is if a jumbo frame
>             carries, say, 9000 bytes, and hypothetically, if it's a
>             5,000 bytes file + your MTU = 1500, which means you split
>             it up into 3 transmissions.
>
>             Same size transmission; capped packet size,  more
>             packets.   So I would naturally conclude that at an MTU of
>             9000 it could get done in 1 what an MTU of 1500 would do in 3?
>
>             (scratches head)
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             clue mailing list: clue at cluedenver.org
>             <mailto:clue at cluedenver.org>
>             For information, account preferences, or to unsubscribe see:
>             http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         clue mailing list: clue at cluedenver.org
>         <mailto:clue at cluedenver.org>
>         For information, account preferences, or to unsubscribe see:
>         http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     clue mailing list: clue at cluedenver.org <mailto:clue at cluedenver.org>
>     For information, account preferences, or to unsubscribe see:
>     http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list: clue at cluedenver.org <mailto:clue at cluedenver.org>
> For information, account preferences, or to unsubscribe see:
> http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list: clue at cluedenver.org
> For information, account preferences, or to unsubscribe see:
> http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue


-- 
+--------------------------------------+------------------------------+
|Jim Bucks                             |Phone: +1(970)539-1242  Cell  |
|1924 44th Avenue Court                |       +1(970)330-3276  Home  |
|Greeley, Colorado  80634       (USA)  |Email: jbucks at procci.com      |
+--------------------------------------+------------------------------+
|                       WWW: http://www.procci.com                    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://cluedenver.org/pipermail/clue/attachments/20131015/faae1e3b/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the clue mailing list