02-13-2010 02:40 PM - edited 03-04-2019 07:30 AM
Overview: I have an internet connection that when connected directly to my pc, or through an abitrary SOHO wireless router, I can go to speedtest.net and pull down 11.5 Mbps and 3.0 Mbps up.
When I put the cisco router in between my laptop and the cable modem, I only get ~about~ 1.5 Mbps in either direction.
Is there something I don't know about max bandwidth/throughput for this device?
More info:
I noticed the problem on site at a customer location. They had cable internet, but were only pulling about .6 down and .8 up. By accident when performing a test on a another piece of equipment that circumvented the router, I noticed they were getting over 8.0 down. I ended up replacing the router in that location with an 1800 series and now they get their full speed and everything is great. However, I now have another location with the same issue; we just upgraded their internet to 6Mbps wireless, but they can only get a little under 1 going through the router. It is also a 2600. I brought the old router from the first location home, redid the config for my personal set up, and am experiencing the issue described above.
Here is the config as it was in the original location:
RT-KSHD#show run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 2010 bytes
!
version 12.2
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log uptime
service password-encryption
!
hostname RT-KSHD
!
enable secret 5 y
!
username x password 7 y
username x password 7 y
username x password 7 y
ip subnet-zero
!
!
!
chat-script DialOut ABORT ERROR "" "AT" OK "ATDT \T" TIMEOUT 60 CONNECT \c
!
!
!
interface Loopback0
ip address 10.255.255.4 255.255.255.255
!
interface Tunnel0
description GRE Tunnel to HQ
ip address 10.11.254.30 255.255.255.252
tunnel source Ethernet0/0
tunnel destination 172.16.0.254
!
interface Ethernet0/0
description "Ethernet connection to GTA firewall 172.16.0.12/30"
ip address 172.16.0.14 255.255.255.252
full-duplex
!
interface Ethernet0/1
description "x LAN 192.168.2.0/24"
ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
full-duplex
!
interface Async65
no ip address
encapsulation ppp
dialer in-band
dialer pool-member 10
async mode dedicated
ppp authentication chap callout
!
interface Dialer10
ip address 10.100.100.26 255.255.255.252
encapsulation ppp
no ip route-cache
no ip mroute-cache
dialer pool 10
dialer remote-name x
dialer idle-timeout 300
dialer string x
dialer-group 1
ppp authentication chap
!
router ospf 1
log-adjacency-changes
passive-interface Dialer10
network 10.11.254.28 0.0.0.3 area 0
network 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.0.13
ip route 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255 Dialer10
ip route 10.11.0.0 255.255.255.0 Dialer10 190
no ip http server
ip pim bidir-enable
!
dialer-list 1 protocol ip permit
snmp-server community public RO
!
line con 0
login local
line aux 0
script dialer DialOut
modem InOut
modem autoconfigure type usr_sportster
transport input all
autoselect ppp
stopbits 1
speed 115200
flowcontrol hardware
line vty 0 4
login local
transport input pad v120 telnet rlogin udptn
!
no scheduler allocate
end
And here is the config as I have modified it to work at home connected directly to my cable modem:
router#show run Building configuration... Current configuration : 951 bytes ! version 12.2 service timestamps debug datetime msec service timestamps log uptime service password-encryption ! hostname router ! enable secret 5 y ! username x password 7 y username x password 7 y ip subnet-zero ! ! no ip domain-lookup ip name-server x ip name-server y ip name-server z ! ! ! ! interface Ethernet0/0 description "Connection from cisco to belkin" ip address dhcp ip nat outside full-duplex ! interface Ethernet0/1 description "laptop only network" ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0 ip nat inside full-duplex ! ip nat inside source list 1 interface Ethernet0/0 overload ip classless no ip http server ip pim bidir-enable ! access-list 1 permit 192.168.3.0 0.0.0.255 ! line con 0 login local line aux 0 flowcontrol hardware line vty 0 4 login local transport input pad v120 telnet rlogin udptn ! end
Show Ver:
Version 12.2(10r)1
cisco 2611
In both instances, the core issue is the same. The bandwidth I can get is no where near what I can get when the router is not in play. Any suggestions?
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-13-2010 04:20 PM
Joshua
It might provide helpful information if you would post the output of show ip interface from your router. One thing I am wondering about is whether the router is process switching packets or if one of the better switching paths is being used.
I would observe that the version of IOS that you are running is old. I wonder if a more recent version of IOS would have corrected some bugs and might have improved performance. But from your description of the history of the router I also wonder if a code upgrade is feasible (do you have a maintenance contract for this router)?
I also wonder about the possibility of duplex mismatch causing poor performance. I notice that both of your interfaces are hard coded for full duplex. This prevents any negotiation of duplex on both interfaces. It is possible that whatever you are connected to (on either or both interfaces) was not able to negotiate and defaulted to half duplex. Duplex mismatch such as I have described will certainly impact performance. I would suggest changing the configuration of both interfaces to enable negotiation of duplex. Give it a try and let us know if things get better.
HTH
Rick
02-13-2010 04:20 PM
Joshua
It might provide helpful information if you would post the output of show ip interface from your router. One thing I am wondering about is whether the router is process switching packets or if one of the better switching paths is being used.
I would observe that the version of IOS that you are running is old. I wonder if a more recent version of IOS would have corrected some bugs and might have improved performance. But from your description of the history of the router I also wonder if a code upgrade is feasible (do you have a maintenance contract for this router)?
I also wonder about the possibility of duplex mismatch causing poor performance. I notice that both of your interfaces are hard coded for full duplex. This prevents any negotiation of duplex on both interfaces. It is possible that whatever you are connected to (on either or both interfaces) was not able to negotiate and defaulted to half duplex. Duplex mismatch such as I have described will certainly impact performance. I would suggest changing the configuration of both interfaces to enable negotiation of duplex. Give it a try and let us know if things get better.
HTH
Rick
02-13-2010 04:55 PM
I upgraded to latest IOS 12.3.26 for this model; that itself did not make any difference.
I tried all 4 combinations of changing the duplex of the interfaces. After setting the interface plugged directly into my laptop to half, and the interface plugged into the cable modem at half, I attained the best speeds, about 6.5down and 2.7up. This is a world better than what I was getting and so I would have to say that this is at LEAST the issue with the new (test) configuration, and could have something to do with the way it was configured in original environment. IT also gives me something to go on with the problem I'm facing in new environment. I can not see a way to tell it to duplex auto, the commands appear to put it at duplex half if i tell it anything other than duplex full
show ip interface after making the above changes:
Ethernet0/0 is up, line protocol is up
Internet address is 174.49.140.155/22
Broadcast address is 255.255.255.255
Address determined by DHCP
MTU is 1500 bytes
Helper address is not set
Directed broadcast forwarding is disabled
Outgoing access list is not set
Inbound access list is not set
Proxy ARP is enabled
Local Proxy ARP is disabled
Security level is default
Split horizon is enabled
ICMP redirects are always sent
ICMP unreachables are always sent
ICMP mask replies are never sent
IP fast switching is enabled
IP fast switching on the same interface is disabled
IP Flow switching is disabled
IP CEF switching is enabled
IP CEF Feature Fast switching turbo vector
IP multicast fast switching is enabled
IP multicast distributed fast switching is disabled
IP route-cache flags are Fast, CEF
Router Discovery is disabled
IP output packet accounting is disabled
IP access violation accounting is disabled
TCP/IP header compression is disabled
RTP/IP header compression is disabled
Policy routing is disabled
Network address translation is enabled, interface in domain outside
WCCP Redirect outbound is disabled
WCCP Redirect inbound is disabled
WCCP Redirect exclude is disabled
BGP Policy Mapping is disabled
Ethernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
Internet address is 192.168.3.1/24
Broadcast address is 255.255.255.255
Address determined by non-volatile memory
MTU is 1500 bytes
Helper address is not set
Directed broadcast forwarding is disabled
Outgoing access list is not set
Inbound access list is not set
Proxy ARP is enabled
Local Proxy ARP is disabled
Security level is default
Split horizon is enabled
ICMP redirects are always sent
ICMP unreachables are always sent
ICMP mask replies are never sent
IP fast switching is enabled
IP fast switching on the same interface is disabled
IP Flow switching is disabled
IP CEF switching is enabled
IP CEF Feature Fast switching turbo vector
IP multicast fast switching is enabled
IP multicast distributed fast switching is disabled
IP route-cache flags are Fast, CEF
Router Discovery is disabled
IP output packet accounting is disabled
IP access violation accounting is disabled
TCP/IP header compression is disabled
RTP/IP header compression is disabled
Policy routing is disabled
Network address translation is enabled, interface in domain inside
WCCP Redirect outbound is disabled
WCCP Redirect inbound is disabled
WCCP Redirect exclude is disabled
BGP Policy Mapping is disabled
Given what the other poster said about NAT possibly slowing this router down a little because of it being a low end, I wonder if the duplex changes might correct the original location as it was ~8.5Mbs?
Unless there is something else you see here that can help me squeeze a few more Mbs through this old baby. And no, this one doesn't have a contract (it did at one time, but expired).
02-13-2010 04:35 PM
Hi Joshua,
A 2611 router has only 10Mb interfaces and pretty slow processor (MPC860). Also, when you add NAT to it the router gets slower and slower, because NAT is process intensive. So, there is no way to get 11.5 out of a 10Mb interface. With all that said, I do not know why you only get 1.5Mb out of 10Mb interface. To me somewhere close to 6 or 7Mb would be a reasonable speed. If you had an extra public IP address to use for your PC, It would be intersting to know how high you go witout NAT.
Maybe you should replace this router with a faster one too and see if it helps.
HTH
Reza
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide