Opened on 11/29/2014 at 03:23:43 PM
Closed on 02/06/2015 at 01:46:05 PM
#1637 closed defect (fixed)
Investigate Packet Loss
| Reported by: | matze | Assignee: | fred |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | P3 | Milestone: | |
| Module: | Office-IT | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | matze | Blocked By: | |
| Blocking: | Platform: | Unknown | |
| Ready: | yes | Confidential: | no |
| Tester: | Verified working: | no | |
| Review URL(s): | |||
Description
Our WAN1 uplink repots an average of 14% packet loss (WAN2 is 0%) for a few days now; common issues have been ruled out already. Thus we need a more in-depth investigation to find a solution here.
Attachments (0)
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed on 12/12/2014 at 09:43:56 AM by sebastian
- Component changed from Platform to Office-IT
comment:2 Changed on 12/12/2014 at 10:31:01 AM by AAlvz
comment:3 Changed on 01/12/2015 at 11:53:56 AM by matze
- Owner changed from matze to fred
comment:4 Changed on 01/27/2015 at 03:29:50 PM by fred
I have done some searching on the pfSense forum on the packet loss problem.
There are some posts that suggest that the shown packet loss is actually a bug of the pfSense apinger (gateway monitoring) service.
After restarting the apinger service (as suggested in the post), the packet loss on WAN1 (UM) is shown as 0% again.
There is an update for pfSense to version 2.2 (we are on 2.1.5), maybe the bug is fixed there?
See
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=82535.msg451585#msg451585
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=80373.msg438722#msg438722
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=73009.msg398189#msg398189
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=72455.msg395284#msg395284
comment:5 Changed on 02/06/2015 at 01:08:57 PM by fred
- Cc matze added; AAlvz removed
Since the restart of the apinger service the (pretended) packet loss on WAN1 has not occured again, so this issue can probably be solved.
comment:6 Changed on 02/06/2015 at 01:46:05 PM by matze
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
@matze How could we get deeper into this?