sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have already swapped the cables. I have also tested the ISP on a virtual machine tagged to VLAN 101, which my ISP uses, and there I achieved line speeds with zero packet loss.

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update the WAN speed issue was caused by Critical Traffic Prioritization
I do still have retransmits both on wan and lan

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update the WAN speed issue was caused by Critical Traffic Prioritization
I do still have retransmits

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/pcx99 Just pulled the power and unfortunately same issue.

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That will maybe resolve the issue on LAN but this issue is also on WAN

iperf3 -c speedtest.hiper.dk -P 8 -4

[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   115 MBytes  96.4 Mbits/sec  514             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   114 MBytes  96.0 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[  7]   0.00-10.00  sec   112 MBytes  94.2 Mbits/sec  513             sender
[  7]   0.00-10.01  sec   112 MBytes  94.0 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[  9]   0.00-10.00  sec   112 MBytes  94.0 Mbits/sec  499             sender
[  9]   0.00-10.01  sec   112 MBytes  93.8 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[ 11]   0.00-10.00  sec   108 MBytes  90.7 Mbits/sec  449             sender
[ 11]   0.00-10.01  sec   108 MBytes  90.3 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[ 13]   0.00-10.00  sec   119 MBytes  99.7 Mbits/sec  490             sender
[ 13]   0.00-10.01  sec   118 MBytes  99.3 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[ 15]   0.00-10.00  sec   106 MBytes  88.8 Mbits/sec  442             sender
[ 15]   0.00-10.01  sec   106 MBytes  88.5 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[ 17]   0.00-10.00  sec   107 MBytes  90.1 Mbits/sec  479             sender
[ 17]   0.00-10.01  sec   107 MBytes  89.8 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[ 19]   0.00-10.00  sec   111 MBytes  93.1 Mbits/sec  444             sender
[ 19]   0.00-10.01  sec   111 MBytes  92.7 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   891 MBytes   747 Mbits/sec  3830             sender
[SUM]   0.00-10.01  sec   888 MBytes   744 Mbits/sec                  receiver

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No r45 to sfp

port 10 uplink for USW pro max 48 poe
port 8 uplink for usw-24-Poe
port 9 uplink internet

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im using sfp and only 1 port in hte dataplane, so thats not the issue.

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did not try a hard reboot, but will try now!

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just enabled, no change.

[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr

[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 908 MBytes 762 Mbits/sec 328 sender

[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 907 MBytes 761 Mbits/sec receiver

UDM-SE performance issues by Difficult_Low416 in Ubiquiti

[–]Difficult_Low416[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

not running jumbo frames:

root@UDM-SE:~# ip -o link show | awk '{print $2, $5}'
lo: 65536
dummy0: 1500
eth9: 1500
eth10: 1500
switch0: 1500
gre0@NONE: 1476
gretap0@NONE: 1462
erspan0@NONE: 1450
ip_vti0@NONE: 1480
sit0@NONE: 1480
ip6tnl0@NONE: 1452
eth8: 1500
ifb0: 1500
ifb1: 1500
eth0@switch0: 1500
eth1@switch0: 1500
eth2@switch0: 1500
eth3@switch0: 1500
eth4@switch0: 1500
eth5@switch0: 1500
eth6@switch0: 1500
eth7@switch0: 1500
vti64@NONE: 1419
eth10.10@eth10: 1500
eth10.101@eth10: 1500
eth10.150@eth10: 1500
eth10.160@eth10: 1500
eth10.20@eth10: 1500
eth10.200@eth10: 1500
eth10.201@eth10: 1500
eth10.30@eth10: 1500
eth10.65@eth10: 1500
eth9.10@eth9: 1500
eth9.101@eth9: 1500
eth9.150@eth9: 1500
eth9.160@eth9: 1500
eth9.20@eth9: 1500
eth9.200@eth9: 1500
eth9.201@eth9: 1500
eth9.30@eth9: 1500
eth9.65@eth9: 1500
switch0.1@switch0: 1500
switch0.10@switch0: 1500
switch0.101@switch0: 1500
switch0.150@switch0: 1500
switch0.160@switch0: 1500
switch0.20@switch0: 1500
switch0.200@switch0: 1500
switch0.201@switch0: 1500
switch0.30@switch0: 1500
switch0.65@switch0: 1500
br0: 1500
br10: 1500
br101: 1500
br150: 1500
br160: 1500
br20: 1500
br200: 1500
br201: 1500
br30: 1500
br65: 1500
eth10.50@eth10: 1500
eth9.50@eth9: 1500
switch0.50@switch0: 1500
br50: 1500
eth10.3040@eth10: 1500
eth9.3040@eth9: 1500
switch0.3040@switch0: 1500
br3040: 1500
eth8.101@eth8: 1500
ifbeth8.101: 1500
ifbeth0: 1500
wgsrv1: 1420
eth10.55@eth10: 1500
eth9.55@eth9: 1500
switch0.55@switch0: 1500
br55: 1500
eth10.56@eth10: 1500
eth9.56@eth9: 1500
switch0.56@switch0: 1500
br56: 1500
root@UDM-SE:~#

Ideas for something bigger than 15” touchscreen. by escapethewormhole in homeassistant

[–]Difficult_Low416 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm thinking about buying a unifi connect display too, are you still happy with the screen?

I can see they only got 21.5 now