[netperf-talk] Re: Problems with UDP-Test

[Rick Jones]

Egon Gruenter wrote:
> Hi Rick,
> 
> here is some sample output from our UDP-Tests. It always ends with:
> "send_udp_stream: error on remote: Bad address". What's wrong with our
> tests?
> 
> OS_10.1 on aragorn:~/FIREWALL-TESTS # netperf -d -v9 -t UDP_STREAM -H
> 10.0.0.5 -- -m 1024

OS_10.1 - is that OSX or something else?  Which netperf version?

> scan_sockets_args called with the following argument vector
> netperf -d -v9 -t UDP_STREAM -H 10.0.0.5 -- -m 1024
> Program name: netperf
> Local send alignment: 8
> Local recv alignment: 8
> Remote send alignment: 8
> Remote recv alignment: 8
> Report local CPU 0
> Report remote CPU 0
> Verbosity: 9
> Debug: 1
> Port: 12865
> Test name: UDP_STREAM
> Test bytes: 0 Test time: 10 Test trans: 0
> Host name: 10.0.0.5
> 
> installing catcher for all signals
> Could not install signal catcher for sig 9, errno 22
> Could not install signal catcher for sig 19, errno 22
> Could not install signal catcher for sig 32, errno 22
> Could not install signal catcher for sig 33, errno 22
> Could not install signal catcher for sig 65, errno 22
> remotehost is 10.0.0.5 and port 12865
> establish_control called with host '10.0.0.5' port '12865' remfam
> AF_UNSPEC
>                 local '0.0.0.0' port '0' locfam AF_UNSPEC
> getaddrinfo returned the following for host '10.0.0.5' port '12865'
> family AF_UNSPEC
>         cannonical name: '10.0.0.5'
>         flags: 2 family: AF_INET: socktype: SOCK_STREAM protocol
> IPPROTO_TCP addrlen 16
>         sa_family: AF_INET sadata: 50 65 10 0 0 5
> getaddrinfo returned the following for host '0.0.0.0' port '0' family
> AF_UNSPEC
>         cannonical name: '0.0.0.0'
>         flags: 3 family: AF_INET: socktype: SOCK_STREAM protocol
> IPPROTO_TCP addrlen 16
>         sa_family: AF_INET sadata: 0 0 0 0 0 0
> bound control socket to 0.0.0.0 and 0
> successful connection to remote netserver at 10.0.0.5 and 12865
> complete_addrinfo using hostname 10.0.0.5 port 0 family AF_UNSPEC type
> SOCK_DGRAM prot IPPROTO_UDP flags 0x0
> getaddrinfo returned the following for host '10.0.0.5' port '0' family
> AF_UNSPEC
>         cannonical name: '10.0.0.5'
>         flags: 2 family: AF_INET: socktype: SOCK_DGRAM protocol
> IPPROTO_UDP addrlen 16
>         sa_family: AF_INET sadata: 0 0 10 0 0 5
> local_data_address not set, using local_host_name of '0.0.0.0'
> complete_addrinfo using hostname 0.0.0.0 port 0 family AF_UNSPEC type
> SOCK_DGRAM prot IPPROTO_UDP flags 0x1
> getaddrinfo returned the following for host '0.0.0.0' port '0' family
> AF_UNSPEC
>         cannonical name: '0.0.0.0'
>         flags: 3 family: AF_INET: socktype: SOCK_DGRAM protocol
> IPPROTO_UDP addrlen 16
>         sa_family: AF_INET sadata: 0 0 0 0 0 0
> UDP UNIDIRECTIONAL SEND TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to
> 10.0.0.5 (10.0.0.5) port 0 AF_INET
> create_data_socket: socket 4 obtained...
> netperf: set_sock_buffer: send socket size determined to be 126976
> netperf: set_sock_buffer: receive socket size determined to be 126976
> recv_response: received a 256 byte response
> send_udp_stream: remote data connection done.
> About to start a timer for 10 seconds.
> recv_response: received a 256 byte response
> send_udp_stream: error on remote: Bad address

Since the error is on the remote, looking at /tmp/netperf.debug might be 
a good thing and/or taking a system call trace (following forks) of the 
netserver while you are running the test.

The usual song and dance about "are you using the latest version" would 
apply as well :)

happy benchmarking,

rick jones

> 
> Happy Benchmarking!
> Egon
>