iperfiperf3

Iperf3: Why there is no sender traffic at server site


I tried to take the test between my two machines and the output is as below:

Server listening on 5201
-----------------------------------------------------------
Accepted connection from 192.168.100.113, port 41749
[  5] local 192.168.100.114 port 5201 connected to 192.168.100.113 port 41750
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   479 MBytes  4.02 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   611 MBytes  5.13 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   615 MBytes  5.16 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   614 MBytes  5.15 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   616 MBytes  5.17 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   597 MBytes  5.01 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   519 MBytes  4.35 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   561 MBytes  4.70 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   590 MBytes  4.95 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   600 MBytes  5.03 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]  10.00-10.05  sec  27.5 MBytes  4.47 Gbits/sec                  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  5]   0.00-10.05  sec  0.00 Bytes  0.00 bits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.05  sec  5.69 GBytes  4.87 Gbits/sec                  receiver

$ iperf3 -c 192.168.100.114 -w 300k
Connecting to host 192.168.100.114, port 5201
[  4] local 192.168.100.113 port 41750 connected to 192.168.100.114 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Retr  Cwnd
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec   506 MBytes  4.24 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec   613 MBytes  5.14 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec   613 MBytes  5.14 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec   615 MBytes  5.16 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec   617 MBytes  5.18 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec   595 MBytes  4.99 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec   515 MBytes  4.32 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec   565 MBytes  4.74 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec   590 MBytes  4.95 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec   601 MBytes  5.05 Gbits/sec    0    216 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Retr
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  5.69 GBytes  4.89 Gbits/sec    0             sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  5.69 GBytes  4.89 Gbits/sec                  receiver

From the output of client site, we could see there is sender and receiver traffic record but from the server site, there is only receiver traffic.

Than I run in a reverse mode, there is no receiver traffic at server site.

Server listening on 5201
-----------------------------------------------------------
Accepted connection from 192.168.100.113, port 41755
[  5] local 192.168.100.114 port 5201 connected to 192.168.100.113 port 41756
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   611 MBytes  5.13 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   629 MBytes  5.28 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   637 MBytes  5.35 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   642 MBytes  5.39 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   641 MBytes  5.38 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   643 MBytes  5.39 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   638 MBytes  5.35 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   641 MBytes  5.38 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   630 MBytes  5.29 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   637 MBytes  5.35 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
[  5]  10.00-10.04  sec  19.9 MBytes  4.15 Gbits/sec    0    212 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.04  sec  6.22 GBytes  5.32 Gbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.04  sec  0.00 Bytes  0.00 bits/sec                  receiver

$ iperf3 -c 192.168.100.114 -w 300k -R
Connecting to host 192.168.100.114, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 192.168.100.114 is sending
[  4] local 192.168.100.113 port 41756 connected to 192.168.100.114 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec   631 MBytes  5.29 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec   630 MBytes  5.29 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec   638 MBytes  5.35 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec   641 MBytes  5.38 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec   640 MBytes  5.37 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec   643 MBytes  5.39 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec   641 MBytes  5.38 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec   639 MBytes  5.36 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec   631 MBytes  5.29 Gbits/sec                  
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec   636 MBytes  5.34 Gbits/sec                  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Retr
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  6.22 GBytes  5.34 Gbits/sec    0             sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  6.22 GBytes  5.34 Gbits/sec                  receiver

Can someone help to explain why? Thanks a lot.


Solution

  • For various reasons having to do with the ordering of messages on iperf3's control channel, the server cannot print summary statistics from the client side. This is a known issue (there are various issues in the iperf3 issue tracker around this problem such as #560 and #314). It's not particularly easy to fix because a solution to this problem would involve changing the ordering or semantics of iperf3's control messages which, unfortunately, aren't particularly well documented. We (ESnet) would be happy to entertain possible fixes.