First time here? Check out the FAQ!
THIS IS A TEST INSTANCE. Feel free to ask and answer questions, but take care to avoid triggering too many notifications.
Ask Your Question
0

Outlook performance

  • retag add tags

Hello: i have been troubleshooting issue with outlook slow latency with exchange server and noticed that load balancer is missing SACK option. attached are two traces - one from client and another from load balacner.

192.168.0.1 is client and 10.10.10.1 is lb.

any thoughts besides SACK missing from tcp handshake which constitute to slow outlook performance

-thanks

here is the links to traces

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sPg... -loadbalacner

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GpC... - client

quest4answer's avatar
11
quest4answer
asked 2019-12-09 16:47:21 +0000, updated 2019-12-09 17:06:17 +0000
edit flag offensive 0 remove flag close merge delete

Comments

Can you talk a little about the network topology?
In the client capture, the server is known by two different MAC addresses:

No. Source  Source  Destination Destination Info
1   192.168.0.1 f2:76:10:3d:cb:a3   10.10.10.1  f2:06:d9:43:0b:ce   53376 → 443 [SYN] Seq=0 Win=64240 Len=0 MSS=1460 WS=256 SACK_PERM=1
2   10.10.10.1  f2:cb:5f:89:23:87   192.168.0.1 f2:76:10:3d:cb:a3   443 → 53376 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=29200 Len=0 MSS=1460 WS=128

In the load balancer capture, the client comes is known by 5 difference MAC addresses.
Is that normal for this environment?

Chuckc's avatar Chuckc (2019-12-09 22:29:56 +0000) edit
more
  • delete

i used Anonymizer so it might have changed the mac address

quest4answer's avatar quest4answer (2019-12-12 17:46:06 +0000) edit
more
  • delete
add a comment see more comments

1 Answer

1

Delayed ACK is adding another ~50ms delay per lost packet as each lost packet is retransmitted individually and therefor the ACK to each retransmission is sent a the DelayedACK timout (as there is not a second packet and the client does not have data to send).

So each lost packet takes ~168ms (iRTT) + ~50ms (DelayedAckTimeout) = ~218ms to be retransmitted. Multiplying by the about of packets lost (which seems to be happening in bursts) which is quite high.

If your loadbalancer supports it, you can enable SACK on the client-side and keep it disabled on the server side if your servers do not support it.

SYN-bit's avatar
18.5k
SYN-bit
answered 2019-12-09 18:32:15 +0000
edit flag offensive 0 remove flag delete link
more

Comments

That's a nice tcp graph. I agree, enabling SACK would be a huge improvement.

Christian_R's avatar Christian_R (2019-12-11 20:31:20 +0000) edit
more
  • delete

Okay .. sounds i am in right direction. i will enable sack at my next change window. thanks everyone

quest4answer's avatar quest4answer (2019-12-12 17:46:54 +0000) edit
more
  • delete
add a comment see more comments

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account. This space is reserved only for answers. If you would like to engage in a discussion, please instead post a comment under the question or an answer that you would like to discuss.

Add Answer