Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bandwidth limited to below 10Mbps #33

Open
aabdellah opened this issue Jan 9, 2024 · 10 comments
Open

Bandwidth limited to below 10Mbps #33

aabdellah opened this issue Jan 9, 2024 · 10 comments

Comments

@aabdellah
Copy link

Hello

I have managed successfully to use the extension, but my connection is now always below 10Mbps. Server running latest Debian is 100mbps and client running Arch Linux ARM is 70mbps on v0.4.2.

Below is an iperf3 log from testing:

$ iperf3 -c 10.0.0.30 -n 20M
Connecting to host 10.0.0.30, port 5201
[  5] local 10.0.0.1 port 39378 connected to 10.0.0.30 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  2.88 MBytes  24.1 Mbits/sec  585    102 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  1.97 MBytes  16.5 Mbits/sec  303    112 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec   43   73.5 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   80.2 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   89.5 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  1.72 MBytes  14.4 Mbits/sec   24   46.8 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  0.00 Bytes  0.00 bits/sec    0   41.4 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   50.8 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   60.1 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   69.5 KBytes       
[  5]  10.00-11.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec   23   54.8 KBytes       
[  5]  11.00-12.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec   22   48.1 KBytes       
[  5]  12.00-13.00  sec  0.00 Bytes  0.00 bits/sec    0   56.1 KBytes       
[  5]  13.00-14.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   65.5 KBytes       
[  5]  14.00-15.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   74.8 KBytes       
[  5]  15.00-16.00  sec  1.72 MBytes  14.4 Mbits/sec    0   85.5 KBytes       
[  5]  16.00-17.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   94.9 KBytes       
[  5]  17.00-18.00  sec   942 KBytes  7.71 Mbits/sec   56   52.1 KBytes       
[  5]  18.00-19.00  sec   879 KBytes  7.20 Mbits/sec    0   58.8 KBytes       
[  5]  19.00-19.85  sec   516 KBytes  4.94 Mbits/sec    0   66.8 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-19.85  sec  20.0 MBytes  8.45 Mbits/sec  1056             sender
[  5]   0.00-19.93  sec  17.9 MBytes  7.52 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

What would be the cause of having such performance loss? I don't think the overhead should be this much.

Thanks for the great extension that helps with Internet censorship.

@infinet
Copy link
Owner

infinet commented Jan 10, 2024

What is the speed without extension?

@aabdellah
Copy link
Author

aabdellah commented Jan 10, 2024

I can't manage to get unobfuscated wireguard through the handshake, but when I was using a fork called notwireguard, I used to get the full speed.

@infinet
Copy link
Owner

infinet commented Jan 11, 2024

I cannot reproduce this problem. Perhaps your ISP is throttling UDP now? Also, have you tried version 0.5?

@aabdellah
Copy link
Author

I didn't try 0.5 because it was not available on aur, I give it a try and update.
As for UDP, I don't think so as notwireguard is using UDP and provides the same speed with minimal overhead.

@aabdellah
Copy link
Author

Same performance on v0.5.0
Does the extension encrypt all of the traffic or just the handshake?

@infinet
Copy link
Owner

infinet commented Jan 12, 2024

It obfuscates all traffic. How about CPU usage?

@aabdellah
Copy link
Author

CPU is under 20% while doing the speed test.
Is it possible to limit the extension to only obfuscate handshake bytes?

@infinet
Copy link
Owner

infinet commented Jan 13, 2024

It is not possible to only obfuscate the handshake unless make big changes. Besides, what if other parts of WG traffic also affected?

@aabdellah
Copy link
Author

The DPI firewalls I deal with only detect the handshake. I will try with other server and see if it improves, thanks for your support.

@infinet
Copy link
Owner

infinet commented Mar 30, 2024

I tested it on a ARM single board computer but still cannot reproduce the problem. If possible you can try the latest branch. Also, it might help by setting the wireguard MTU to a lower value.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants