From: "Steven Levine" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (HELO mail.2rosenthals.com) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.10) with ESMTPS id 2020948 for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:45:31 -0400 Received: from secmgr-va.2rosenthals.com ([50.73.8.217]:44450 helo=mail2.2rosenthals.com) by mail.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from ) id 1ltfDk-0005sE-2t for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:45:21 -0400 Received: from mta-102a.oxsus-vadesecure.net ([51.81.61.66]:50721 helo=oxsus1nmtao02p.internal.vadesecure.com) by mail2.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from ) id 1ltfDZ-0003Hr-24 for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:45:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; bh=yNx9Mve7Wyu2txKV3ZMFV6AMmvrGTfHmSTt/lm J8AoU=; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earthlink.net; h=from:reply-to:subject: date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-cc:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post: list-owner:list-archive; q=dns/txt; s=dk12062016; t=1623887108; x=1624491908; b=C9p2DJ4TbH8ZQGDMrlMn8bkYnXfGu80zq2HSLQgJ0q/njvbb5Q866ff FiCy4Li22QkIJ3LfDDjNRUr0+AoS97XHE98G0cpKF1eC0o7aESdkoRYgJlM5DhEfR9oxbzy GKL0e2QrolUI37xi0quFjJcD14XvrALtoHUkdMMjQoH/YMh+7ZXKw5FtemN36ppCCnpKX6i Jowgh5DcJ7z84nM6fMpaz3GZulC+VZgsvoJk9RcNK8bF4GUoIYUGzWSUcK3sH2EPZyalSAJ RUWGj4ak5+l1ZzDZqnuH/8hf6KtY27zTbOhV8yO255vDm4ND9QW29k4hIKNkPbXDsPrvvuo nNQ== Received: from slamain ([108.193.252.237]) by oxsus1nmtao02p.internal.vadesecure.com with ngmta id b7739292-168934b8a509bb81; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 23:45:08 +0000 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:47:09 -0700 To: "eCS ISP Mailing List" In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [eCS-ISP] Injoy FW 4.2.2 and download datarates (connection speed) the eternal mistery :) X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v3.00.11.21 BETA/60 Message-ID: In , on 06/16/21 at 11:46 PM, "Massimo S." said: Hi Massimo, >"busy surviving" is not a justification No, it's not. It is a reason. Roderick in not trying to justify anything. Let's just say Roderick's written English loses something in the translation. >i've installed at a client's place IJ fw on a 3Ghz core I7 with 4GB of >ram, with SSD storage and i still have performances issues This makes sense to me. Nothing you have done will completely address the perforance issues. >so i don't believe the stuff of ring0 and ring3 You can choose to believe what you want. It's a free country. With your extensive developement skill and techincal knowledge of driver internals, I'm sure you know exactly where the problems are. I'm waiting for you to explain to us how to solve then. >since if you play with the "intermediary parameters" of packet assembling >you get speed improvements You said it yourself. You get improvement. However, you have yet to find a set of intermediary parameters that provide you the performance you desire. This should tell you something. >i believe the problem is that the product *do not have updated >documentation* with correct settings for the different kind of >connections This assumes that your so-called correct settings exist. What do you think is going on here. There are a few folks on this list that are still using ijfw. Do you think they know the correct settings and are simply unwilling to share them with you? >the documentation are still very old PDFs (some it's even hard to open >nowadays) from FX firm, they have been never updated by the new software >house Think about why this may be. Perhaps nothing has changed in the ijfw internals that warrants updating the manuals. >when you modify a rule or a parameter that need firewall restart the >firewall become unresponsive so that you have to call by phone the >customer and power off the server, it's allmost about one year that i >wait for such fix I have no idea what you are doing wrong. I routinely modify rules while accessing the server over a secure VNC connection and have never had that happen to me If you mess up a rule because you did not test it before updating the production system, well what can I say? >did they tested the software on a modern connection? This kind of stupid comment is sure to get you an immediate response from the vendor. You seem to have a poor grasp of history. FX.DK stopped development of the ijfw approximately 2008. For all practical purposes the product was dead Bitwise purchased the rights to the software probably about 2011 hoping that they could generate sufficient sales to resurrect the product. 4.2 was release sometime around 2014. It is now 2021. The performance of the product was just fine for circa 2005 networks. Times change. BTW, what version of fxwrap.sys are you running? Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" Warp/DIY/BlueLion etc. www.scoug.com www.arcanoae.com www.warpcave.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------