0

I'm seeking for some advices on how to improve connection speed while using SMB shares over VPN. I have two Win10 PCs with following setup. PC1 - 500Mb/s DL and 350 MB/s UL per SpeedTest PC2 - 100Mb/s DL and 30 MB/s UL per SpeedTest Both PCs are quite powerful an definitely not CPU constrained.

PC1 hosts SoftEther server and VPN bridged to it's local network. PC2 connects to PC1 via SoftEther client. Upon VPN connection PC2 has following speed checks - 40Mb/s DL and 1 Mb/s UL per speedtest. Location is determined to be the same as location of PC1.

But sharing any files over windows shares barely can reach 200Kb/s speed. My main use case was to combine both PCs into VPN network for resources access.

PS: I've tried hosting FTP server on PC1, but for some reason FileZilla was cutting done every connection speed to ~100kb/s with limit of total around 300-400 kb/s.

Does anyone know what can be done in order to improve connection speeds?

Johnny_D
  • 143
  • 1
  • 1
  • 9
  • Have you read https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/performance-tuning/role/file-server/smb-file-server ? – Robert May 29 '22 at 11:25
  • Have you read https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/performance-tuning/role/file-server/smb-file-server – Robert May 29 '22 at 11:26
  • I have no experience with SoftEther, but normally VPNs need to be tuned to get the best throughput possible; a 60% reduction in download throughput and a 97% reduction in upload throughput implies something is misconfigured, SoftEther is subpar for this use case, or the ISP upload pool for the area PC2 resides in is overly saturated resulting in low throughput _(if disconnecting from the VPN results in ~30mbit/s upload throughput, this is not the issue)_. Generally speaking, the #1 and #2 VPNs for throughput are WireGuard and OpenVPN - no other VPN has ever come close to either's throughput. – JW0914 May 29 '22 at 12:14
  • _(Cont'd...)_ SoftEther is a Layer 3 [SSL](https://www.softether.org/4-docs/1-manual/2._SoftEther_VPN_Essential_Architecture/2.1_VPN_Communication_Protocol) VPN, so it should be able to mirror or get close to OpenVPN's throughput; If not having done so, the SoftEther [man pages](https://www.softether.org/4-docs/1-manual) would be a good place to start until someone with experience with it comments/answers. – JW0914 May 29 '22 at 12:21
  • @Robert did some testing, unfortunately now significant difference. – Johnny_D Jun 01 '22 at 00:48
  • @JW0914 I've tested SoftEther, but also I've tested my router's OpenVPN option. Unfortunately both end up with the same problem. Connection speed slows down to hundreds of kilobytes. Would you please share what should I be looking in terms of investigating what could be misconfigured in my connection? – Johnny_D Jun 01 '22 at 00:48
  • @Johnny_D Please post the server and client configs for each – JW0914 Jun 01 '22 at 01:36
  • @JW0914 I'd be happy to, but not sure what part is needed. I was using UI tools and can make screenshots of them. – Johnny_D Jun 01 '22 at 15:46
  • @Johnny_D Client configs should be text files _(e.g. OpenVPN's is a `.ovpn` text file)_ and the server will also use a text file, albeit you'll need to review SoftEther's man page to determine it's location _(if this was on a router without SSH access, a text file wouldn't be accessible and a screenshot would work, but on a PC, a configuration file will be accessible)_. My hunch is too high of an encryption that's unneeded _(AES128 will remain impossible to crack well beyond 2030)_, unless AES256-GCM is being used, since a PC's CPU should be to process it at ~1GB/s _(if not higher)_. – JW0914 Jun 01 '22 at 18:47
  • Oh, I'm using default OpenVPN embedded into router TP-Link C1200. It doesn't provide any options apart from network mask and is configured via certificates. While I was using SoftEther I tried different encryption protocols from AES-128 to RC4, but didn't witness any difference. – Johnny_D Jun 03 '22 at 03:57

0 Answers0