<html><head></head><body>Yes, exactly. There are lots of packages exchanged between tinc processes on port 655, accounting to 99 % of the Ethernet traffic, while the virtual interface stays almost idle.<br><br>Best,<br>Maximilian<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Am 20. März 2020 21:09:18 MEZ schrieb Lars Kruse <lists@sumpfralle.de>:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">Hello Maximilian,<br><br>Am Fri, 20 Mar 2020 19:43:35 +0100<br>schrieb Maximilian Stein <m@steiny.biz>:<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">My current mitigation is to stop some tinc peers for ten seconds and to<br>start them again afterwards, that usually causes the excessive traffic<br>to stop without interrupting service too much.<br></blockquote><br>I am guessing now: the rise of traffic on the ethernet link is caused by<br>packets being exchanged between the tinc processes (e.g. port 655)?<br>I think, you did not mention this explicitly, but the effect of a tinc restart<br>points in this direction. This information is quite relevant for the further<br>discussion, I guess.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Lars<hr>tinc mailing list<br>tinc@tinc-vpn.org<br><a href="https://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc">https://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc</a><br></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>