docs: recommend Linux routing peers for file-share workloads#833
Conversation
Add performance guidance to the Active Directory use case (Step 1 placement choice) and a performance trade-off note to Reach Services on the Routing Peer: Windows/macOS peers process the data path in userspace, and self-access delivery is slowest for reads, so a dedicated Linux routing peer is the fast default for SMB/DFS.
Linux kernel-mode service hosts deliver to their own LAN IP at full speed; the read-direction penalty is specific to Windows/macOS userspace hosts.
The directional asymmetry is a suspected client defect under engineering escalation, not durable documented behavior. Keep only the kernel-vs-userspace guidance.
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughDocumentation updates clarify that routing peers should preferably be dedicated Linux machines for full-speed performance, with Windows/macOS routing peers running in userspace and reducing throughput. Updates span the Active Directory guide and the reach-services-on-the-routing-peer guide, adding a new performance note. ChangesRouting peer documentation updates
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool's configuration or disable the tool if it's a critical failure. 🔧 ESLint
src/pages/manage/networks/use-cases/active-directory.mdxOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 9.39.4 TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON src/pages/manage/networks/use-cases/reach-services-on-the-routing-peer.mdxOops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 9.39.4 TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
- AD page: performance point stated once (Step 1 note, linking how-routing-peers-work for the mechanism); bullets and recap trimmed; Step 1 bullet now carries the Windows qualifier - reach-services: note compressed to consequence + links, moved below The scenario where LAN IP and the shape are defined
What
Adds routing-peer placement and platform guidance to two pages:
Active Directory & Windows File Shares (
active-directory.mdx)Reach Services on the Routing Peer (
reach-services-on-the-routing-peer.mdx)Why
A recurring evaluation/support pattern: remote users report documents from SMB/DFS shares opening much slower over NetBird than in the office. The dominant factor is routing-peer placement and platform, which these pages previously presented as a neutral choice. Verified in a lab reproduction of the agent-on-Windows-file-server topology; moving the agent to a small Linux routing peer in front of the server restored expected performance.
Summary by CodeRabbit