[Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Richard Fröhning]

And if so, which queue discipline would work best with it?

Background: I am forced to use my cell phone as uplink and after I
reach the monthly limit, bandwidth will be reduces to given up/downlink
speeds.

I know Surfing websites with those speeds will take forever - however
it should be enough to send/receive emails and/or use a messenger.

Richard

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Jonathan Morton]

> On 4 May, 2020, at 3:26 pm, Richard Fröhning <misanthropos@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> And if so, which queue discipline would work best with it?
> 
> Background: I am forced to use my cell phone as uplink and after I
> reach the monthly limit, bandwidth will be reduces to given up/downlink
> speeds.
> 
> I know Surfing websites with those speeds will take forever - however
> it should be enough to send/receive emails and/or use a messenger.

You should be able to do this with Cake.  Unlike most other qdiscs, it will automatically adjust several parameters to work nicely with low-speed links, because with the built-in shaper it has knowledge of the speed.  I don't think I've tested it as low as 16Kbit, but I have used it at 64Kbit.

To keep things simple, you may want to specify "besteffort flows satellite" as parameters.  Some of those settings may also be available in a GUI.

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Sebastian Moeller]

At 16Kbps a full-MTU sized packet will take around
(1000 ms/sec * (1500 * 8) bits/packet ) / 16000 bits/sec = 750 ms

This is just to put things into perspective, 16Kbps is going to be both painful and much better than no service at all....




> On May 4, 2020, at 14:26, Richard Fröhning <misanthropos@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> And if so, which queue discipline would work best with it?
> 
> Background: I am forced to use my cell phone as uplink and after I
> reach the monthly limit, bandwidth will be reduces to given up/downlink
> speeds.
> 
> I know Surfing websites with those speeds will take forever - however
> it should be enough to send/receive emails and/or use a messenger.
> 
> Richard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Jonathan Morton]

> On 4 May, 2020, at 5:09 pm, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> At 16Kbps a full-MTU sized packet will take around
> (1000 ms/sec * (1500 * 8) bits/packet ) / 16000 bits/sec = 750 ms
> 
> This is just to put things into perspective, 16Kbps is going to be both painful and much better than no service at all....

Reducing the MTU to 576 bytes is likely to help.  That was commonly done in the days of analogue modems, when such low speeds were normal.

I'm fortunate enough to live somewhere where the local ISPs don't limit your data transfer, even on the budget subscriptions.  Roughly €25 will buy you 500Kbps mobile service for three months, and you can use that 500Kbps as much as you like.  And that is with the lowest population density in Europe, so the per capita cost of covering the country in cell towers is obviously no excuse.

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Richard Fröhning]

Thanks for your insights.

I will set MTU and cake options accordingly.

I have a VPN provider which support lzo-compression. If I were to use
VPN through the 16Kbps it could squeeze out some bytes.

I guess in that case I shape the tunX interface, right?

Would the MTU setting be on the usb0 device and/or the tunX?


Richard

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Jonathan Morton]

> On 4 May, 2020, at 6:47 pm, Richard Fröhning <misanthropos@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> I have a VPN provider which support lzo-compression. If I were to use
> VPN through the 16Kbps it could squeeze out some bytes.
> 
> I guess in that case I shape the tunX interface, right?
> 
> Would the MTU setting be on the usb0 device and/or the tunX?

You should set the qdisc and those options on the *physical* device, not the one that carries your uncompressed data.  Don't forget to set up ingress shaping as well as egress.

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Bloat] Does it makes sense to shape traffic with 16Kbit/s up and 16Kbit/s down?

[Richard Fröhning]

On Mon, 4 May 2020 18:51:59 +0300
Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:

> You should set the qdisc and those options on the *physical* device,
> not the one that carries your uncompressed data.  Don't forget to set
> up ingress shaping as well as egress.
>
Not sure what you are trying to say here.
The physical interface is usb0 and it carries uncompressed data - the
tun0 interface however is compressing the data.
Another point would be to the shaper all traffic looks the same if I
use OpenVPN and shape the physical interface. So I should shape the
tun0 interface and let all traffic go through it.

I can set max mtu in OpenVPN too. So correct me if I am wrong, but I
think I should shape the tun0 interface.

Richard