Re: [Bloat] Getting started with sqm-scripts - latency good, bandwidth decimated

[Brandon Applegate <brandon@burn.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2130 bytes --]


> On Jan 20, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Alan Jenkins <alan.christopher.jenkins@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> No offense to your work on sqm-scripts.
> 
> 
> 1) It's just in case the problem is *outside* of sqm-scripts, it could be useful to try the minimum commands necessary to demonstrate the problem.  Maybe it's unfair but I assumed running on a PC is also a less tested case, as well as the "firewall on a stick" part.
> 
> Equally, since AFAICT Brandon hasn't had a working AQM setup on this box before.  It could be useful if the Gentoo script works, to prove that AQM + fq_codel can work correctly on Brandon's box.
> 
> If the Gentoo script _wasn't_ working, that's when I'd suggest tearing it down e.g. to eliminate fq_codel as an issue.  Rather than specify fifo explicitly, just don't run the fq_codel command (assuming that actually does something sensible, which can be checked using `tc qdisc`).
> 
> 
> 2) More specifically, you didn't mention trying "simplest.qos". This would i) simplify the setup we're trying to debug, and ii) it might show if there's a bug with the more complex bandwidth calculations / assignments in "simple.qos".
> 
> 
> And again - I suggest starting by checking `tc class show dev eth0.666`, because it's not a 100% obvious command, and we don't want to miss if there are bad rates there :).
> 
> 
> Alan

Wow, thanks for all the ideas and feedback.  I did indeed find the Gentoo wiki script and gave it a shot - basically the same behavior as sqm-scripts.

I’m really thinking my on-a-stick topology is tying things in knots as my traffic is on the same interface twice in inverse directions.  I have another NIC in the box used for some back end NFS stuff - I can steal him temporarily to rejigger my interfaces.  My goal is to get eth0.666 to just be eth0 (public wan, no dot1q).  I’ll post my results from this - and barring any great success there - will loop back to this thread and try what folks have mentioned.

We are snowed in today so the kids are home from school - I’m sure I’ll get plenty of feedback from them - ‘dad the internet is down’.  :)

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 842 bytes --]