From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com (mail-yb1-xb32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BEE23B2A4 for ; Sun, 4 Jun 2023 09:57:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-ba8cd61ee2dso7511143276.1 for ; Sun, 04 Jun 2023 06:57:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1685887047; x=1688479047; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OYynTu+PxpRAQzDnFBizkvvNfb1KdO825u0+XK4MHVg=; b=Ac3N0G9EPIWIWrLgG2RNxcDfu1vCKJM2fXwUqvdW+oTIwgt7f3cILDSrfxGGdrA1DV QA3tSJXpczt9dIS50wHvTY549iprIDDIWDo+Wdj2lkmDyRvwss/u2CCH+NhjHdPQb837 ABAxczThO84spz+ZfsIdEVz/6PzKpDDVANGk+q0uwfvbJAX1KRPerqKrISIJplEMW/lc f57u7TuPWKLnHDnpbyuTL6Q3SaNhQEMOegpqP77OwP/1dNruwZiLSG6+MWO2OZuVcs0h LFlWN1lPCnBIHCqTf05uP161w4l2UfTPJzwGLYKf6FAVpPO6BcjPDHuu6ZjgKr9kTN3O hVOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685887047; x=1688479047; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=OYynTu+PxpRAQzDnFBizkvvNfb1KdO825u0+XK4MHVg=; b=EVi31fbYKRwBm8IQOjE3iNeaQQAi/6qCYWZ57LihBNIU1WrTa0PBQ6FbUSsipEBbZE HYinJbrxvFXztwJqCfFaZcEEVddoIdMQCVL0hxGXssC4zCvPH6jsUAVVNpW5vpp8j3en gp9n0Hf2OUSp8TCfLXG9blPYcApWsNdaZD660NjMoA/TfZX+kStM7BIvYm7dLLkSIrYV SnYlpRmOfEW2+vK2g661BZ+1uVDjtHQg0Ce2PTFObb3H9okmPObdMgZOP13sGyqc85OK 5b7vtyVqarot10VBP0U3iJk+YmVaTM3CxStWEBcjr4ZEEGH/P+Btny4TJw3PYdKCCPAf CNgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzTLZ8RqoVm67Wx1vtTbtZXhMN3NrRKtr1WiMZPLUCAPCaDMsJy HvHVqIxnTVWTLrj3QcWHWRJrBJyOHhkIrA71bXXDA93N X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ52rAMhtJE58A4kof1181VThXhY8GNz7MynCYyansCFXw9F3aKWQv0Ju34DZw9UnxRLnDc5PCY8SZL2nb1dh8o= X-Received: by 2002:a0d:df95:0:b0:564:c747:64f4 with SMTP id i143-20020a0ddf95000000b00564c74764f4mr5848356ywe.11.1685887047433; Sun, 04 Jun 2023 06:57:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: John D Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2023 14:57:18 +0100 Message-ID: To: Nils Andreas Svee Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000098030b05fd4e2a18" Subject: Re: [Bloat] Dual WAN home router with decent SQM? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2023 13:57:28 -0000 --00000000000098030b05fd4e2a18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I might be missing the very obvious but I'm struggling to see which ER models support multiple WAN when I look on their own website. Unless ALL ports support WAN... if the ER-X can do this already then that was what I was looking at on the router side anyway. On Sun, Jun 4, 2023, 14:07 Nils Andreas Svee wrote: > Hi > > The EdgeRouter line does have load balancing as well as SQM (htb + > fq_codel), > so one of those should cover your needs. > > Of note, CAKE is not built-in to the firmware if you care about it, > but support can be compiled > > With your current bandwidth, I'd guess an EdgeRouter Lite would to weak, > but the EdgeRouter X or more powerful would do the job well. > > Keep in mind though, that as far as I can tell, the EdgeMax line is > basically on life support, > and only receives some security fixes once in a blue moon. > > Mikrotik's RouterOS devices supports load balancing / failover and SQM I > believe, > so there might be an option for you there, but as I've never used them > personally, > I can't comment beyond that. > > Best Regards > Nils > > On Sun, Jun 4, 2023, at 10:48, John D via Bloat wrote: > > I want to set up a new home router with SQM support to alleviate (mostly > upload) bloat. > > However I would also like dual ISP support, more for backup/failover > than load sharing. > > I can see affordable multi wan "load balancer" routers eg TP-link, and > affordable SQM routers such as ubiquity Edgerouter, but I'm struggling to > find a single device providing both. > > Just after any advice on a) am I better having two separate components > b) if so any suggestions which product/brand? > > Two devices means more configuration but possibly more flexible and > cheaper. > > > > My internet speed is looking to max out around 100/20mbps so I don't > need Gbit performance. Thanks for any help. > > _______________________________________________ > > Bloat mailing list > > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > --00000000000098030b05fd4e2a18 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I might be missing the very obvious but I'm stru= ggling to see which ER models support multiple WAN when I look on their own= website. Unless ALL ports support WAN... if the ER-X can do this already t= hen that was what I was looking at on the router side anyway.

On Sun, Jun 4, 2= 023, 14:07 Nils Andreas Svee <me@loch= nair.net> wrote:
Hi

The EdgeRouter line does have load balancing as well as SQM (htb + fq_codel= ),
so one of those should cover your needs.

Of note, CAKE is not built-in to the firmware if you care about it,
but support can be compiled

With your current bandwidth, I'd guess an EdgeRouter Lite would to weak= ,
but the EdgeRouter X or more powerful would do the job well.

Keep in mind though, that as far as I can tell, the EdgeMax line is basical= ly on life support,
and only receives some security fixes once in a blue moon.

Mikrotik's RouterOS devices supports load balancing / failover and SQM = I believe,
so there might be an option for you there, but as I've never used them = personally,
I can't comment beyond that.

Best Regards
Nils

On Sun, Jun 4, 2023, at 10:48, John D via Bloat wrote:
> I want to set up a new home router with SQM support to alleviate (most= ly upload) bloat.
> However I would also like dual ISP support, more for backup/failover t= han load sharing.
> I can see affordable multi wan "load balancer" routers eg TP= -link, and affordable SQM routers such as ubiquity Edgerouter, but I'm = struggling to find a single device providing both.
> Just after any advice on a) am I better having two separate components= b) if so any suggestions which product/brand?
> Two devices means more configuration but possibly more flexible and ch= eaper.
>
> My internet speed is looking to max out around 100/20mbps so I don'= ;t need Gbit performance. Thanks for any help.
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/b= loat
>
--00000000000098030b05fd4e2a18--