From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 990DD3B29E for ; Fri, 5 May 2017 09:20:28 -0400 (EDT) From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1493990426; bh=EaHsQhj09LsPyrupFpKYivw1BvboM0+NMLT1MW3vQiM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=SfKcAYwnLzb2nzTlDv2uCkthnuJBMJdKTdhouSxYqLRF9e74kzY2jtChaTEyQ4jPl DZlwCAdp2i3ave9b34MaNWso2zM7J19qXr3HaeGfyGvFjp8rODToYU2fQeYvLJlDXk wwFWKHW5yvPb+Nfpc1rhfKlFHKBSNrekKvMOa50zjDhSxukwNFY1y6axcZCmfAND4I i6aLn/E1o/+YiEYiZc+TbyGp8XtXetbJnRnyPz7MmxJnRLXInU9cZVL4GAk09vRCOR 9mFhHSYMp4IwEEICvkbgjBpHziS2hV/NnaSEcID0vzkbtPSE/n+HYwENlYrsBH/wW2 xNw67AX334CGg== To: Cc: References: <1493989225450.12354@telenor.com> Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 15:20:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1493989225450.12354@telenor.com> (erik taraldsen's message of "Fri, 5 May 2017 13:00:26 +0000") X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <8760hfl9t2.fsf@alrua-kau> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Cake] ER-X now running cake, thanks for the help. :) X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 13:20:28 -0000 writes: > Just a follow-up from the great support I got here. I am now running ER-X with cake with the precompiled binaries from Nils. I need to do some tuning and get it properly into the lab. Currently I'm dogfooding it at home. > > Any other suggestions in order to make the topping of the cake so to speek? I notice for example that all interfaces pr default use pfifo_fast and run a txqueuelen of 1000. Which is a bit deep for running a 20/1 adsl line. > > And a slight rant on the default fq_codel setup for ER-X, 10240 > packets? Before reducing that I got a one way delay of more than > 600ms when I congested the line with udp. Sane defaults You're not likely to hit the packet limit for fq-codel, since the AQM will make TCP flows back off before it gets that far. The exception is an unresponsive UDP flow, of course, but that is only going to hurt itself. Main problem with the 10240 limit on small boxes is the memory; an explicit memory limit was introduces in later versions to deal with this. Guess that wasn't backported to the edgerouter, though... -Toke