Re: [Cake] isp economics

[Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4040 bytes --]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:03 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:39 AM Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 28, 2018, at 7:32 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Exactly. Many members, including myself, are limited by our CPE links
>> during off hours, and by the backhaul during high traffic hours.
>>
>>
>> 3 items
>>
>> 1) Co-locating some essential services (like netflix) might be of help.
>>
>>
>> That’s a good idea, will bring that up with the admins.
>>
>> Netflix is here now, but many folks seem to use “O2 TV Air”, which is a
>> way to watch ordinary cable packages over any Internet connection (not just
>> from O2). SD streams are 3Mbit and HD 6Mbit. Weirdly, they don’t pace out
>> their data but there’s a characteristic “pulsing” of the streams every 5
>> seconds that when I see it on the router's throughput graph I know, yep,
>> that’s O2 TV. I’ll find out if their on-demand stuff has such a co-location
>> option.
>>
>> https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/
>>
>> 2) If the members voted for more backhaul, the costs are understandable…
>>
>>
>> Backhaul upgrades are coming into focus gradually, and upgrading those
>> ALIX boxes which are tanks but...tanks.
>>
>
> apu2s are thus far being tanks for me. wndr3800s with multi-year cerowrt
> uptimes now exist, too.
>
>
>>
>> I think some of the higher costs come from physical installations /
>> placement rights. Surprising what towers can cost.
>>
>> 3) Philosophically I vastly prefer the concept of "everyone sharing
>> the network", rather than rate plans, to create some market tension as
>> to the available bandwidth at any given time of day.
>>
>>
>> Agree wholeheartedly. Rate limiting members isn’t necessary for a
>> non-profit (no profit motive) and especially if we can get fairness right,
>> there’s no technical reason to do it that I know of either.
>>
>>
> It would be a better world if more isps served their users and didn't buy
> film studios.
>
>
>> ubnt did add at least airtime fairness to airos a year or two back. It
>> was not on by default. Their "TDMA" qos system was this insane mess of
>> sfq rules when I tore it apart.... 8 years back.
>>
>>
>> I don’t know what they’re doing in their newer AC stuff, but I'm
>> surprised by what appears to be ~6-8ms latency
>>
>
> Something fq_codel-like is now in qualcomms proprietary firmware I'm told.
> No ecn
>

Which qca chipset ? Which version of the firmware ?



>
>
>> under load on the NanoStation 5 AC Loco’s I got for the camp’s backhaul.
>> Is it really that good? This is in contrast to the 50+ms I see with rrul_be
>> on the NanoStation M5 (without controlling the queue).
>>
>
> ubnt both cases? doubt it's the same bandwidth both cases. should be
> proportional to the latency you are seeing. running 2x2 incurs a latency
> penalty also.
>
>
>> This test is straight AP to AP though, with probably 1 flow up and 1 down
>> plus ping, so I want to get 2-4 more of these and do rrul_be through the
>> Ethernet ports, to get more flows and UDP, and see how it looks then.
>>
>
> Run more flows. SFQ is per packet fq. They have right-sized buffers when
> the link is running at close to the configured rate, not when it's
> stuggling.
>
> I also seem to remember they reduced the txop to ~2ms. turned off 802.11e.
> I've recommended this for years now in the general case.
>
> Their 100mbit ethernet devices also do flow control and are more often the
> bottleneck than not, so the wifi runs empty more often.
>
> I LIKE their gear. Despite all we've done here there are still things they
> do better.
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Dave Täht
> CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> http://www.teklibre.com
> Tel: 1-669-226-2619
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7135 bytes --]