[Cerowrt-devel] DSL devices?

[Cerowrt-devel] DSL devices?

[Dave Taht]

There are a LOT of dsl capable devices in openwrt barrier breaker. I
am curious if anyone has tried one of late? I just got back from
"farmstock", and as effective as software rate limiting can be, I
imagine that when someone is stuck at a line rate of 1Mbit down and
384k up that doing it in hardware is superior...

This was a classic bufferbloated plot on the existing 384k uplink there:

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock_upload_showing_1700ms_latency.png

Downloads were not so bad, "only" 1sec of buffering...

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock-short-download.png

there appears to be some level of ack prioritization or fair queuing
in play here, an internet radio flow would survive the onslought of
netperf-wrapper for 10s of minutes... and generally full download rate
was achieved at a huge cost in the upload.

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock-bidirectional.png

you can imagine under the influence of two dozen millenials with 1 or
more phones/tablets each, the network performed rather badly during
the show.

Anyway, so I figure that there are a selection of DSL capable openwrt
platforms now someone can fiddle with....

PS wow was there a lot of traffic on the list while I was away. I am way behind.

-- 
Dave Täht

NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DSL devices?

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave,

hope you had a great time...



On Jul 28, 2014, at 20:59 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are a LOT of dsl capable devices in openwrt barrier breaker. I
> am curious if anyone has tried one of late? I just got back from
> "farmstock", and as effective as software rate limiting can be, I
> imagine that when someone is stuck at a line rate of 1Mbit down and
> 384k up that doing it in hardware is superior…

	For the uplink, sure the router/modem should avoid the software cost of shaping (not that that should be costly @384k...)

> 
> This was a classic bufferbloated plot on the existing 384k uplink there:
> 
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock_upload_showing_1700ms_latency.png
> 
> Downloads were not so bad, "only" 1sec of buffering...
> 
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock-short-download.png
> 
> there appears to be some level of ack prioritization or fair queuing
> in play here, an internet radio flow would survive the onslought of
> netperf-wrapper for 10s of minutes... and generally full download rate
> was achieved at a huge cost in the upload.

	But this means that the downlink needs the shaper badly (unless the ISP can be convinced to allow making setting to the prioritization settings in the DSLAM/BRAS)


> 
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/farmstock/farmstock-bidirectional.png
> 
> you can imagine under the influence of two dozen millenials with 1 or
> more phones/tablets each, the network performed rather badly during
> the show.
> 
> Anyway, so I figure that there are a selection of DSL capable openwrt
> platforms now someone can fiddle with….

	I think it is only TI and lantiq (= ex-infineon = siemens) del modems have open source drivers, all devices with broadcom DSL modems in the hardware database will not allow use of the modem even if listed as supported.


Best Regards
	Sebastian


> 
> PS wow was there a lot of traffic on the list while I was away. I am way behind.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel