From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from complete.lackof.org (complete.lackof.org [198.49.126.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A0343BA8D for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 17:34:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from taggart.lackof.org (c-24-22-132-166.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [24.22.132.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "taggart.lackof.org", Issuer "CAcert Class 3 Root" (verified OK)) by complete.lackof.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A7F91E12012 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:34:53 -0700 (MST) Received: by taggart.lackof.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A46E1225; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:34:52 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 (debian 1:2.8.0-4) with nmh-1.6 From: Matt Taggart To: cerowrt-devel In-reply-to: References: <20161214005800.08268202@taggart.lackof.org> <374ac0b8-aee0-74bb-d6e9-7eacb43a12d2@taht.net> Comments: In-reply-to Aaron Wood message dated "Tue, 13 Dec 2016 21:26:33 -0800." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:34:52 -0800 Message-Id: <20161220223452.A46E1225@taggart.lackof.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on complete.lackof.org Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] WNDR3800 improvements? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 22:34:55 -0000 Aaron Wood writes: > I thought it did better than that with Cake? Yes, I was referring to newer cake, possible BQL improvements, possible ath9k improvements, newer kernel, the stuff listed at https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast/wiki/Wifi_Stack_Rework/ etc I've also seen discussion of "policing" rather than full SQM, etc. Basically, what is the state of the art we should be running on the 3800? > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Dave T=C3=A4ht wrote: > > > > > > > On 12/13/16 4:58 PM, Matt Taggart wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I love the WNDR3800 platform, it's been great over the years first with > > > cerowrt and then openwrt. Of the many I've deployed I have only had > > > hardware problems with 2 of them, and usually uptimes go over 100 days. > > You > > > can also still buy them used for $20 w/free shipping on amazon! > > > > > > With the recent improvement for cake, make-wifi-fast, driver > > improvements, > > > etc is there any chance in seeing some of these things land for the > > > WNDR3800 specifically? It would be really nice if this hardware could > > > continue to do SQM, etc for some of the faster broadband speeds the cab= > le > > > providers are offering (comcast xfinity has 100, 200, 250 plans now) an= > d > > > see some of the wifi improvements too. > > > > We already support the 3800, although it peaks at 60 mbits of inbound > > rate shaping. If your primary use case is wifi, with the latest fq_codel > > code, you can live without inbound shaping and probably get 150mbits > > well managed. Thanks, -- Matt Taggart matt@lackof.org