From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FEF621F0E7 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 13:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933812110A; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 16:14:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 27 Dec 2013 16:14:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=imap.cc; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=hwrfPFiUzTd4RZSHUOR+ysWp 2e0=; b=gC5sCvxw8ycO7IaJNc1tHNv/n/Ua6oUeQDNMqcFZopE5OGImrhtCaEaq blCbhBhywfI+5BLIMW8HHJvbamfCzI4uHfwFwlwiHp4NVsWyKEAG5wCQyWL5EoxL n2ZRUFKZN+seH3IkKY5I2jjbpMWUOepsB6duZvG/E6b13HurceY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; s=smtpout; bh=hwrf PFiUzTd4RZSHUOR+ysWp2e0=; b=HFY7W+OSdoodKx6CArHQROT7LUzgBQcnFpnA DH90DLMitI4gxYk21u5/oi5BQ3fDOfHGCealGPuSF5ivYV2UzsqtGDlYAQGYnMCQ 8a58tQqCQw8aX0Ww6nJpDyEb8tO1LvjFDnblVRiRVSkCmdQUdAvE7GO/rVl8+VMr XoYtQpc= X-Sasl-enc: f23YF/tQ88RxgbwvlRHrJGzdwpZmL1JA7Z8ouBC5b/O/ 1388178895 Received: from [172.30.42.8] (unknown [2.99.243.63]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C15C46800F7; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 16:14:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <52BDEDCD.3080008@imap.cc> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 21:14:53 +0000 From: Fred Stratton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rich Brown , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <571C0EE5-DC15-4A9C-A195-A97F93A335EB@gmail.com> <12CCC35C-74F4-4F62-AF86-84AFD49A8093@gmail.com> <52BDED6D.2050203@imap.cc> In-Reply-To: <52BDED6D.2050203@imap.cc> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050504000404050306070803" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated?/Not anymore... X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 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: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 21:15:00 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050504000404050306070803 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 'Enable', not 'Enabled' checkbox. On 27/12/13 21:13, Fred Stratton wrote: > The 'Enabled' checkbox is disabled by default. > > I would have no problem with it being enabled by default, but would > like it retained. > > I use a TP-Link device to bridge to the phone line. In the next year, > a build of OpenWRT will appear which I can apply to this, with all the > ceroWRT changes incorporated in it hopefully. > > I envisage testing the operation of that device as a full gateway, and > using the ceroWRT device as an access point in the testing period, > with sqm partly or wholly disabled on it. > > > On 27/12/13 20:59, Rich Brown wrote: >>> >>> Probably didn't start sqm properly >>> >>> Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart >>> >>> tc -s qdisc show dev ge00 >>> >>> Should show htb and fq codel. >>> >> Uh oh. PEBCAK (Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard :-) >> >> I see the problem... There's this little checkbox in the "Basic >> Settings" of the GUI... It's labeled "Enable" and hidden in plain >> sight above all the interesting stuff in that tab. If it isn't >> checked, the router is just as bloated as every other home router. >> >> However, if you *do* check it, everything works as desired. Whew! >> >> A few thoughts which might keep this from ever happening again: >> >> - Was it disabled by default? (I don't remember unchecking it...) >> - Is there even a reason to have the "Enable" checkbox? Would there >> ever be a circumstance where a person wouldn't want SQM? >> - Could the "Enable" checkbox be replaced by another "Not Enabled" >> entry in the "Interface name" dropdown? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Rich >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --------------050504000404050306070803 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 'Enable', not 'Enabled' checkbox.


On 27/12/13 21:13, Fred Stratton wrote:
The 'Enabled' checkbox is disabled by default.

I would have no problem with it being enabled by default, but would like it retained.

I use a TP-Link device to bridge to the phone line. In the next year, a build of OpenWRT will appear which I can apply to this, with all the ceroWRT changes incorporated in it hopefully.

I envisage testing the operation of that device as a full gateway, and using the ceroWRT device as an access point in the testing period, with sqm partly or wholly disabled on it.


On 27/12/13 20:59, Rich Brown wrote:

Probably didn't start sqm properly

Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart

tc -s qdisc show dev ge00

Should show htb and fq codel.

Uh oh. PEBCAK (Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard :-)

I see the problem… There’s this little checkbox in the “Basic Settings” of the GUI… It’s labeled “Enable” and hidden in plain sight above all the interesting stuff in that tab. If it isn’t checked, the router is just as bloated as every other home router.

However, if you *do* check it, everything works as desired. Whew!

A few thoughts which might keep this from ever happening again: 

- Was it disabled by default? (I don’t remember unchecking it…)
- Is there even a reason to have the “Enable” checkbox? Would there ever be a circumstance where a person wouldn’t want SQM?
- Could the “Enable” checkbox be replaced by another “Not Enabled” entry in the “Interface name” dropdown? 

Thanks!

Rich


_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel




_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

--------------050504000404050306070803--