From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-x229.google.com (mail-qg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D035621F689 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2014 12:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id q107so3267267qgd.14 for ; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:34:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ObBT+kDzNmuQXF37DoIDa7xkuD3ip46OMUF4o6R62JU=; b=YX8zP+CvT64giCCL7aDnEQLOwAZfo/m68YczrTHL6nSHLSWjK/c39I2VvndS9P78bD n9KIuGEk3ilZdPyr28V06yD2E7rdCVSS5h/lLgo/Tgsr4ocPzlO3bTWRU0JMMsq8XQ8P cgRlx5Qg5SOYGd/ITg2762X401RO2OtLV1T6nK6WTQ7eY8SqKlaAJWO2QLIPUS6WvODF LNBz0eYvwf3VpDe9s1cipP46Go9AqGMzNuWnzRh1Uk8y0w/MKUA22rY5fxaCIxznZNy1 ivPju2DB1UVJQ9sHOccm+NLoIBXL9i/tjZboxmaK/OTkR4wIRjEH0SBGk53FafE8JvXr Cd2w== X-Received: by 10.224.43.10 with SMTP id u10mr20338003qae.20.1407353694744; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from williamovna.rutgers.edu ([198.151.130.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id d69sm1951732qge.35.2014.08.06.12.34.54 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53E2839D.8090304@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 15:35:57 -0400 From: William Katsak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" References: <53BEA813.8000108@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Upper routing throughput limit 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: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 19:34:56 -0000 Sorry to wake this thread up again. It does indeed seem that the 3800 is having trouble routing at my line speed. I was considering doing a pfSense box, but it doesn't seem that Bufferbloat has been much of a consideration yet over there. There is a version of Codel, but the QoS would have to be set up manually. I've Googled this Ubiquiti Edgerouter Lite, and I am intrigued. I don't see many details on Ubiquiti's site about the QoS though. Is this device as good at beating bloat as Cero? Would mating one of these with a 3800 (for Wifi only) be a good bet? Thanks, -Bill On 07/10/2014 11:01 AM, Aaron Wood wrote: > It depends on the aqm rules that are configured. In the base setup, it > struggles at 50Mbps. But that can be increased by switching from the > simple.qos script to simplest.qos (I'm not sure where the limit is with > the simplest.qos script. > > I know that Dave Taht has been working with some other platforms. The > Ubiquity EdgeRouter Lite may be able to hit 100Mbps, but it doesn't run > CeroWRT itself, it just supports similar configuration. > > -Aaron > > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 7:49 AM, William Katsak > wrote: > > Hello, > > Does anyone have a good sense of the most throughput our 3800s with > Cero can push through the WAN interface? Are we good to 100 mbps? 1gbps? > > Thanks, > Bill Katsak > _________________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.__bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/__listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > >