From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qc0-x231.google.com (mail-qc0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231]) (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 2868121F28D for ; Sun, 5 Oct 2014 19:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id c9so3336189qcz.36 for ; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:16:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JxYS/y4SKuKzv0ubuCsJXjEZ6wvgy/6rjhlkyD2Bxp4=; b=KjzYDUbijjKbLeky90j+jY/40743WcC6wEoeaf/ACHcCRfzCQqnMWtD0nQPkeRxxMA jl4RwrxVB2Irmh/1VCxbm8JVaeyMIHzvmd+MbCdQvbwZBFCfPd+IrM6WYc4on+iJCLZL FOpuxtgpKEAZVNuitw6auwqDaja5axKmDWmLtxc8wk/zszfEI/Z8gEJdE1/3qhcdpwqS uGnRsYKhYV5OgbjLcv8aNOUpZdjARZtwUnJJ1QmqO/p97bwAv3MyUnCvYTeZOJUVPyR2 dGtuFP1XEqvsFXwY4ILibxN3EJ33tTzkzu95m5/6+m8uLHioIrjxqxGSfA7qpCpOHIax fSpg== X-Received: by 10.229.47.193 with SMTP id o1mr26696596qcf.18.1412561775083; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:6:8000:705:5a94:6bff:fe3b:ad8? ([2601:6:8000:705:5a94:6bff:fe3b:ad8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j19sm11562785qge.48.2014.10.05.19.16.13 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Richard Smith Message-ID: <5431FB6D.8090005@laptop.org> Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2014 22:16:13 -0400 From: "Richard A. Smith" Organization: One Laptop per Child User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Taht References: <54317119.2090605@laptop.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] better ingress shaping somehow 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: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 02:16:45 -0000 On 10/05/2014 01:57 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> Ugh. Got any hard numbers on the top speed of the edgerouter with shaping? >> >> At work we recently upgraded our link from 60/10 to 100/15 and the WNDR I >> have running the show can no longer keep up. I've been looking for a >> replacement and the edgerouter lite was looking like a possibility. > > Shaping the uplink only still helps a lot. Hmmm... At work I use OpenWRT barrier breaker and not ceroWRT. I'm just using the stock qos script and luci. How would I go about setting it to only do uplink? > is basically fq_codel, near as I can tell. I'll try pushing it to > 120Mbit this week. Thanks. That would be very helpful. If it works I'll get one. We need QoS for our VoIP system. If I don't run QoS the VoIP system is very unhappy. > I do not have a high impression of it's overall firmware quality, and > haven't seen the gpl drop yet. There several pages that say its based on OpenWRT? But I don't see any mention of that on OpenWRT page website and searches for r7500 or AC2350 or nighthawk don't seem to turn up anything. Just a few hits for the r7000 and that the radio is not supported. > Aside from that, there's always x86. Yeah. That was going to be my fall back option if the edgerouter did not work. I was thinking about getting one of these: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856205007 and running OpenWRT x86 on it. -- Richard A. Smith Former One Laptop per Child