From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22d.google.com (mail-qk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22d]) (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 1FDB321F879; Tue, 7 Jul 2015 07:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkbp125 with SMTP id p125so140246994qkb.2; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 07:08:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=mAY5dwpSglC3eL09fxuPkFcste1CCxGgJBJjjzGAfXw=; b=cU7MK5Wio5xVgWb9rBk2f8RRSGUCS/A3e5o52D+wn4xS+FfApYoo7TGKKMM2KBnDon 2VJMq6JsO67bLfVTQqa0Yjgh+IZ5miFLSwwPjRuntYaLZb7rlxNPH+HFWnGHcd7ZSWHo wkf41b0a7F6S8ltp4dtPBoVi2mja4rGZxxHk0axv5PmCk6XrSzwxrYNsEcgk/oz3j4aK Wtk8j4u2QCUTox8iKn2ElldkSJA+ZNpNfvXluKfHHha7uEpDFBM20ennIaPM2Ku7GnHp 6AblaIt+Wwen4DwjM/IAAcdjgLHyoxBCb6qXgjN/O7VR5O4G+qYt1CBScyLLGHlS7bvr LcXg== X-Received: by 10.140.32.181 with SMTP id h50mr7189644qgh.31.1436278082645; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 07:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richs-mbp-13475.lan (pool-71-169-164-229.burl.east.myfairpoint.net. [71.169.164.229]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i7sm11250921qge.32.2015.07.07.07.08.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Jul 2015 07:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: <559B53E8.90201@isi.edu> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 10:07:59 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8CBE744B-CE0D-4C44-A4B1-C7FB27403E1D@gmail.com> References: <559B2513.3020909@isi.edu> <559B53E8.90201@isi.edu> To: Joe Touch X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] failing to find the "declared victory" in a current wifi router 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: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 14:08:34 -0000 Hi Joe, These are great observations. CeroWrt was boosted enormously by the = presence of the powerful and reliable OpenWrt software platform. We were = able to make so much progress with bufferbloat because OpenWrt provided = a stable platform for our experiments. Nonetheless, the motivations of = the two teams - CeroWrt and OpenWrt - are vastly different, and I offer = the following to help you adjust your expectations. - CeroWrt was, and remains, a research project for "making networking = better". In 2012, this team of open-source developers solved the problem = of bufferbloat. (Hardly any other commercial or academic development = group even understood or acknowledged there was a problem.) Now the team = is moving on to other projects, including "making wifi fast" (again, = this does not seem to be addressed by any commercial/academic groups). = We continue our work with CeroWrt, using a current version of OpenWrt as = the base. The Bufferbloat/CeroWrt site has attracted a significant = following of people who're willing to test the bleeding edge of network = research. The current builds make no promises of reliability (or even = functionality), but it's fun to hang out with people who're driving = science forward. - I'm a newcomer to OpenWrt, but it seems that their mission is to make = the OpenWrt software run on as many different devices/routers as = possible. This has a side benefit of making the excellent OpenWrt = software available on a number of excellent routers, which, as a = second-order side benefit might be useful to make the network better at = your home. As far as I can tell, making it easier to learn about, = install, and run OpenWrt is not a primary goal. Furthermore, the OpenWrt = leaders are reluctant to recommend any particular piece of equipment, to = avoid accusations of "favoritism". That said, I'm working with a number = of people to improve the resources at OpenWrt to pull all the info = together so that people can get the benefits of OpenWrt without having = to read 10,000 forum posts and wiki pages. With that framework in mind, let me respond to your questions. TL;DR - if you just want to fix your home network today and get on with = your life, I recommend: - OpenWrt Barrier Breaker (BB) release. As of July 2015, it's = the stable version. Stay away from CC or trunk, as they're still = evolving. - Install OpenWrt using the instructions at: = http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/howto/installopenwrt - Install SQM/fq_codel to solve bufferbloat using the = instructions at: http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/howto/sqm - What router to choose? I bought the TP-Link Archer C7 v2 for = ~$90 (US). http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wdr7500 In a = one-out-of-one test, it seems to work well with BB, SQM works fine, and = I'm happy. On Jul 7, 2015, at 12:22 AM, Joe Touch wrote: > Hi, Rich, >=20 > On 7/6/2015 7:23 PM, Rich Brown wrote: >> Hi Joe, >>=20 >> The OpenWrt firmware project is a "some assembly required" affair.=20 >=20 > That might be less daunting if there were assembly instructions. I.e., > I'm suggesting that the instructions need revision. Work there could > have a significant payoff in a larger test community (I'm not exactly = a > hardware noob, but I found it annoyingly obfuscated). Yup. I agree.=20 >=20 >> Although it's not always easy to find, the site has a number of = resources: >> - Buyer's Guide at http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/buyerguide >=20 > That is useful for picking from among the currently supported = versions, > but perhaps it'd be useful to take a colleague with you to a store and > see how helpful that all is. It's nearly impossible to find any of the > devices in the list or to verify whether a particular device in a box > has the required version of motherboard and firmware needed. Yup. >> - The specific guidance to search Amazon for "OpenWrt" - see: = http://amzn.to/1mONYr0 >=20 > That turns up quite a bit of devices that aren't supported, FWIW. Yup. That's why I'm on the team to improve documentation... We will have = a delicate balance between the project founders' reluctance to recommend = any devices and the desire help people "just to get something going". >> - The forum at: https://forum.openwrt.org/viewforum.php?id=3D10 = mentions lots of routers >=20 > Indeed; more isn't better. Yup. >> As for specific routers: >> - The WNDR3800 remains our gold standard for CeroWrt builds. It'll >> do SQM up to ~30 mbps, then the CPU runs out of gas. >=20 > May I also suggest moving to another standard that hasn't been > explicitly "end-of-life'd" by the manufacturer. The CeroWrt team (Thanks, Dave!) is working hard to find a replacement = for the WNDR3800 that will handle higher speeds. Read the cerowrt-devel = list frequently (daily?) to follow that news. We'll update the CeroWrt = site once there's a good recommendation.=20 >> - Check the OpenWrt Table of Hardware (ToH) to see what other routers >> support the current stable 14.07/Barrier Breaker (BB) builds. >=20 > Sure - I spent several days in Target, Best Buy, and Fry's trying to > decipher whether particular products were supported - again often > difficult without UPC numbers (boxes don't always indicate version) I don't ever expect OpenWrt to include UPC info. It's hard enough to get = the user-maintained wiki to have accurate info at all. (And vendors = change UPC's all the time... See the next point.) Better to read (and ask) for information on the forums. >> - Many people on this list have good luck with the TP-Link Archer C7 >> v2. I believe it'll route at cable speeds. I'm using it very >> successfully with OpenWrt BB release on a 7 mbps DSL line. >=20 > Here's a good example of how useful the information on the OpenWRT > website can be. Everyone seems to refer to this as "Archer C7", = everyone > except the TP-Link website. Their search finds no products matching = that > description, and the WIFI routers there are listed with other codes, > e.g.:TL-WDR7500 - except you won't find that number on the hardware = page > -- you have to click through to the page for that device. >=20 > For that device, like for many, the most recent version (i.e., the one > more likely to arrive on a blind web order, or on most store shelves) = is > not yet supported. Blame TP-Link for this confusion. The box may mention "WDR7500" (I've = thrown mine away so I can't check), but neither the router nor the = TP-Link website (today) mentions "WDR7500". The label on my router says = "Model: Archer C7" Does this situation stink out loud? Yes. But it's not ours to fix. >> - If you have been following the Linksys WRT1900AC and WRT1200AC=20 >> thread at >> https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=3D50173&action=3Dnewyou'll = see >> that the CC builds are sorta, kinda working. There are a lot of = moving >> pieces still, and despite the CC RC2 status, stable builds only come >> out a few days apart. I would stay away from it if you're not willing >> to participate in a science experiment. >=20 > Well, the 23-Apr-2015 build by Kaloz works fine - except that the SQM > package fails to install. Yup. Welcome to software that's under development. You should definitely = follow the OpenWrt forum thread on 1900AC. = https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=3D50173&p=3D246 > What I'm baffled by here is that the main trunk builds leave LUCI out; > that's seems > quite short-sighted, IMO. That may be an explicit decision. I believe, without authoritative = confirmation, that the GUI is not included in trunk builds as a means to = "scare away the beginners". I would argue that it has the opposite = effect - that of causing more confusion. But I'm not driving that bus.=20= A page that describes the trunk builds as being suitable only for people = who are willing to work with buggy, unreliable, and had-to-use builds = would be valuable. (That's why I'm on the team to improve = documentation...) >> There is a team working to improve the OpenWrt site, but our work >> has not yet been "blessed" by the the admin's who maintain the core = pages of >> the site. >=20 > And I appreciate and understand that. The CeroWRT site could similarly > use an update. With CeroWrt, we need to split our time between fixing and enhancing the = software and telling the world about it. It has been a while since we've = reviewed the Bufferbloat.net site with an eye toward a newcomer, and I = can do that.=20 > I.e., there's ample opportunity here to build a larger community with = a > few simple steps: As I stated above, it's not clear to me that building a community of = people who *use* the software is foremost in the core developers' minds = at OpenWrt. That said, > - refer to routers by the manufacturer's designation > - create builds with both LUCI and (if possible) SQM > - make a short-list of a few currently available routers > for which an integrated build exists *for the most recent > motherboard version* Within the limitations of a user-maintained wiki, that's why I'm on the = team to improve documentation... >=20 > All of this could be done on the CeroWRT site until it can be put on > OpenWRT. No. The two teams - and goals - are separate. Although I'm playing both = sides of the street, I still don't want to post stuff on the CeroWrt = site that needs to be updated when things get better on the OpenWrt = site.=20 > These are fairly direct ways to lower the bar, which seems = unnecessarily > high here. Yup. That's why I'm on the team to improve documentation... Rich >>=20 >> On Jul 6, 2015, at 9:02 PM, Joe Touch wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi, all, >>>=20 >>> I'm posting because of my recent frustration with the claim that >>> bufferbloat solutions have been "pushed up into the OpenWRT and >>> commercial routers. >>>=20 >>> I spent the bulk of last weekend trying to find a COTS WIFI router = that >>> supported OpenWRT with bufferbloat (SQM) extensions. >>>=20 >>> I tried a Linksys WRT1200AC, and here's what I found: >>>=20 >>> - Kaloz's 23-Apr-2015 build installs fine and comes up >>> with a web server (LUCI), but does NOT include SQM >>>=20 >>> - trying to install the SQM packages fails >>> due to a kernel version incompatibility >>> (for a 23-Apr-2015 build?!) >>>=20 >>> - CC-rc2 doesn't have a WRT1200AC build >>> presumably I should have used mvebu-armada-385-linksys-caiman, >>> but it's not at all clear >>>=20 >>> - and I'd have to install LUCI and/or reinstall >>> factory firmware from the command line, and none >>> of that is all that clear, esp. a recovery route >>> that doesn't involve voiding warranty to wire in >>> a serial port >>>=20 >>> Given the "declared victory" (http://www.bufferbloat.net/news/53), >>> perhaps someone one one of these lists can explain why there's no = clear >>> information on a current device that supports a current build that >>> actually supports these fixes? >>>=20 >>> I.e., if you were trying to make this obscure, you're doing a very = good job. >>>=20 >>> FWIW. >>>=20 >>> Joe >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> =09 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >>=20