From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x234.google.com (mail-ob0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::234]) (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 BAED221F24B for ; Sun, 5 Oct 2014 10:57:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id va2so2976070obc.11 for ; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 10:57:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bNWcD00ageGMXzbFH1kcKCl37c5s3XNDUBtCowqZFVU=; b=V9hnWdrxzuMzjSGNPywA2StbM990ttjP3/Tw7EUz2Bnlg/EIyOmSd/sPNNGFBrDKAO ArS4GsDgwvBK1tkkL1WiqMBGaJMsstThDhT0Ym1hdIFpuIsQ8MN8if6Ifc4jigxZjgIL 67jbjnfzW9BjVVnocgDXWDU/i/RreXYKwxHcC/vWvleUjMeGyT+vcdkPR/4n9cF8wEjR t9RYCKonATwCTAdSbiuw02FUYakyu2MK9ISMHrGOsTGW05RbkWZ6c9rBA9W28kfwAO1y hCvQUWNX4w5DjDahszWhd+D4lICelUF2uxwagggsPz6OB/KhdurSywesMKOZsekV9vlL yfwA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.65.229 with SMTP id a5mr22120624obt.16.1412531831333; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 10:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.227.76 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Oct 2014 10:57:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <54317119.2090605@laptop.org> References: <54317119.2090605@laptop.org> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 10:57:11 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: "Richard A. Smith" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Alpha Sparc , openwrt-devel , "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: Sun, 05 Oct 2014 17:57:41 -0000 On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Richard A. Smith wrote= : > On 10/02/2014 07:07 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > >>> I beleive that on the WNDR3800, it's able to work up to about 50Mb with >>> the >>> existing configurations. A faster CPU would do better, a slower one >>> worse. >> >> >> Actually it appears that cache is very important on fixing inbound rate >> shaping. >> >> The octeon in the edgerouter lite peaks out at above 60mbits also, but t= he >> bigger, fatter pro product actually manages quite a bit better (with >> increasing >> inaccuracy however). See below... > > > Ugh. Got any hard numbers on the top speed of the edgerouter with shapin= g? > > 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. > I tried to use a TPLink AC1750 thinking that a newer setup with a faster = cpu > might be able to keep up. If I don't have shaping enabled it can do 200+ > Mbit but with shaping it drops considerably. It's still faster than the > WNDR but seems to max out at about 85 Mbit. The fastest-looking thing I've played with of late is the netgear x4. It's dynamic QoS feature is basically fq_codel, near as I can tell. I'll try pushing it to 120Mbit this week. I do not have a high impression of it's overall firmware quality, and haven't seen the gpl drop yet. Aside from that, there's always x86. > -- > Richard A. Smith > Former One Laptop per Child --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast