[Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi List,
the following might just be what we need to replace the WNDR as a hig(er)-speed capable traffic shaper:

http://www.fit-pc.com/web/products/specifications/fitlet-models-specifications/?model%5B%5D=fitlet-B+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-X+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-i+%28TBA%29

The entry level model fitlet-B is estimated at $129 (requires ram and msata), no information about the more interesting fitlet-i (2 GE ports). The AMD Jaguar SoC is supposedly more powerfull then the AMD G series T40E in the pc-engines api-1d ( http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1d.htm ) that was not that hot network wise ( http://planet.ipfire.org/post/pc-engines-apu1c-a-review ). Improvements include twice the L2, slightly faster DRAM, slightly tweaked core, an potentially “turbo” up to 1.6Ghz from 1GHz base, intel GE chip i211 with BQL support. Downside the intel AC wifi card most likely will not allow proper tweaking (so maybe not suited for the make-wifi-fast project)
	So most likely this thing will also not be able to do SQM/Cake at 300Mbps combined or better. Would it not be sweet to finally be able to “retire” the wndrs…

Best Regards
	Sebastian

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Dave Taht]

oh, they are using a nice ethernet chip from intel? That will help.

I did feel the apu1c was improvable, but the intel "dma to cache"
since ivy bridge feature is a tremendous advantage for intel chips.

Sigh, more benchmarking....

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi List,
> the following might just be what we need to replace the WNDR as a hig(er)-speed capable traffic shaper:
>
> http://www.fit-pc.com/web/products/specifications/fitlet-models-specifications/?model%5B%5D=fitlet-B+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-X+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-i+%28TBA%29
>
> The entry level model fitlet-B is estimated at $129 (requires ram and msata), no information about the more interesting fitlet-i (2 GE ports). The AMD Jaguar SoC is supposedly more powerfull then the AMD G series T40E in the pc-engines api-1d ( http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1d.htm ) that was not that hot network wise ( http://planet.ipfire.org/post/pc-engines-apu1c-a-review ). Improvements include twice the L2, slightly faster DRAM, slightly tweaked core, an potentially “turbo” up to 1.6Ghz from 1GHz base, intel GE chip i211 with BQL support. Downside the intel AC wifi card most likely will not allow proper tweaking (so maybe not suited for the make-wifi-fast project)
>         So most likely this thing will also not be able to do SQM/Cake at 300Mbps combined or better. Would it not be sweet to finally be able to “retire” the wndrs…
>
> Best Regards
>         Sebastian
>



-- 
Dave Täht

thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave, hi list,


On Jan 19, 2015, at 17:37 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> oh, they are using a nice ethernet chip from intel? That will help.
> 
> I did feel the apu1c was improvable,

	well, for what it is worth the apu1c is EOL’d and replaced by the apu1d, no idea what the difference is, both use an AMD low power/performance from last generation ;)

> but the intel "dma to cache"
> since ivy bridge feature is a tremendous advantage for intel chips.

	But the fitlet uses a slightly more modern AMD design (I think its jaguar/puma instead of bobcat, whatever that means, technologically I mean, I am on top of the biologic difference between the two ;) ) I would not bet money that this can saturate its gigabit ethernet ports, but I think the immediate goal is a reasonably low priced device that allows SQM on current bandwidths <= 300Mbps combined. Maybe this is it...

> 
> Sigh, more benchmarking….

	More waiting ;) I think the dual and quad ethernet devices are not out yet …

Best Regards
	Sebastian

> 
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi List,
>> the following might just be what we need to replace the WNDR as a hig(er)-speed capable traffic shaper:
>> 
>> http://www.fit-pc.com/web/products/specifications/fitlet-models-specifications/?model%5B%5D=fitlet-B+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-X+%28TBA%29&model%5B%5D=fitlet-i+%28TBA%29
>> 
>> The entry level model fitlet-B is estimated at $129 (requires ram and msata), no information about the more interesting fitlet-i (2 GE ports). The AMD Jaguar SoC is supposedly more powerfull then the AMD G series T40E in the pc-engines api-1d ( http://www.pcengines.ch/apu1d.htm ) that was not that hot network wise ( http://planet.ipfire.org/post/pc-engines-apu1c-a-review ). Improvements include twice the L2, slightly faster DRAM, slightly tweaked core, an potentially “turbo” up to 1.6Ghz from 1GHz base, intel GE chip i211 with BQL support. Downside the intel AC wifi card most likely will not allow proper tweaking (so maybe not suited for the make-wifi-fast project)
>>        So most likely this thing will also not be able to do SQM/Cake at 300Mbps combined or better. Would it not be sweet to finally be able to “retire” the wndrs…
>> 
>> Best Regards
>>        Sebastian
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Felix Fietkau]

Here's another candidate:
http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/

CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_codel,
no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
March when I get back from vacation.

- Felix

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Dave Taht]

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
> Here's another candidate:
> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
>
> CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
> The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
> ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_codel,
> no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.

One of the many things on my todo list is to roll an RFC in the hope some vendor
can meet it. High on that list would be the ability to do inbound
traffic shaping at
up to about 300Mbits.

> Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
> March when I get back from vacation.

Ah, this is the new chip with the driver support for actually implementing per
tid (station) queues? Is this the master repo for that or is it mainlined?

https://github.com/openwrt/mt76/commits/master

Guess we have to get around to implementing a codel with a weighted
per-active-station average for the target, and start layering the other
stuff in on top...

>
> - Felix



-- 
Dave Täht

thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Felix Fietkau]

On 2015-01-25 20:16, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>> Here's another candidate:
>> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
>>
>> CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
>> The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
>> ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_codel,
>> no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
> 
> One of the many things on my todo list is to roll an RFC in the hope some vendor
> can meet it. High on that list would be the ability to do inbound
> traffic shaping at
> up to about 300Mbits.
> 
>> Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
>> March when I get back from vacation.
> 
> Ah, this is the new chip with the driver support for actually implementing per
> tid (station) queues? Is this the master repo for that or is it mainlined?
Yes.

> https://github.com/openwrt/mt76/commits/master
This is the master repo right now. I will mainline it once I've
stabilized it and added support for a few similar chips.

> Guess we have to get around to implementing a codel with a weighted
> per-active-station average for the target, and start layering the other
> stuff in on top...
Right.

- Felix

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Felix, hi List,


On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:

> Here's another candidate:
> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
> 
> CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
> The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
> ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_codel,
> no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
> Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
> March when I get back from vacation.
> 
> - Felix

	I am currently searching for a replacement for my wndr3700v2 as it is running out of steam on my temporary 100/40 Mbps link. This thing looks quite decent, but I notice between https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_A1 and https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_B1 that d-link reused the sam name for quite different hardware implementations, and only the more recent B1 revision will work for us. (Is it just me or do you also find this tendency to not even add the revision to the official name a bit annoying?)
	So, does anybody here now how to order a specific revision in Germany? Or is the only way to wait a bit and hope the A1 revision clears the retail channel so only B1’s are left? I notice that from looking at the internal photos for both devices posted on the FCC site that the old A1 Broadcom revision has its USB port "above" the ethernet ports while the B1 Mediatek revision has the USB port between DC in and below the ethernet ports. Am I correct in assuming that deployed hardware needs to match the FCC design exactly (that is, in case of revision a new FCC submission with new photos is required)?

Best Regards
	Sebastian

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2376 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Felix, hi List,
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>
> > Here's another candidate:
> >
> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
>
>
I just ordered one of these to play with. I am otherwise quite depressed
about how the home gateway industry arbitrarily switches out products and
software with the same brand for something else, usually inferior.

Today´s news:
http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=61634.msg250538#msg250538


> > CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
> > The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
> > ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_codel,
> > no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
> > Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
> > March when I get back from vacation.
> >
> > - Felix
>
>         I am currently searching for a replacement for my wndr3700v2 as it
> is running out of steam on my temporary 100/40 Mbps link. This thing looks
> quite decent, but I notice between
> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_A1 and
> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_B1 that d-link reused the
> sam name for quite different hardware implementations, and only the more
> recent B1 revision will work for us. (Is it just me or do you also find
> this tendency to not even add the revision to the official name a bit
> annoying?)
>         So, does anybody here now how to order a specific revision in
> Germany? Or is the only way to wait a bit and hope the A1 revision clears
> the retail channel so only B1’s are left? I notice that from looking at the
> internal photos for both devices posted on the FCC site that the old A1
> Broadcom revision has its USB port "above" the ethernet ports while the B1
> Mediatek revision has the USB port between DC in and below the ethernet
> ports. Am I correct in assuming that deployed hardware needs to match the
> FCC design exactly (that is, in case of revision a new FCC submission with
> new photos is required)?
>
> Best Regards
>         Sebastian




-- 
Dave Täht

thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3586 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2743 bytes --]

while I am grumping:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/NyW5HQusMMw

It has been a bad day.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:30 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Felix, hi List,
>>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Here's another candidate:
>> >
>> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
>>
>>
> I just ordered one of these to play with. I am otherwise quite depressed
> about how the home gateway industry arbitrarily switches out products and
> software with the same brand for something else, usually inferior.
>
> Today´s news:
> http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=61634.msg250538#msg250538
>
>
>> > CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
>> > The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
>> > ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with
>> fq_codel,
>> > no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
>> > Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
>> > March when I get back from vacation.
>> >
>> > - Felix
>>
>>         I am currently searching for a replacement for my wndr3700v2 as
>> it is running out of steam on my temporary 100/40 Mbps link. This thing
>> looks quite decent, but I notice between
>> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_A1 and
>> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_B1 that d-link reused the
>> sam name for quite different hardware implementations, and only the more
>> recent B1 revision will work for us. (Is it just me or do you also find
>> this tendency to not even add the revision to the official name a bit
>> annoying?)
>>         So, does anybody here now how to order a specific revision in
>> Germany? Or is the only way to wait a bit and hope the A1 revision clears
>> the retail channel so only B1’s are left? I notice that from looking at the
>> internal photos for both devices posted on the FCC site that the old A1
>> Broadcom revision has its USB port "above" the ethernet ports while the B1
>> Mediatek revision has the USB port between DC in and below the ethernet
>> ports. Am I correct in assuming that deployed hardware needs to match the
>> FCC design exactly (that is, in case of revision a new FCC submission with
>> new photos is required)?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>         Sebastian
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
>
> thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks
>



-- 
Dave Täht

thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4457 bytes --]