From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com (mail-wg0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60F92002A9 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:57:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wgbfa7 with SMTP id fa7so2824365wgb.28 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:57:53 -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=jBev8kTv45blCHQbCea/DxGUkvINcEASXihlpww8GFg=; b=jw0cskzoegewcxb2P/5mtVBdZxmQeE4oxJfdv2YFQ6J6gewd/u7zQR2xix7zuw4q0S MUKRJMaaeg/xaoslNyIT2/F64T6HMNmlWHAtaen0MQkbNT0FOI0ldFu7ll+BL3WN6DDh QVsGyjY/3ANSfkEebqlweZhrRhGI6qi+rOpVERh13ZrygU/akxqNuNeiQrOtOacMOcc5 aOEhe8p4EbumQCNqhqd+JlQwkrizxTmAwlA2u+NhYzSCQxUTiez3dtsZjgfL/by1PQMu s5mK4JAsFpi7NIZlJ6nNmybNlmPe3UADR5xhT8vHOr2XLZj705qVkdXAnYoKgL7SH0IZ bFfw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.107.103 with SMTP id hb7mr20378381wib.3.1344880672732; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.143.69 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:57:52 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Luke Hamburg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] router chipset selection for cero-2 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, 13 Aug 2012 17:57:55 -0000 When I said "not cheaper" I didn't say that "price was no object!!" :) Both of the x86 systems proposed would cost well north of 400 dollars when outfitted properly. This is a lot to request of the volunteer cerowrt effort to buy on their own! (I note that donations of sufficient hardware of any stripe would be gladly considered) I still retain hope we'll be able to get a distributed network analysis system deployed using the existing cerowrt hardware, too, and at any scale, that's going to cost a lot as it is. The present retail cost on a 3700v2 is under 100 dollars, and from that we can assume that the build cost is under 30. I was figuring on (at worst) doubling the build cost for cero-2. By looking at various new chipsets now, that may only be available in evaluation board form (now), my hope would be to influence the development of future products *before* they got deployed, this time around. This is a more ambitious goal than the cero-1 effort. There we wanted to find a popular 100% open source chipset to work with, that was widely sold at retail, work with it, and deeply understand what was right and wrong with the software load... which we're kind of done with. Peering dimly 18 months into the future as to what would become a popular chipset for home routers is hard, but I don't think it will be x86 based. I HAVE been tempted towards explicitly adding support for this x86 adsl capable box and exploring how far up it can scale: http://www.traverse.com.au/geos21-dual-adsl2-x86-router-appliance David Woodhouse has one and I've been meaning to hack on his for ages. Getting a good grip on adsl behavior would be nice to have. To add to the negatives of the x86 idea some more, however: Working on a resource constrained platform with an embedded mindset is very useful, in that memory intensive design mistakes (like, for example, doing the UI in java, leveraging bloated libraries) aren't made. Proving that fq_codel would 'just work' on commonly deployed low-end hardware was very important to us to prove to the industry as a whole. While some problems remain, as codel can be more memory intensive than we'd like, I like to think the myth that fq and aqm can't run on all interfaces of a given router is now *thoroughly* debunked. This stuff barely registers on a cpu trace on the wndrs. Similarly, manufacturers care about pennies in their markets and shipping the bare minimum amount of hardware required to meet a market niche is what they are all about. Next: If we'd produce an x86 version of cero, everyone on the planet would try tossing their own junked 486 through 6 core box at the problem with wildly varying results. The additional driver support required in the x86 world boggles the mind, just on ethernet alone. The support burden for the cerowrt effort is already beyond sustainable. I'm perfectly happy for x86 folk to track ubuntu/redhat/suse/etc directly, and to try and push bufferbloat related patches into kernels relevant to those distros, and more importantly, the people that are working on those distros (this has been done for fedora and ubuntu - thx John and Kamal!). The openwrt mainline works on over 30 arches including x86, too. (thx everybody at openwrt!). Still, in the x86 world, few seem to have picked up on how needed BQL support is needed at the driver level to see any useful results from an aqm, and furthermore everybody over there is busily adding all sorts of cpu-saving network (tso,gso,ufo,gro,etc) offloads, which nearly universally add latency. now, I'm capable of arguing both sides of an issue (lawyer for a dad) in the same email... so, in defense of using an x86 platform for (at least some) future cerowrt related development: A) it's EASY to track kernel head and do experiments and new code developme= nt. The compile, test, debug cycle is much shorter, and getting stuff pushed upstream is much easier. This translates out to much shorter time to market than any other cpu arch (although arm is tracking mainline linux quite well now) B) I already do do x86 based work a goodly percentage of the time (on a pair of laptops, one of which just died). For most of the last quarter of last year I worked on x86 exclusively (for bql and sfqred). Judging from the upcoming (and sadly unfunded) plans for wifi and improvements to fq_codel, a lot more work should be done initially on the x86. But in either of those cases using off the shelf used x86 hardware seems more cost effective than picking a new x86 based routing box from a given vendor, and going with it, unless said vendor was supporting the effort directly. It does bug me that although we get great support from various individuals related to atheros, nobody at netgear calls us back. We picked the netgear because it had a great chipset, and the build quality is excellent (tested to -40C/+70C). Numerous other users of the same chipset were in the running (notably buffalo), but the build quality wasn't as good... I wouldn't mind working with the next generation (mips 75k) atheros chipsets with a manufacturer that cared... And certainly on my over-long todo list is to get someone to add BQL and fq_codel support to the dreamplug and smileplug arm based boxen... So anyway, this gets me back to my original questions about the comcerto 2000, and I guess I'm going to have to make some phone calls. On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Luke Hamburg wrote: > How about something like the Jetway JBC372F36 ? > > -Atom N2600 (new) CedarView CPU: fairly capable + very low wattage (fanle= ss) > -mini-PCIe card slot (comes populated with a B/G/N-card but that is easil= y > replaced) > -dual gigabit Ethernet ports, USB ports, serial/COM ports > -rugged industrial design (all metal enclosure) - with (4) antenna holes! > > The Comcerto C2200 sure does have some wonderful-sounding specs - but for > now I couldn't find any available (or even planned) hardware. I realize t= his > Atom unit doesn't satisfy all of the requirements (no hardware RNG, not s= ure > about hooking to advanced interfaces e.g. GPON) but surely this beats a > wndr3700 ? > > Luke > > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> I can't remember with whom I was talking to about alternatives to mips >> for home router processors, but this is the first new one I've seen in >> the arm world that comes close to being one... >> >> >> http://electronicdesign.com/article/digital/dualcore-cortexa9-tackles-co= mmunication-gateway-chores-74092 >> >> Most of the new arms are targetted at the burgeoning handheld markets. >> A router has no use for video >> and a big use for pci busses and multiple ethernet chips, which the >> handheld targetted chips usually don't have... >> >> All that said, the arm ecosystem appears to be healthier than the mips >> ecosystem, overall. >> >> The marvell kirkwood (dreamplug) is getting long in the tooth, the >> octeon is too expensive (and the cool onboard hardware locked away >> with binary blobs), the various atheros chipsets I'm aware of a little >> too weak, the broadcoms a little too proprietary, and perhaps this new >> chip from mindspeed would be "just right". >> >> So... Anyone know about the comcerto 2000, or of anything else out there= ? >> >> I figure cerowrt's ar71xx chipset currently has less than 18 months of >> market life left to it. >> >> While I would hope to have finished fixing the home router market by >> then, deploying fq_codel, getting ipv6 made default, solving the >> naming problems, deploying dnssec, etc and genericall fixing all the >> head-ends and the rest of the known internet universe, etc, I'm not >> planning on it. :) >> >> So thinking about what next piece of open, and more powerful hardware >> to complete the research/work with is starting to weigh on my mind. >> >> Big Goals: >> >> Faster, better, not cheaper >> Open source in all core components >> 802.11ac >> Hardware rng >> Capable of gigE ipv6 *routing* >> Capable of being hooked to various advanced interfaces (gpon, cable, ads= l) >> >> >> -- >> Dave T=E4ht >> http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki - "3.3.8-6 is out >> with fq_codel!" >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --=20 Dave T=E4ht http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki - "3.3.8-6 is out with fq_codel!"