From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-x231.google.com (mail-qg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::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 BC8BD21F293 for ; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id e89so2610225qgf.36 for ; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:33:22 -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; bh=9VW4kvODkV9gYxyZbJui/kuu7kSk1EEkP9SE1xZTc5g=; b=gzp+Rve21o1uPq2WuJIfW8Gi1VzCLFixsGnJD3vLfma+md9DwbhFETMr4HcK++sSsB JiVqgGsKY25Py1hKTUpSdutLu2Gh9pdw2fwT1umUQ+EtS/ACDkyqkIutNlYhzv5qoaDG Yhhm+rbMfOCoYrPBCyuYMfsIczsCg5qmEFctP2slSsGJ2UdYGW3oPXVAHYtN0w+Sy0zc /PJ+sIRlNx5u6yLD+Om9KmcEonJHirwAMriaozHJUOjHQebNHDzcQcEykHQ+VbCFxOap enZm5OqdQ7wn46yK9nO56FxVjdlfCRrSaHS3wg4UeOuwqD4gNfYg38/xcDHbgTxu1BMX 9Vrw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.111.201 with SMTP id t9mr30541058qap.0.1413747202313; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.102.197 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.102.197 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7B5DD5A3-D273-4708-909C-5B5D5DE72282@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 15:33:22 -0400 Message-ID: From: Ernesto Elias To: Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c23154cbd85d0505cbab8b Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Routing limit question 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, 19 Oct 2014 19:33:52 -0000 --001a11c23154cbd85d0505cbab8b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm not using the actiontec at all. I'm using the wndr3800 On Oct 19, 2014 3:22 PM, "Dave Taht" wrote: > It looks to me as if the actiontec has pretty good qos all by itself. > On Oct 19, 2014 11:56 AM, "Sebastian Moeller" wrote: > >> HI Dave, >> >> >> On Oct 19, 2014, at 20:24 , Dave Taht wrote: >> >> > On at least one verizon device I've tried it appeared that they had >> > SFQ or something similar on egress from the modem. >> > >> > >> http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/RRUL_Rogues_Gallery#Veriz= on-FIOS-Testing-at-25Mbit-up-and-25Mbit-down >> > >> > So you only needed to shape the download. which is good as we start >> > peaking out at 50Mbit download total. But only measurements can tell. >> >> So on Hnymans community openwrt build a few fortunate ones on >> excellent lines seem to get decent results even at 110-120 Mbps combined= : >> https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?pid=3D250989#p250989 >> and: >> https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?pid=3D251013#p251013 >> I have no idea why and both lines were reasonably well-behaved even >> without any AQM/QOS... >> >> Also I wonder whether when we increase the quantum for higher rates to >> give HTB some breathing room, whether we also should increase burst and >> cburst? My hunch is that quantum affects the switching between the leave= s, >> while busts and cburst should allow to dump more data to lower layers >> inside each leaf qdisc. And since we are running behind, maybe taking a >> bigger shovel can help some. (I assume this needs to be titrated not to >> kill latency under load, but if we can only effective have HTB execute x >> times per second we can easily afford to dump >> line-rate/maxHTB_iteratin_rate bytes per opportunity, no?) My own intern= et >> link is way to slow to test this... >> >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >> >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Ernesto Elias < >> ernestogelias@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone! >> >> I have a question about the wndr3800 routing limit. I went back to th= e >> older >> >> submissions to see if I can find what would be the answer for it. But >> in my >> >> search I haven't managed to find a definite answer. From what I seen >> about >> >> setting the limit it can do with SQM is 50, 60, or 80 mbit. I'm just >> >> wondering if anyone can shed some light for me here as I have verizon >> fios >> >> and my speeds are 50 dl/50 ul. Thank you guys very much! >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Dave T=C3=A4ht >> > >> > thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >> >> --001a11c23154cbd85d0505cbab8b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm not using the actiontec at all. I'm using the wn= dr3800

On Oct 19, 2014 3:22 PM, "Dave Taht" &= lt;dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote= :

It = looks to me as if the actiontec has pretty good qos all by itself.

On Oct 19, 2014 11:56 AM, "Sebastian Moelle= r" <moeller0@g= mx.de> wrote:
HI Dave,


On Oct 19, 2014, at 20:24 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On at least one verizon device I've tried it appeared that they ha= d
> SFQ or something similar on egress from the modem.
>
> http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/RRUL_Rogues_Gallery#Verizo= n-FIOS-Testing-at-25Mbit-up-and-25Mbit-down
>
> So you only needed to shape the download. which is good as we start > peaking out at 50Mbit download total. But only measurements can tell.<= br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 So on Hnymans community openwrt build a few for= tunate ones on excellent lines seem to get decent results even at 110-120 M= bps combined:
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?pid=3D250989#p25098= 9
and:
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?pid=3D251013#p25101= 3
I have no idea why and both lines were reasonably well-behaved even without= any AQM/QOS...

Also I wonder whether when we increase the quantum for higher rates to give= HTB some breathing room, whether we also should increase burst and cburst?= My hunch is that quantum affects the switching between the leaves, while b= usts and cburst should allow to dump more data to lower layers inside each = leaf qdisc. And since we are running behind, maybe taking a bigger shovel c= an help some. (I assume this needs to be titrated not to kill latency under= load, but if we can only effective have HTB execute x times per second we = can easily afford to dump line-rate/maxHTB_iteratin_rate bytes per opportun= ity, no?) My own internet link is way to slow to test this...

Best Regards
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sebastian

>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Ernesto Elias <ernestogelias@gmail.com> = wrote:
>> Hello everyone!
>> I have a question about the wndr3800 routing limit. I went back to= the older
>> submissions to see if I can find what would be the answer for it. = But in my
>> search I haven't managed to find a definite answer. From what = I seen about
>> setting the limit it can do with SQM is 50, 60, or 80 mbit. I'= m just
>> wondering if anyone can shed some light for me here as I have veri= zon fios
>> and my speeds are 50 dl/50 ul. Thank you guys very much!
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >>
>
>
>
> --
> Dave T=C3=A4ht
>
> thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcom= ing_Talks
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

--001a11c23154cbd85d0505cbab8b--