From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x235.google.com (mail-ig0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::235]) (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 D228921F144 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-f181.google.com with SMTP id h18so1365266igc.2 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:01:25 -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=AuLiOmq9/0UbsEoFolkTbxzKLjIaku3o/xb70feWpQs=; b=kkNC72W9tzBjhgGbJKXrrrqV0Z6daCzSIVb9A4IWgqWh/QN71EPEZWwAQEnKrfFuo/ qAy3uUf6GAcbK0ihO9Rj2QhS9n2B6x3xePiHvogN97Bjm4f75R6RoynPvbH7c2UOJ8sS FvE/I7qQ1FD7Vpay9nrB54wJItIgNTPFEFYKs8fnISu/YVYGKKJ2OUqCwxEqKlzr18pD C7WZj9gMrUozuk08n1Dvg7CS/XIDZA9ixVYQmaHPT4S3craH5dxArpJ6DeM9vm4mBGNo B4lMou5F8svOjmJ0Y1Dyq2r8KZxiRRA/yVsNzJbBM/7EjeaoJUCivTGpi5TRqsvswILP 6hvQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.114.82 with SMTP id f18mr3667279icq.56.1396040485027; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.238.70 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:01:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <30456.1396032043@sandelman.ca> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 22:01:24 +0100 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303f6dce33c5ee04f5b10123 Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: wndr3800 replacement 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: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:01:26 -0000 --20cf303f6dce33c5ee04f5b10123 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Michael Richardson > wrote: > > > > Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > I also think that it'll be very hard to find a box that is decently > > > priced > > > that also will do gig speeds *and* will do AQM, since most home > > > gateways that > > > > So, I'm struggling to get a $700 Cisco (not Linksys) SOHO switch to > forward > > packets at GbE across my home LAN. Gigabit ethernet in the home is > actually > > a reality.... and having a Gigabit LAN hit a 11Mb/s (half-duplex!) > 802.11b > > wireless means that in many homes, we actually need a box that satisfies > > both. > Right, but in that instance, the flow-rates are only 802.11 rates, and a wndr can keep up with that. It's the sqm on the uplink/wan side that needs the processing power. Or, it's time to do what Dave has mentioned and rewrite to get a faster implementation than htb. > > My vote would be to double the price from $80 to $250, and set that as > the > > new base for cerowrt work. If it can't forward more than 2-3 GbE links, > > that is just fine. I don't expect 24-ports of GbE. > > (I was expecting that cisco switch to do that... sadly no lost packets > > on a $100 unmanaged FE switch...) > > I started looking at the edgerouter LTE and related boxes again. > > Does anyone else have one? > > They have a new release based on 3.4 out; backporting fq_codel might work. > > I don't have any numbers on it's performance however, and it does look like > updating it to 3.10 would be good idea. > Nice looking platform. Cavium Octeon? Looks like it's all in software, and not in offload modules? -Aaron --20cf303f6dce33c5ee04f5b10123 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On F= ri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Micha= el Richardson <mcr= @sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
> Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> =A0 =A0 > I also think that it'll be very hard to find a box th= at is decently
> =A0 =A0 > priced
> =A0 =A0 > that also will do gig speeds *and* will do AQM, since mos= t home
> =A0 =A0 > gateways that
>
> So, I'm struggling to get a $700 Cisco (not Linksys) SOHO switch t= o forward
> packets at GbE across my home LAN. =A0 Gigabit ethernet in the home is= actually
> a reality.... and having a Gigabit LAN hit a 11Mb/s (half-duplex!) 802= .11b
> wireless means that in many homes, we actually need a box that satisfi= es
> both.

Right, but in that ins= tance, the flow-rates are only 802.11 rates, and a wndr can keep up with th= at. =A0It's the sqm on the uplink/wan side that needs the processing po= wer. =A0Or, it's time to do what Dave has mentioned and rewrite to get = a faster implementation than htb.
=A0
> My vote would be to = double the price from $80 to $250, and set that as the
> new base for cerowrt work. =A0If it can't forward more than 2-3 Gb= E links,
> that is just fine. =A0I don't expect 24-ports of GbE.
> (I was expecting that cisco switch to do that... sadly no lost packets=
> on a $100 unmanaged FE switch...)

=A0I started looking at the edgerouter LTE and related boxes again.
Does anyone else have one?

They have a new release based on 3.4 out; backporting fq_codel might work.<= br>
I don't have any numbers on it's performance however, and it does l= ook like
updating it to 3.10 would be good idea.

Nice looking platform.

Cavium Octeon? =A0Looks li= ke it's all in software, and not in offload modules?

-Aaron
--20cf303f6dce33c5ee04f5b10123--