From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (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 672DC21F21F; Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkdn188 with SMTP id n188so43330302qkd.2; Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -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 :content-type; bh=OPLHmk7mpgAZB1eCG3D/CQMW8SjXEHhWOWL6Hy/IDcc=; b=nOeiRSv/67J1UJy638TjPqOo9Be6Ns2YjMnNSpourxOfHrS8x6gAoLVoi8PUv9kqsp AlwZrBaTVDpHgDN22vbgnPLEYjabphWh00OE86HVPkqINJ/RMIQ2mJyJqEJh9SKksbzR 6fYAgGpDXJAed/lnIJeeD+klsu3R6qWn0mEVHExFBrrAe+hr7XDwJ+7qfAh46T2CeE89 EExDetdfN+kVwggAs7Hwl8ldC0TnK+8Tu+zL20QlBRObZ631H0iNmXSXxDd9iwiFCcps 1RscESJs0/8NnJVhix8BzANfGupSA8PmHpWbYEoKved73tQCfZ2dJ2GXY9G/kt5WIlk4 6XuQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.15.129 with SMTP id 1mr34644592qkp.29.1432448359542; Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.187.71 with HTTP; Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: bloat , cerowrt-devel , Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1146f100a133e80516cddf1b Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] sqm-scripts on WRT1900AC 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, 24 May 2015 06:19:49 -0000 --001a1146f100a133e80516cddf1b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 After more tweaking, and after Comcast's network settled down some, I have some rather quite nice results: http://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2015/05/sqm-scripts-on-linksys-wrt1900ac-part-1.html So it looks like the WRT1900AC is a definite contender for our faster cable services. I'm not sure if it will hold out to the 300Mbps that you want, Dave, but it's got plenty for what Comcast is selling right now. -Aaron P.S. Broken wifi to the MacBook was a MacBook issue, not a router issue (sorted itself out after I put the laptop into monitor mode to capture packets). On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Aaron Wood wrote: > All, > > I've been lurking on the OpenWRT forum, looking to see when the CC builds > for the WRT1900AC stabilized, and they seem to be so (for a very "beta"-ish > version of stable). > > So I went ahead and loaded up the daily ( CHAOS CALMER (Bleeding Edge, > r45715)). > > After getting Luci and sqm-scripts installed, I did a few baseline tests. > Wifi to the MacBook Pro is... broken. 30Mbps vs. 90+ on the stock > firmware. iPhone is fine (80-90Mbps download speed from the internet). > > After some rrul runs, this is what I ended up with: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538967 > > sqm-scripts are set for: > 100Mbps download > 10Mbps upload > fq_codel > ECN > no-squash > don't ignore > > Here's a before run, with the stock firmware: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/337392 > > So, unfortunately, it's still leaving 50Mbps on the table. > > However, if I set the ingress limit higher (130Mbps), buffering is still > controlled. Not as well, though. from +5ms to +10ms, with lots of > jitter. But it still looks great to the dslreports test: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538990 > > But the upside? load is practically nil. The WRT1900AC, with it's > dual-core processor is more than enough to keep up with this (from a load > point of view), but it seems like the bottleneck isn't the raw CPU power > (cache?). > > I'll get a writeup with graphs on the blog tomorrow (I hope). > > -Aaron > --001a1146f100a133e80516cddf1b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
After more tweaking, and after Comcast's network settl= ed down some, I have some rather quite nice results:




So it looks like the WRT1900AC is a definite contender for= our faster cable services.=C2=A0 I'm not sure if it will hold out to t= he 300Mbps that you want, Dave, but it's got plenty for what Comcast is= selling right now.

-Aaron

P.S.=C2=A0 Broken wifi to the MacBook was a MacBook issue, not a router i= ssue (sorted itself out after I put the laptop into monitor mode to capture= packets).

On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Aaron Wood <woody77@gmail.com&g= t; wrote:
All,
I've been lurking on the OpenWRT forum, looking to see= when the CC builds for the WRT1900AC stabilized, and they seem to be so (f= or a very "beta"-ish version of stable).

So I went ahead and loaded up the daily (=C2=A0CHAOS CALMER (Bleeding Edge= , r45715)).

After getting Luci and sqm-scripts ins= talled, I did a few baseline tests.=C2=A0 Wifi to the MacBook Pro is... =C2= =A0broken. =C2=A030Mbps vs. 90+ on the stock firmware. =C2=A0iPhone is fine= (80-90Mbps download speed from the internet).

Aft= er some rrul runs, this is what I ended up with:

sqm-scripts are s= et for:
100Mbps download
10Mbps upload
fq_cod= el
ECN
no-squash
don't ignore
<= br>
Here's a before run, with the stock firmware:
<= a href=3D"http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/337392" target=3D"_blank">htt= p://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/337392

So= , unfortunately, it's still leaving 50Mbps on the table.

=
However, if I set the ingress limit higher (130Mbps), buffering = is still controlled.=C2=A0 Not as well, though. =C2=A0from +5ms to +10ms, w= ith lots of jitter.=C2=A0 But it still looks great to the dslreports test:<= /div>

But the upside? =C2=A0load is practically nil.=C2=A0 The WRT1900AC= , with it's dual-core processor is more than enough to keep up with thi= s (from a load point of view), but it seems like the bottleneck isn't t= he raw CPU power (cache?).

I'll get a writeup = with graphs on the blog tomorrow (I hope).

-Aaron

--001a1146f100a133e80516cddf1b--