From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vb0-f43.google.com (mail-vb0-f43.google.com [209.85.212.43]) (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 7C45F21F166 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 07:31:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id fs19so18184213vbb.2 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 07:31:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:x-priority :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=SFGKWtAHfWblwKFg5HzvpaargJ5FJHQ+NvdsvmJTaBk=; b=ox+mbqABkl38eKG6ExJU7J2xWja1khbhyubK+qAs2jkex34nSxUPbGUJLWxvzDZNZN UVJMnKPPPoJIjbEoPGxCHq4yyxv8h/tn9DYueE4iUHw2xiz+HRmeWosF5Gf800jNz/Ii xYcxqSmrLWzTHI1anNjEixmToTOEWuNBExzBaZjJqaxKM4H1TNgJ9924WdWh7XudC9pd Ubp36Djjs5xduW+cNDz1hMwaLH6F8xanUK74M9tdSAUvTLOCnTc7IVWY22OaGhLAiTfM o401EWNhO/lMjjpXbE+NNX77tN6iWmo7TS2qGCtQtWq0kOaRAURVG7VUnzkH5ovlTAxj WhYg== X-Received: by 10.220.115.19 with SMTP id g19mr80712543vcq.69.1357486305635; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 07:31:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:470:894b:100:a104:7cf5:ac83:c139? ([2001:470:894b:100:a104:7cf5:ac83:c139]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cv19sm50140746vdb.5.2013.01.06.07.31.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 06 Jan 2013 07:31:44 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7D2D39F1-9246-4842-B75C-85CA51826457" From: William Katsak X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: <1357424714.707316439@apps.rackspace.com> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 10:31:44 -0500 Message-Id: References: <1357424714.707316439@apps.rackspace.com> To: dpreed@reed.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Anyone using PPPoE with Sugarland? 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, 06 Jan 2013 15:31:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7D2D39F1-9246-4842-B75C-85CA51826457 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I don't think that the QDISC variable was used in the Sugarland version = of the script. What do you have for IFACE? Thanks, -Bill On Jan 5, 2013, at 5:25 PM, dpreed@reed.com wrote: > I am using 3.7.1-1, and comparing my simple_qos.sh config with yours, = I don't see any QDISC=3D... line in yours. > So is it possible you need that? The egress() interface setup in = simple_qos.sh uses that to set the queue discipline. > =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: "William Katsak" > Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2013 4:37pm > To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" = > Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Anyone using PPPoE with Sugarland? >=20 > Hello, >=20 > I am experimenting with using Cero/Sugarland on a PPPoE connection, = and can't seem to find a config of simple_qos that works well. >=20 > The service is DSL, PPPoE, 3M/768K. Without any qos, the router works = well, as expected. When I try to use simple_qos, the clients have = trouble loading websites (hangs while loading, etc). >=20 > Netlyzer shows upstream buffering of about 650ms, consistently. I have = tried various higher and lower values for UPLINK and DOWNLINK, but = nothing seems to help. Anyway, I think 15-20% below link should be fine. >=20 > Here is my config: > UPLINK=3D550 > DOWNLINK=3D1900 > DEV=3Difb0 > IFACE=3Dge00 > DEPTH=3D42 > TC=3D/usr/sbin/tc > FLOWS=3D8000 > PERTURB=3D"perturb 0" # Permutation is costly, disable > FLOWS=3D16000 #=20 > BQL_MAX=3D3000 # it is important to factor this into the RED calc >=20 > CEIL=3D$UPLINK > MTU=3D1492 > ADSLL=3D"" > PPOE=3Dyes >=20 > Couple of things I am unsure about: > 1) Should the IFACE be ge00 or pppoe-ge00? > 2) Should the MTU be the pppoe mtu (1492) or the ethernet (1500) >=20 > One last thing: I have the lan split up into VLAN interfaces se00.1, = se00.100, and se00.200. Everything otherwise works as expected with = these, but could the naming be breaking something? >=20 > If anyone is willing to share a working configuration it would be much = appreciated. >=20 > Thanks, > Bill Katsak >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --Apple-Mail=_7D2D39F1-9246-4842-B75C-85CA51826457 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii I = don't think that the QDISC variable was used in the Sugarland version of = the script.

What do you have for = IFACE?

Thanks,
-Bill

On Jan 5, 2013, at 5:25 PM, dpreed@reed.com wrote:

I am using 3.7.1-1, and comparing my simple_qos.sh config with = yours, I don't see any QDISC=3D... line in yours.
So is it possible you need = that?  The egress() interface setup in simple_qos.sh uses that to = set the queue discipline.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: "William Katsak" = <wkatsak@gmail.com>
Sent: = Saturday, January 5, 2013 4:37pm
To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bu= fferbloat.net" <cerowrt-devel@lists.bu= fferbloat.net>
Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Anyone using PPPoE = with Sugarland?

Hello,

I am experimenting with using Cero/Sugarland on a = PPPoE connection, and can't seem to find a config of simple_qos that = works well.

The service is DSL, PPPoE, 3M/768K. Without any qos, = the router works well, as expected. When I try to use simple_qos, the = clients have trouble loading websites (hangs while loading, = etc).

Netlyzer shows upstream buffering of about 650ms, = consistently. I have tried various higher and lower values for UPLINK = and DOWNLINK, but nothing seems to help. Anyway, I think 15-20% below = link should be fine.

Here is my = config:
UPLINK=3D550
DOWNLINK=3D1900
DEV=3Difb0
IFACE=3Dge00DEPTH=3D42
TC=3D/usr/sbin/tc
FLOWS=3D8000
PERTURB=3D"perturb = 0" # Permutation is costly, disable
FLOWS=3D16000 #
BQL_MAX=3D3000 = # it is important to factor this into the RED = calc

CEIL=3D$UPLINK
MTU=3D1492
ADSLL=3D""
PPOE=3Dyes
Couple of things I am unsure about:
1) Should the IFACE be ge00 or = pppoe-ge00?
2) Should the MTU be the pppoe mtu (1492) or the ethernet = (1500)

One last thing: I have the lan split up into VLAN = interfaces se00.1, se00.100, and se00.200. Everything otherwise works as = expected with these, but could the naming be breaking = something?

If anyone is willing to share a working configuration = it would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Bill = Katsak

_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-d= evel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bu= fferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel<= /div>

= --Apple-Mail=_7D2D39F1-9246-4842-B75C-85CA51826457--