From: Jeremy Tourville <organ_dr@hotmail.com>
To: "cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [Cerowrt-users] SQM Setup and Performance
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:06:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BLU175-W83264DBB20827095EB653F3AF0@phx.gbl> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2403 bytes --]
Hello, I followed your excellent instructions here -
http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/Setting_up_SQM_for_CeroWrt_310
I am using build 3.10.24-8
I am using a DSL line rated at 6 Mbps down and 512kbps up. My real throughput without SQM enabled is 5.7Mbps down and 450kbps up.
After enabling SQM my throughput has dropped to approximately 4.5Mbps down and 350 kbps up. Does this seem like an amount that is expected? (within norms?)
It would seem reasonable that I should expect some performance loss at the expense of better bufferbloat management based on setting 85-95% of actual download/upload speeds. Please correct me if I am wrong. :-) But my question is, how much is too much? The setting of SQM does fix the bufferbloat issue as evidenced by ping testing and times for packets. With SQM on all packets were 100ms or less. With SQM off the times jumped to over 500ms or more during the speed testing.
For reference I have set the parameters as indicated in the screenshots. I have changed only two variables and tested after each change as indicated in the grid below.
Que setup script
Per packet
overhead
test
results
Test #1
simple.qos
40
no buffer, less
throughput
<100ms, 4.5mbps
down
Test #2
simple.qos
44
no buffer, less
throughput
<100ms, 4.5mbps
down
Test #3
simplest.qos
40
no buffer, less
throughput
<100ms, 4.5mbps
down
Test #4
simplest.qos
44
no buffer, less
throughput
<100ms, 4.5mbps
down
I also read your statement-
>>>"The CeroWrt development team has been working to nail down a no-brainer set of instructions for eliminating bufferbloat - the lag/latency that kills voice & video chat, gaming, and overall network responsiveness. The hard part is that optimal configuration of the Smart Queue Management (SQM) link is difficult - there are tons of options an ISP can set. Although CeroWrt can adapt to any of them, it's difficult to find out the exact characteristics of the link you have."
What info do I need to get from my ISP to best optimize my connection?
I also recognize that this could be an issue that requires multiple changes at once. I am curious to know from the experts what your thoughts are on this. Many thanks in advance!
-Jeremy
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8199 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2014-01-30 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-30 17:06 Jeremy Tourville [this message]
2014-01-30 17:42 ` Dave Taht
2014-01-30 19:29 ` Sebastian Moeller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=BLU175-W83264DBB20827095EB653F3AF0@phx.gbl \
--to=organ_dr@hotmail.com \
--cc=cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox