[Cerowrt-users] Cerowrt_question

[Cerowrt-users] Cerowrt_question

[Oliver Niesner]

Hi, all!

I am new to all this stuff but as a networking enthusiast, i want to 
learn ;-)
I installed cerowrt on my brand new wndr-3800 and it runs fine.
I changed the radios to my country (germany) as suggested and then i 
connected to the wlan
with my notebook (qos in cerowrt enabled). After running netalyzr the 
buffersizes in ms are much better.
But at this point i have some problems with understanding: I run the 
cerowrt as a second router in my
normal network, so the gateway to the internet is my "normal" router 
with all the problems with buffers we all have. How could it be that the 
buffersizes are so much better even when i connected with my
standard router?? If someone could explain me a bit more, it would be 
very nice. I also want support
this project as best as i can. If i can provide any useful info/data, 
please let me know. I certainly have
a ton of questions in the next weeks, hope there are not too much noob 
ones :-)

Thanks,

Oliver

Re: [Cerowrt-users] Cerowrt_question

[Dave Taht]

Wow. I think this is the first post ever to cerowrt-users. I note
cerowrt-devel is where most of the action is, and I'd advise posting
over there (for now).

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Oliver Niesner
<oliver.niesner@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, all!
>
> I am new to all this stuff but as a networking enthusiast, i want to learn
> ;-)
> I installed cerowrt on my brand new wndr-3800 and it runs fine.
> I changed the radios to my country (germany) as suggested and then i
> connected to the wlan
> with my notebook (qos in cerowrt enabled). After running netalyzr the
> buffersizes in ms are much better.
> But at this point i have some problems with understanding: I run the cerowrt
> as a second router in my
> normal network, so the gateway to the internet is my "normal" router with
> all the problems with buffers we all have. How could it be that the
> buffersizes are so much better even when i connected with my
> standard router??

The point here is that by setting qos on and doing rate limiting
you've moved the core bottleneck from the gateway device or other main
router to cero, which can then manage the problem.

(but only for devices that are behind it. And, yes, if you have
competing traffic on the main router, it will mess up qos)

I generally advise people to FIRST make sure their environment still
works - like printing, samba, dlna, and other services - before making
a version of cerowrt into their main router. Particularly if they have
spouses/kids/work dependent on the network always working.

and then certain releases of cerowrt can certainly be used (after that
testing) as your main router (-17 is looking good, but there is a
patch outstanding on the cerowrt-devel mailing list for openwrt's qos
to lower it's buffering somewhat). See the archives for details.

https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2012-August/000394.html

but if your intent is to help fix the internet, please! do follow
along with our development of cero by using it as a secondary router,
too....

> If someone could explain me a bit more, it would be very
> nice. I also want support
> this project as best as i can.

The wiki always needs love, in particular.

> If i can provide any useful info/data, please
> let me know. I certainly have
> a ton of questions in the next weeks, hope there are not too much noob ones
> :-)

Noob questions welcomed, the effort of writing emails in explanation
generally results in stuff getting wikied...

> Thanks,
>
> Oliver
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-users mailing list
> Cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-users



-- 
Dave Täht
http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki - "3.3.8-17 is out
with fq_codel!"

Re: [Cerowrt-users] Cerowrt_question

[Maciej Soltysiak]

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Oliver Niesner
> <oliver.niesner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But at this point i have some problems with understanding: I run the cerowrt
>> as a second router in my
>> normal network, so the gateway to the internet is my "normal" router with
>> all the problems with buffers we all have. How could it be that the
>> buffersizes are so much better even when i connected with my
>> standard router??
>
> The point here is that by setting qos on and doing rate limiting
> you've moved the core bottleneck from the gateway device or other main
> router to cero, which can then manage the problem.
>
> (but only for devices that are behind it. And, yes, if you have
> competing traffic on the main router, it will mess up qos)
>
> I generally advise people to FIRST make sure their environment still
> works - like printing, samba, dlna, and other services - before making
> a version of cerowrt into their main router. Particularly if they have
> spouses/kids/work dependent on the network always working.
I have the same setup as you, Oliver, a EPC3925 cable modem with
WNDR3800 connected to it as second device so I am able to fight
buffers where I have access.

What I started doing last week though is I deployed an additional
WRT54GL for emergency, including family use if I make WNDR3800
inoperable. I connect it to the cisco cable modem. For the WRT54GL I
am using Hector Ordorica's Tomato RAF build with some anti-bufferbloat
changes, for the broadcom chip buffer size, txqueuelen and around qos:
http://ordorica.org/blog/tomato-firmware-wreduced-bufferbloat

Hector is not doing any further builds, but it gives very good results
on netalyzr.

This allows me to tinker away with WNDR3800 and if I break anything,
anyone can still use the WRT54GL.
Yes, this means I can have competeng traffic on the router, but the
54GL is for emergency use only.

Regards,
Maciej