From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Mike Loiterman <mike@ascendency.net>
Cc: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [LibreQoS] network.json and ShapedDevices.csv for Multi-Wan SOHO
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 19:15:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw5M9+tf_miPsCzUR5Vnbrqh_FjbjP5bNKvXsb+9pH1C+g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9EF819F0-E158-4CCB-A2AF-FC3430D637BF@ascendency.net>
The fastest way to get support is via the #libreqos:matrix.org
chatroom, although we also do github bugs and good ole fashioned
email.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 7:03 PM Mike Loiterman via LibreQoS
<libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> Hello, all.
>
> Really new to LibreQoS, but so far it’s been working really, really well with my pfSense setup.
So wonderful to see you trying it. Are you using v1.3, v1.4-rc2 or the
heimdall (v1.5) branch?
> I’d like some input on how best to setup my network.json and ShapedDevices.csv given the following parameters:
>
> 1. I have three very asymmetric WANs that connect to my pfSense Edge router/firewall:
> a. WAN_1 - 1200/35
> b. WAN_2 - 25/2
> c. WAN_3 - 50/4
> 2. pfSense connects to my Layer 3 Aruba 2920 switch via a single 10gig transit link so:
> a. pfSense: 172.16.0.1/30
> b. 2920: 172.16.0.2/30
> 3. LibreQoS sits between the pfSense and the 2920 with 10gig layer2 bridge between 172.16.0.1 and 172.16.0.2 setup on an intel X710.
> 4. Behind pfSense I have the following VLAN layout:
> a. VLAN_1 @ 192.168.1.0/24 via WAN_1
> b. VLAN_2 @ 192.168.2.0/24 via WAN_1
> c. VLAN_3 @ 192.168.3.0/24 via WAN_2
> d. VLAN_4 @ 192.168.4.0/24 via WAN_3
>
> So, given these parameters, can anyone provide some general tips on how to structure the two files?
It doesn't sound to me as though you need much of a network.json. A
flat topology will suffice, unless you need to model multiple devices
further down the chain from VLAN_X.
As for the upstream though, load balancing that is kind of painful and
more the domain of pfsense than libre.
Additionally, shaping those upstreams properly is problematic, I would
probably use pfsenses's native fq_codel implementation on each of
those WAN interfaces to install an upper limit for egress but on
ingress... hmm... and in either case something needs to attempt to
direct the "right" amount of traffic through those interfaces.
>
> ------------------------------
> Mike Loiterman
> Cell: 630-302-4944
> Email: mike@ascendency.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> LibreQoS mailing list
> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
--
Come Heckle Mar 6-9 at: https://www.understandinglatency.com/
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-21 2:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-21 2:03 Mike Loiterman
2023-03-21 2:15 ` Dave Taht [this message]
2023-03-21 2:17 ` Dave Taht
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
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/libreqos.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAA93jw5M9+tf_miPsCzUR5Vnbrqh_FjbjP5bNKvXsb+9pH1C+g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=mike@ascendency.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