From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B80A33B260 for ; Sun, 4 Dec 2016 11:33:19 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id c21so516211262ioj.1 for ; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 08:33:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=xY51UqQE2tdjTjhfowE/Ddlp70U73c6GWqcg/wwLjlw=; b=euRDW8uNaUnkS3iL0iXQ+s8VRZvgL0gT9MMoMy0QfMcLbYLv5OXpxXqzWPG7TK0HUH JWGE8DHpJSrP9dIFYP4V4lr2aSTCek7tB6WLPvQn2JO+2EnT8Ug6+CmbS35R6NMcrKVe Rdpw9mRjnflEpK/nCm8rnL9ARUbjOz3tXNTTPKZJ8LWwWe6YedHh5gvUXQkyL9acsfR3 vzPJQrnQ3QkuDScRTeZDhJhh9OE0pWFMVCebxfQ/CNjRZOKrWSyHSkCPILP5S3ygLIUA bi+owxoPAn3zejjIiKtm5CchLQpSySN+UjzkVHsKSEiLqev6M+KLE3GQMm0VplZGR5wB kWJA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=xY51UqQE2tdjTjhfowE/Ddlp70U73c6GWqcg/wwLjlw=; b=Jq4L3cmxYFFg3O81k81FFzRoWBsIn6aPwLV163gq8AKpQ7ClOW5mLMG2imE/xcrv+x DxfX4GhpIheHYjfJWR6xXxqFkV+65pYsDAgKahkSIrTbU/RDBEZOtlJseUtYqb6G2eWd 4++yaP9UHM97Eyy+kcIG29VwpRljYkBOhf13Z+7OD738E9C29oMtpB8qjn1xxcICAuCm f2FoA+Hp1WMeVFkkrHCWd1rZh2DxFosBpmZP2/ynGNq9bUvzwSll7kHtLIPYipnaVFhz SrzGh7zIKmVCHbZFgYyvvusPuhlDf1kVtP9Hf7Z71CxG9kDGfW1uGp/6yMq77bPEDIDQ X9Ig== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC038qsu4Uotx6jWQN9ddDF9fwqrCHGISMGNd7wktKfkecJL9ZEJMfQ21G25HPy/uDQ== X-Received: by 10.107.174.88 with SMTP id x85mr43870118ioe.125.1480869199047; Sun, 04 Dec 2016 08:33:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.105] (c-68-42-142-136.hsd1.mi.comcast.net. [68.42.142.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x190sm4739867ite.14.2016.12.04.08.33.18 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 04 Dec 2016 08:33:18 -0800 (PST) To: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net References: From: Noah Causin Message-ID: <7edb76c5-4393-04cd-2558-560b38d9e7a1@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 11:33:22 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------B6A5C0E4276820CA9D774616" Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Updated LEDE build with airtime patches X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2016 16:33:19 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------B6A5C0E4276820CA9D774616 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Maybe your ISP gives you a burst of bandwidth and then takes it away shortly after. Comcast was known for doing this with their Powerboost. Try these settings: Download: 42500 Upload: 4000 On 12/4/2016 5:11 AM, Jon Pike wrote: > Here's some straight eth to router test runs. > > Wierdly, I'm getting worse performance on ethernet, than 15 minutes > ago over the wifi link. This computer is older and slower though, and > with a HD rather than a SSD. > > UL speed is slower overall, in the first two of the three tests, with > many more high latency events on the bloat graph occuring on both the > DL and the UL. Last one was cleaner and faster, though with a few > large excursions. > > C7 gbit eth - gbit PC eth > > Somewhat slower Win 10 PC than the USB adapter platform. > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881431 slow UL speeds, many high > latency events, bloat score B > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881473 " " > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881491 better than the first two, > both in UL speed and low latency > > Hope this is helpful... > > > On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Jon Pike > wrote: > > Did a new set on the same PC located on the other side of the > house. Will also add the requested ethernet attached PC runs > later. Just discovered that you can click on the bufferbloat > graph items on the DSLReports Speedtest results, and they actually > expand into a detailed picture vs time graph. Never knew about that! > > I disabled my virus scanner (Kaspersky) for the first time. Don't > know if the smoother and faster results are more due to that, vs > maybe it's pretty quiet on the home network front right now... > > One thing I've been wondering about, is the speed setting in the > SQM, i.e. the 55mbit/5mbit in my case. Is it supposed to cap the > data rates below the setting? If so, why am I still getting my > upload speed surge of 10 or more mbit, even with it set to 5? > > > New set of tests on the C7, Toke's 11-24 build. > Same cake and piece of cake SQM as before, Noah's suggestion of > removing the extra SQM settings has been done. > SQM cap speeds: 55/5mbit > Other new change, virus scanner disabled. > > Very smooth, near perfect speeds, only a very few high latency > spikes. No neighboring PC running videos, or gaming, like there > was in earlier tests. Maybe the upstairs roommate also wasn't as > busy as well? > > 2.4Ghz AC adapter - Netgear A6200 AC1200 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880534 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880607 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880642 > > > 5Ghz AC adapter - Netgear A6200 AC1200 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880694 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880747 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880827 > > > 2.4Ghz N adapter - Netgear WNA3100 N300 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880915 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880950 > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880968 > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Noah Causin > > To: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > > Cc: > Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:41:11 -0500 > Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Updated LEDE build with airtime > patches > > Are you using the dual-dsthost and dual-srchost options? If > so, try removing those settings from SQM and uncheck all the > checkboxes you selected to reach them. > > Then try a test on Ethernet with SQM on. > > Noah > > > On 12/2/2016 1:14 PM, Jon Pike wrote: >> Hello all... >> >> Well, with medical issues, and having a busy week, I didn't >> get back right away. Here's the DSLReports Speedtest runs I took. >> >> My results here are pretty variable, so I don't know how >> trustworthy they are or how worth while to you guys, vs >> FLENT runs. >> The lower block is using Toke's 11-18 C7 FW build, the upper >> block is with the 11-24 build. >> >> Upshot, on my Archer C7, both ran for days with no apparent >> issues, on my home network. Interesting note, I ran both >> the C7 v2 and the C7 v3, both ran fine. So, if you end up >> with a v3, it shouldn't be an issue. Further side note, >> the different configuration of the v3 model, with both 2.4Ghz >> and 5Ghz on the external "rabbit ears" antennas, seems to >> have a bit stronger signal on 2.4Ghz on the other end of my >> house, than the v2 model that has 3 separate, small 2.4Ghz >> antennas inside the box. Caveat, my testing of that wasn't >> very thourough.. >> >> My overall home network setup is: Cox cable - SB6146 modem - >> Archer C7 router - various clients. I did testing on a PC >> plugged directely in a eth port of the C7, to PC's using >> Netgear Netgear WNA3100 N300, and A6200 AC1200 USB adapters. >> >> Below are the links to DSLReports, on the tests. Most have >> cake, and piece of cake, and Noah's suggested settings, with >> speed caps of 55 and 5 mbit. My cable is supposed to be >> 60/6, I see 65 often, with wild speed variation on the UL, >> settling to 5-6mbits. >> >> I have the Speedtest settings set for hi res bufferbloat, >> test time extended to 20sec, which is about as long as you >> can go without pushing the start of the test off the end of >> that graph. >> >> Let me know if this is in any way useful, or what I can do >> to make it more worth looking at. It seems so variable and >> random, that I wonder about the worth, as well as you don't >> get a good look at what the latencey is over time, vs FLENT. >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> eth0 to router - no SQM >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6656688 >> Starts near 60, >> plateau 64-65 (hits 66) then drops to 52-54 at the 10sec >> mark. UL hits 18, before falling down to a 4.5-5.5 average >> Bloat C >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6657058 >> very similar, >> but bloat an A this time >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6657916 >> " Bloat >> a C this time >> >> >> now C7 V2, with Toke 11-24 FW SQM 55/5 >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6659367 >> 51.2 1.65, bloat B >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6659493 >> 52.4 3.01 >> bloat A peak of 300-400ms on all including idle? >> >> -------------------------------- >> Earlier tests with Toke's 11-18 FW, SQM 55/5 mbits >> >> 2.4Ghz N adapter Netgear WNA3100 N300 adapter >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440808 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440846 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440864 >> >> >> >> 2.4Ghz AC adapter Netgear A6200 AC1200 adapter >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440940 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440963 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440987 >> >> >> 5Ghz AC adapter Netgear A6200 AC1200 adapter >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441015 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441038 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441056 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441132 >> (first A grade >> of the batch) >> >> eth1 to C7 >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441483 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441570 >> >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441586 >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Jon Pike > >> To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" > >> Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 21:58:46 -0800 >> Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Updated LEDE build with airtime >> patches >> >> Wish I wasn't out of town still... I could have got some >> time with the new one. Had been running the 11-18 build >> version of yours, on a C7 v2 in my mixed home network >> enviroment. N devices, AC devices, a semi rogue N range >> extender, all running WPA2-AES. >> >> I did see some occasional large amounts of bloat, most of >> the time good behavior. Occasional odd, regular thru put >> drops to 1/4 speed. I mentioned this in earlier posts, >> have done some more detailed testing since, that's at home >> and unavailable till I'm home again. You could see a few >> DSLReports logs in my posts. >> >> Hope that helps... >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast >> > _______________________________________________ Make-wifi-fast > mailing list Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast > > > _______________________________________________ > Make-wifi-fast mailing list > Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast --------------B6A5C0E4276820CA9D774616 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Maybe your ISP gives you a burst of bandwidth and then takes it away shortly after.  Comcast was known for doing this with their Powerboost.

Try these settings:

Download: 42500

Upload:  4000


On 12/4/2016 5:11 AM, Jon Pike wrote:
Here's some straight eth to router test runs.

Wierdly, I'm getting worse performance on ethernet, than 15 minutes ago over the wifi link. This computer is older and slower though, and with a HD rather than a SSD. 

UL speed is slower overall, in the first two of the three tests,  with many more high latency events on the bloat graph occuring on both the DL and the UL.  Last one was cleaner and faster, though with a few large excursions.

C7 gbit eth - gbit PC eth

Somewhat slower Win 10 PC than the USB adapter platform.

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881431  slow UL speeds, many high latency events, bloat score B
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881473               "         "
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6881491  better than the first two, both in UL speed and low latency

Hope this is helpful...


On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Jon Pike <jonpike54@gmail.com> wrote:
Did a new set on the same PC located on the other side of the house.  Will also add the requested ethernet attached PC runs later.  Just discovered that you can click on the bufferbloat graph items on the DSLReports Speedtest results, and they actually expand into a detailed picture vs time graph.  Never knew about that!

I disabled my virus scanner (Kaspersky) for the first time.  Don't know if the smoother and faster results are more due to that, vs maybe it's pretty quiet on the home network front right now...

One thing I've been wondering about, is the speed setting in the SQM,  i.e. the 55mbit/5mbit in my case.  Is it supposed to cap the data rates below the setting?  If so, why am I still getting my upload speed surge of 10 or more mbit, even with it set to 5? 


New set of tests on the C7, Toke's 11-24 build.
Same cake and piece of cake SQM as before, Noah's suggestion of removing the extra SQM settings has been done.
SQM cap speeds: 55/5mbit
Other new change, virus scanner disabled.

Very smooth, near perfect speeds, only a very few high latency spikes. No neighboring PC running videos, or gaming, like there was in earlier tests. Maybe the upstairs roommate also wasn't as busy as well?

2.4Ghz AC adapter - Netgear A6200 AC1200

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880534
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880607
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880642

5Ghz AC adapter - Netgear A6200 AC1200

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880694
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880747
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880827

2.4Ghz N adapter - Netgear WNA3100 N300

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880915
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880950
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6880968


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Noah Causin <n0manletter@gmail.com>
To: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
Cc: 
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:41:11 -0500
Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Updated LEDE build with airtime patches

Are you using the dual-dsthost and dual-srchost options?  If so, try removing those settings from SQM and uncheck all the checkboxes you selected to reach them.

Then try a test on Ethernet with SQM on.

Noah


On 12/2/2016 1:14 PM, Jon Pike wrote:
Hello all...

Well, with medical issues, and having a busy week,  I didn't get back right away.  Here's the DSLReports Speedtest runs I took.

My results here are pretty variable,  so I don't know how trustworthy they are or how worth while to you guys,  vs  FLENT runs.
The lower block is using Toke's 11-18 C7 FW build,  the upper block is with the 11-24 build.

Upshot,  on my Archer C7,  both ran for days with no apparent issues,  on my home network.  Interesting note,  I ran both the C7 v2 and the C7 v3,  both ran fine.  So, if you end up with a v3,  it shouldn't be an issue.  Further side note,  the different configuration of the v3 model,  with both 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz on the external "rabbit ears" antennas, seems to have a bit stronger signal on 2.4Ghz on the other end of my house,  than the v2 model that has 3 separate, small 2.4Ghz antennas inside the box.  Caveat,  my testing of that wasn't very thourough..

My overall home network setup is:  Cox cable - SB6146 modem - Archer C7 router - various clients.   I did testing on a PC plugged directely in a eth port of the C7,  to PC's using Netgear Netgear WNA3100  N300, and A6200 AC1200 USB adapters.

Below are the links to DSLReports,  on the tests.  Most have cake, and piece of cake, and Noah's suggested settings, with speed caps of 55 and 5 mbit.  My cable is supposed to be 60/6,  I see 65 often, with wild speed variation on the UL, settling to 5-6mbits.

I have the Speedtest settings set for hi res bufferbloat,  test time extended to 20sec, which is about as long as you can go without pushing the start of the test off the end of that graph.

Let me know if this is in any way useful,  or what I can do to make it more worth looking at.  It seems so variable and random, that I wonder about the worth,  as well as you don't get a good look at what the latencey is over time,  vs FLENT.

-------------------------------------------
eth0 to router   -  no SQM

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6656688  Starts near 60, plateau 64-65 (hits 66) then drops to 52-54 at the 10sec mark. UL hits 18, before falling down to a 4.5-5.5 average  Bloat C

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6657058  very similar,  but bloat an A this time

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6657916    "        Bloat a C this time


now C7 V2, with Toke 11-24 FW  SQM 55/5

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6659367 51.2 1.65, bloat B

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6659493 52.4 3.01  bloat A  peak of 300-400ms  on all including idle?

--------------------------------
Earlier tests with Toke's 11-18 FW,  SQM 55/5 mbits

2.4Ghz N adapter  Netgear WNA3100  N300 adapter

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440808

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440846

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440864


2.4Ghz AC adapter  Netgear A6200 AC1200 adapter

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440940

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440963

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6440987

5Ghz AC adapter  Netgear A6200 AC1200 adapter

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441015

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441038

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441056

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441132   (first A grade of the batch)

eth1 to C7

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441483

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441570

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/6441586


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jon Pike <jonpike54@gmail.com>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 21:58:46 -0800
Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Updated LEDE build with airtime patches

Wish I wasn't out of town still...  I could have got some time with the new one.  Had been running the 11-18 build version of yours,  on a C7 v2 in my mixed home network enviroment.  N devices, AC devices,  a semi rogue N range extender, all running WPA2-AES.

I did see some occasional large amounts of bloat,  most of the time good behavior.  Occasional odd, regular thru put drops to 1/4 speed.   I mentioned this in earlier posts,  have done some more detailed testing since,  that's at home and unavailable  till I'm home again.  You could see a few DSLReports logs in my posts.

Hope that helps...





_______________________________________________
Make-wifi-fast mailing list
Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
_______________________________________________ Make-wifi-fast mailing list Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast 
_______________________________________________
Make-wifi-fast mailing list
Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
--------------B6A5C0E4276820CA9D774616--