[Cerowrt-devel] [Cerowrt-users] Cerowrt_question
maciej at soltysiak.com
Sun Aug 19 08:08:12 EDT 2012
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Oliver Niesner
> <oliver.niesner at 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:
Hector is not doing any further builds, but it gives very good results
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.
More information about the Cerowrt-devel