[Cerowrt-devel] comcast provisioned rates?

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave,


On Apr 19, 2014, at 19:57 , Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:

> The features of the PowerBoost feature are well documented at this
> point. A proper
> emulation of them is in the ns2 code. It has been a persistent feature
> request, to
> add support to some Linux rate shaper to properly emulate PowerBoost,
> but no funding
> ever arrived.
> 
> Basically  you get 10 extra megabytes above the base rate at whatever
> rate the line
> can sustain before it settles back to the base rate.
> 
> You can also see that as presently implemented, at least on a short
> RTT path, the feature
> does not prevent bufferbloat.
> 
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/jimreisert/results.html
> 
> I'd like a faster, less cpu intense rate shaper than sch_htb in
> general, and powerboost emulation would be nice.

	So there is a hint at the end of https://calomel.org/pf_hfsc.html describing how to use the hfsc qdisc to allow power boost. It is not perfect though as "whatever rate the line can sustain" is rather badly defined for all attempts to keep the modem queues shallow… But still the link shows a potential way to allow power boost from cerowrt. I have no idea how hfsc compares to htb in terms of processing needs though…

Best Regards
	sebastian

> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Aaron Wood <woody77 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Based on these results:
>> 
>> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/jimreisert/results.html
>> 
>> And talking off-list with Jim, I think that the "PowerBoost" is above the
>> quoted rate, as the 24/4 service hits >36Mbps TCP data rate.  I'm definitely
>> sad that using SQM in the router instead of the modem loses features like
>> that.  But I'll just be happy to have upload over 1Mbps again.
>> 
>> I do know that the FCC was cracking down on advertised vs. actual rates, and
>> started a "measuring broadband in America" project:
>> 
>> http://www.fcc.gov/measuring-broadband-america
>> 
>> -Aaron
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 6:21 PM, <dpreed at reed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> As a non-Comcast-customer, I am curious too.  I had thought their "boost"
>>> feature allowed temporary rates *larger* than the quoted "up to" rates.
>>> (but I remember the old TV-diagonal games and disk capacity games, where any
>>> way to get a larger number was used in the advertising, since the FTC didn't
>>> have a definition that could be applied).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I wonder if some enterprising lawyer might bring the necessary consumer
>>> fraud class-action before the FTC to get clear definitions of the numbers?
>>> It's probably too much to ask for Comcast to go on the record with a precise
>>> definition.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Saturday, April 19, 2014 8:55am, "Aaron Wood" <woody77 at gmail.com> said:
>>> 
>>> I'm setting up new service in the US, and I'm currently assuming that all
>>> of Comcast's rates are "boosted" rates, not the "provisioned" rates.
>>> So if they quote 50/10Mbps, I assume that's not what will need to be set
>>> in SQM with CeroWRT.
>>> Does anyone have good info on the "provisioned" rates that go with each of
>>> the Comcast tiers?
>>> Basically, I'm trying to get to an apples-to-apples comparison with
>>> Sonic.net DSL (I'll be close enough to the CO to run in Annex M "upload
>>> priority" mode and get ~18/2 service).
>>> Thanks,
>>> Aaron
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel