[Cerowrt-devel] Correct syntax for cake commands and atm issues.
fredstratton at imap.cc
Fri Jul 10 11:48:04 EDT 2015
I have yet to undertake formal testing.
I moved from using a Buffalo WMBR-G300 running Barrier Breaker to a
bridged device when I broke the former tying to install Homenet.
I omitted to recraft the cake script I was using to incorporate the
correct interface, now pppoe-wan, and was unaware of the error until
today, a fortnight later.
I am therefore not expecting significant improvements.
On 10/07/15 16:19, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> I'm glad to hear there's a working version (even if it's not in the
> current build :).
> Do you have measurable improvements with overhead configured (v.s.
> I've used netperfrunner from CeroWrtScripts, e.g.
> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p $ISP_ROUTER
> I believe accounting for overhead helps on this two-way test, because
> a) it saturates the uplink b) about half that bandwidth is tiny ack
> packets (depending on bandwidth asymmetry). And small packets have
> proportionally high overhead.
> (But it seems to only make a small difference for me, which always
> surprises Seb).
> On 10/07/15 15:52, Fred Stratton wrote:
>> You are absolutely correct.
>> I tried both a numeric overhead value, and alternatively 'pppoe-vcmux'
>> and 'ether-fcs' in the build I crafted based on r46006, which is lupin
>> undeclared version 2. Everything works as stated.
>> On lupin undeclared version 4, the current release based on r46117, the
>> values were not recognised.
>> Thank you.
>> I had cake running on a Lantiq ADSL gateway running the same r46006
>> build. Unfortunately this was bricked by attempts to get homenet
>> working, so I have nothing to report about gateway usage at present.
>> On 10/07/15 13:57, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>>> You're already using correct syntax - I've written it to be quite
>>> lenient and use sensible defaults for missing information. There are
>>> several sets of keywords and parameters which are mutually orthogonal,
>>> and don't depend on each other, so "besteffort" has nothing to do with
>>> "overhead" or "atm".
>>> What's probably happening is that you're using a slightly old version
>>> of the cake kernel module which lacks the overhead parameter entirely,
>>> but a more up to date tc which does support it. We've seen this
>>> combination crop up ourselves recently.
>>> - Jonathan Morton
More information about the Cerowrt-devel