See comments inline:- Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 4:01:26 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP VoIP QoS > > You're comparing a number of related but different things. > 802.1p/802.11e/WMM is L2, DSCP is L3. Differentiated Services isn't > "older" at all. DiffServ replaced IP Precedence. > yes and no, there is a very distinct relationship between all of them... it can be argued that 802.1p was shoe horned in backwards, i.e. the need to have QoS on l2 devices, while carrying l3 traffic.... WMM is more of a standard for WIFI radios. > I'm not that worried about 802.1p since we don't have much voice traffic > on the same L2 segments. DSCP is important in L3/routing which is where > pretty much all of the traffic is. > stop and think about it for a moment... the connection between the AP & SM is a l2 connection. I agree with you that today DSCP is prevailing in it's importance. > Canopy respects 802.1p and DiffServ. You can even reverse them so that > one is preferred over the other. There's nothing old school about the > way Canopy does QOS. It's only different in the fact that there's MIR > and HP, which is completely fine as far as prioritizing VoIP. > Yes, I agree the Canopy implementation is a 'fuller' implementation. > Don't forget that Ubiquiti had a problem in AirOS where the WMM stuff > didn't work right and was mapped wrong or whatever it was. That was a > plague for quite a while. And there was no way to change it. > Yes, in AirOS, one can say the QoS implementation was an afterthought, which would not be unfair to say because when the M devices came into the market place, VOIP was not so prevalent.... In case of EPMP, I suspect that Cambium is doing some of their own mojo, vs relying on the WMM/QoS capabilities of the underlying Atheros chipset, which is why they have this dumbed down version. ( I think with their Canopy line they were using their own custom designed chipsets). > On 6/7/2015 1:43 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > > Ok, let me see if I can re-phrase.... > > > > You would like to see a more industry best practice standard way of doing > > QOS on EPMP. > > You are used to the older DiffServe table that was / is existing in Canopy. > > (I am guessing you like the granularity of it). > > > > I would argue with you that the DiffServe method is one of the Four > > industry standard way of doing QOS.... and there are translation table > > available to correlate between them all. (DiffServe(DSCP), WME, IP > > Precedence, and 802.1p/CoS) > > > > According to > > http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-Configuration-Management/How-do-I-configure-ePMP-QOS-for-VOIP/td-p/35640 > > > > Cambium is taking the simplified approach of using 3 queues, and using > > layman labels for the highest priority classifications. > > > > Speaking for myself, I would much rather see a QoS implementation based on > > industry standards (most likely WMM Style), but at the same time I cannot > > agree with your request to go back to the older DiffServe Table method. I > > also am not a fan of dumbing down field labels from something different > > than industry best practices. > > > > However I can understand Cambium trying to make the Web Interface, simple > > to use i.e. dumbing it down. > > > > Having said that, it might be a good idea to have someone create a more > > complete table of DSCP values and suggested mapping into the three queues. > > (something like this > > https://wiki.ubnt.com/AirMax_-_QoS_DSCP/TOS_Mappings) > > > > While the qos interface is dumbed down, and there is not a lot of detailed > > info available about it, it has the basics of being able to customize the > > QOS on the Radio. > > > > I suspect that they are not relying on the QOS handling built in the > > Atheros chipset. > > > > Yes I would like to see them use a more standard approach to QOS handling, > > having said that, I can also tell you that whatever mojo they are doing > > with the handling of VOIP QOS it is far superb when compared to some of > > the other radios such as Ubiquiti Airmax. > > > > Regards > > > > Faisal Imtiaz > > Snappy Internet & Telecom > > 7266 SW 48 Street > > Miami, FL 33155 > > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 1:40:17 PM > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP VoIP QoS > >> > >> Maybe, but is it wrong to ask for some uniformity across the two > >> platforms? They could take the Canopy DiffServ table and apply it to > >> ePMP to get the same functionality. > >> > >> On 6/7/2015 10:11 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > >>> BTW, the latest firmware for GXP 2160 is 1.0.4.23 (did a google search), > >>> and the admin manual shows two settings for L3 QOS (one for SIP and one > >>> for RTP) > >>> > >>> EPMP QOS allows you to modify the default settings to over-ride to your > >>> taste. > >>> > >>> If I understand your 'complaint' you are dealing with f**ed up > >>> GrandStream > >>> Phones, and you want Cambium to Change the Default handling of VOIP QoS > >>> to > >>> match your needs ? > >>> > >>> Now that does not make any logical sense... > >>> > >>> The default setup for QoS Voip on EPMP is perfectly fine for all of the > >>> other devices which follow the industry standard of VOIP/Video packet > >>> marking. > >>> > >>> Unless there is something that I am totally missing, I think you are > >>> taking > >>> out your frustrations with GrandStream on Cambium ! > >>> > >>> :) > >>> > >>> > >>> Faisal Imtiaz > >>> Snappy Internet & Telecom > >>> 7266 SW 48 Street > >>> Miami, FL 33155 > >>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > >>> > >>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 3:06:27 AM > >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP VoIP QoS > >>>> > >>>> The 1.0.4.17 firmware for the GXP phones (we have mostly 2160s and some > >>>> 30s and 40s) cannot be downgraded since it contains a security fix. I > >>>> have a couple phones that are now fk'n stuck on that because of it. > >>>> We're running an internal engineering build on some phones with fixes > >>>> for their screwed up SIP message handling and corrupt outgoing messages. > >>>> Some phones we have not upgraded from 1.0.3.9 because it mostly works. > >>>> None of those firmwares allows separate SIP and RTP QOS. We're doing > >>>> testing and validation of 1.0.4.23 with our switch vendor currently, > >>>> which does do the split QoS. About half of the bug fixes listed in the > >>>> .21/.23 release notes were ours. Just have to wait and see what other > >>>> shit is broken now. > >>>> > >>>> But besides all that, I have other phones and ATAs (both Grandstream and > >>>> not) that refuse to send SIP with anything other than DSCP12, even when > >>>> it's configurable. I don't really care if SIP is sent with AF and RTP as > >>>> EF, that's perfectly acceptable. RTP should be higher priority than SIP > >>>> anyway. Standard DiffServ config supports this just fine. So as far as > >>>> the network is concerned, I have to support AF and EF, and I'm fine with > >>>> that. All I was saying is that Cambium should do this out of the box on > >>>> ePMP if you turn on VoIP priority. This is what happens on Canopy when > >>>> you turn on HP on an SM, both DSCP12 and 46 end up in the HP channel. > >>>> > >>>> On 6/7/2015 1:11 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > >>>>> I don't know what grandstream devices you are looking at, but 21xx > >>>>> series > >>>>> and the other Linux and android based phones don't have that issue. > >>>>> Neither does the asterisk based UCMs, such as the 6104. Screenshots > >>>>> attached. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Jun 6, 2015 8:17 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> I disagree. This is exactly what Canopy does. DSCP12/AF is sent over > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> HP channel. Look at the default DiffServ table and see for yourself. > >>>>>> Many managed switches are set up exactly the same way, except they > >>>>>> have > >>>>>> more queues, and Canopy only has MIR and HP. Well, there's LP CIR, but > >>>>>> lets not get into that. ePMP just has "priority" which I assume means > >>>>>> priority over everything else. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I need a way to correct stupid manufacturer's mistakes (Grandstream > >>>>>> being the worst offender). Lots of their devices ALWAYS send SIP > >>>>>> packets > >>>>>> as DSCP12 and this CANNOT be changed. Or the other one I mentioned, > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> GXP phones have one DSCP setting and this changes both SIP and RTP. > >>>>>> I'm > >>>>>> disgusted with their stupidity, but unfortunately it has to be > >>>>>> supported > >>>>>> because those devices aren't going away. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It's totally doable and Cambium could add it by default, saving me > >>>>>> time > >>>>>> configuring every radio with it. Or just make DiffServ on ePMP > >>>>>> work/configure like Canopy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I don't care what's wrong or right. I care about shit working right > >>>>>> now > >>>>>> and customers not being pissy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So the burden falls on the network as usual. It's always our fault. > >>>>>> Sometimes I just don't know how I haven't murdered people. If I drank, > >>>>>> it would probably happen. And I'm finding myself agreeing with that > >>>>>> one > >>>>>> guy Steve every other day now. Stupidity has no limit. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 6/6/2015 10:31 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > >>>>>>>> Yo Cambium, you need to add DSCP 12 (Assured Forwarding) in addition > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> DSCP 46 (Expedited Forwarding) to the default VoIP priority > >>>>>>>> configuration. > >>>>>>> That would be a mistake and the wrong thing to do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We're finding more devices sending SIP packets as AF and > >>>>>>>> RTP as EF. > >>>>>>> When a device is mis-configured, why should the burden of dealing > >>>>>>> with > >>>>>>> that mis-configurtion as a default fall on another device > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> There is plenty of flexibility to override the wrong setup of a > >>>>>>> device, > >>>>>>> if that is they way you want to correct it in your radios... > >>>>>>> (Which by all standards would be the wrong way to fix it...but more > >>>>>>> power > >>>>>>> to you). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Two wrongs don't make a right.. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Faisal Imtiaz > >>>>>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom > >>>>>>> 7266 SW 48 Street > >>>>>>> Miami, FL 33155 > >>>>>>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>> From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] > >>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 10:27:05 PM > >>>>>>>> Subject: [AFMUG] ePMP VoIP QoS > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yo Cambium, you need to add DSCP 12 (Assured Forwarding) in addition > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> DSCP 46 (Expedited Forwarding) to the default VoIP priority > >>>>>>>> configuration. We're finding more devices sending SIP packets as AF > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> RTP as EF. AF isn't prioritized and out-of-band signaling (prompts, > >>>>>>>> etc) > >>>>>>>> are sent as SIP messages so sometimes these are getting dropped, not > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> mention registrations, invites, etc. And more devices are stupid > >>>>>>>> (mostly > >>>>>>>> Grandstream), they only let you set ONE priority value for the > >>>>>>>> entire > >>>>>>>> device. These are coming default as DSCP12/AF. I've tried to get > >>>>>>>> everyone to change this to 46, but they don't remember. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Or just apply the whole Canopy DiffServ table. We've never had to > >>>>>>>> change > >>>>>>>> any of those code points. Turn HP on, it just works. > >>>>>>>> > >> > >
