Hi Juliusz,
On Dec 7, 2013, at 13:59 , Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Perhaps you should push your system to OpenWRT? > >> There is still some work going on to streamline the gui. > > Fair enough. That's important. > >> there are less features in the aqm-scripts for prioritizing packet >> types than qos-scripts. > > I wouldn't bother much with that. The promise of fq_codel is that we > can get rid of our prioritising hacks -- if we need that kind of > features, then fq_codel has failed. Is that really true? given enough concurrent flows, critical flows might be delayed purely be the round robin scheduling of equally "worthy" packets in fq_codel, so some residual priory system might still make sense... > >> I just had to come up with a way to disable it at high (> 80 mbit) >> rates on incoming traffic (not enough cpu in cerowrt), > > I wouldn't bother with that either. 120 Mbit/s is the highest rate you > can get in Europe as far as I can tell, so being able to push 80 Mbit/s > on a four year old router is fine (as long as you're careful to avoid > shaping traffic between LAN and WLAN -- I certainly wouldn't want > backing up my laptop to be capped at 80 Mbit/s). mmmh, currently in Germany residential fiber tops out at 200Mbit/s, cable at 150, and VDSL tops out at 50Mbit/s. Next year cable companies promised 200Mbit/s and the biggest VDSL provider promised100Mbit/sec (G.993.5 Vectoring). So, the wndr3[7,8]00 are getting a bit long in the tooth. What would be a reasonable replacement, anybody any good ideas? @Dave: for the one tier shaper, maybe using TBF instead of HTB will allow higher shaping rates? (I happily admit , I have no clue which part of HTB is the expensive one, the token bucket filter or the hierarchy.) > >> so I'd like it to run faster, maybe using drr in that case, or >> something like what free.fr uses... > > What are they using? > >> And there are actually two aqm/packet scheduling shapers in there (a >> simple 1 tier and a 3 tier one), > > Remove the non-default features. Be a man, Dave, dump it all. Being more cautious, not to say cowardly, I would opt for hiding the non-default features :) Kidding aside, what should be the default? > >> In the interim, existing openwrt users can add ceropackages-3.3 into >> their feeds. > > They won't. If you want to have an effect on the world, you need to > push it into the default OpenWRT scripts. Best Regards Sebastian > > -- Juliusz > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
