On 10/02/2014 10:05 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
I assume you are talking about the pure routing performance with no
firewall/NAT and traffic-shaping involved? I think they pretty much are equal
(pretty much the same kernel and most of the cerowrt guts are from openwrt bb
trunk). But I have not tested that (I have only one cerowrt/openwrt capable
router and that pretty much is my main router).
If you are talking about comparing QOS-scripts with SQM-scripts, they
also seem to top out at roughly 50-60 Mbps (down- and uplink combined), it
seems hfsc (qos-scripts) and HTB (sam-scripts) are equally expensive on MIPS.
Now if you are setup to do tests yourself I would love to hear the
results. I would be happy to help you getting SQM-scripts to work (so far all
people interested disappeared before or just after sharing initial test
results).
Do you still need testers? I have a bit of an interest here.
I have spare routers that I can run OpenWRT or CeroWRt on and I'm setup
to test with netperf, netperf-wrapper on my local network
( desktop -> router -> laptop ) it's Gbit so I can easily saturate
the router.
What I don't have is a lot of time but I can do a few runs in the
evenings or on weekends. I also am very out of touch with the latest
and greatest QoS vs SQM development and configuration so you will have
to feed me test recipes.
--
Richard A. Smith <[email protected]>
Former One Laptop per Child
_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
