On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:24 +0000, Glenn Faustino wrote:
> Thanks Mike!
>
> When I was using newqueue/hfsc I used to assign queues to certain traffic
> like below:
>
> match inet proto tcp from any to any port ssh set queue (ssh_bulkq,
> ssh_prioq)
> match inet proto {tcp,udp} from any to any port {domain,ntp} set queue
> (dnsq, ackq)
> match inet proto {tcp,udp} from any to any port {www,https} set queue
> (webq, ackq)
> match inet proto tcp from any to any port ftp set queue (webq, ackq)
>
> And I was looking how to do that when using flow queues but it seems that
> it is not needed anymore (if I'm not mistaken) ,
> all you need to do is define a flow queue and that's it.
>
I see. Indeed, I'd start with a single flow queue, but that doesn't
necessarily mean that this is going to work in 100% of cases. Please
take a look at the approach I've outlined here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/openbsd/comments/75ps6h/fqcodel_and_pf/doemlgi/
I don't have enough feedback and experience with this exact setup so
I'm treading carefully here until there's a clear understanding what
works and what doesn't.
And please let me remind you again, that first of all you need to
identify whether or not the problem actually exists. Once you figured
that your setup is prone to exposing the bufferbloat on the uplink,
setup the flow queue as I've suggested here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/openbsd/comments/75ps6h/fqcodel_and_pf/doemlgi/
Test and then re-evaluate the situation and only if you see the problem
with downloads, attempt to fix it.
Cheers,
Mike
>
> Regards,
> Glenn
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Mike Belopuhov <m...@belopuhov.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 02:51 +0000, Glenn Faustino wrote:
> > > Hi Mike,
> > >
> > > I'm using HFSC with two root queues (1 for uplink and 1 for downlink),
> > can
> > > you please share your config for FQ-CoDel with HFSC with two queues if
> > you
> > > don't mind?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Glenn
> > >
> >
> > I'm not certain which config you're talking about but there's nothing
> > particularly different about any of those that I've used. I'd like to
> > know instead what might be causing trouble for you to figure out what
> > piece of documentation can be improved.
> >
> > Having said that I tend to set quantum a bit lower when CPU resources
> > are abundant and latency is not increased as a result. For example,
> > OpenWRT sets it to 300 by default which might mean that they optimize
> > for an average packet size on the internet (or it might not, I don't
> > know for sure why do they do it). My limited testing hasn't shown any
> > quantifiable gain when doing that.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
