Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[os10rules]

Thanks!

Greg
On Feb 14, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> I STRONGLY suggest you put email at 2 if voip is going to be 1.  DNS  
> can
> stay at 1, though.  You don't need jitter every time someone sends or
> receives an email message.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
> --- Henry Spencer
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 7:32 AM,  wrote:
>
>> I put dns, email (ports 25, 110, 143, 465, 587, 993, 995) and voip
>> (sip, h323, skype) at the top or maybe email just below voip and dns;
>> web ssl and uncategorized in the middle of the range; and p2p at the
>> bottom.
>>
>> Greg
>> On Feb 13, 2009, at 11:09 PM, RickG wrote:
>>
>>> Since we're on the subject, and RouterOS, what priorities do you put
>>> on your traffic? Web, pop3, smtp, dns, icmp, ssl, ftp, snmp, etc...
>>> -RickG
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Dennis Burgess
>>>  wrote:
 RouterOS can identify Skype at layer 7 as well. .

 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
 WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
 
 */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
 

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by
 the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
 intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
 it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
 material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use
 of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by
 persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is
 prohibited, If you
 received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
 material from any computer.





 os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
> The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but
> it is
> difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to
> be
> hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the  
> admin
> tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and
> detect
> and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS
> prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an
> effort
> to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an
> internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being
> propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out  
> and
> connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.
>
> Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,
> nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators  
> from
> blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse
> between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to  
> detect
> and control these things.
>
> Greg
>
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:
>
>
>> Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you
>> might
>> be
>> able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you
>> see a
>> DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
>> Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of
>> the
>> options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS  
>> rules.
>>
>> It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-
>> boun...@wispa.org]
>> On
>> Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?
>>
>> Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or
>> x86) for
>> doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based
>> servers
>> (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for
>> achieving
>> good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff  
>> from
>> killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as  
>> little
>> router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having  
>> the
>> layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and
>> uTorrent. I'm
>> getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.
>>
>> Does anyone have any success stories?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>> -

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[Josh Luthman]

I STRONGLY suggest you put email at 2 if voip is going to be 1.  DNS can
stay at 1, though.  You don't need jitter every time someone sends or
receives an email message.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer


On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 7:32 AM,  wrote:

> I put dns, email (ports 25, 110, 143, 465, 587, 993, 995) and voip
> (sip, h323, skype) at the top or maybe email just below voip and dns;
> web ssl and uncategorized in the middle of the range; and p2p at the
> bottom.
>
> Greg
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 11:09 PM, RickG wrote:
>
> > Since we're on the subject, and RouterOS, what priorities do you put
> > on your traffic? Web, pop3, smtp, dns, icmp, ssl, ftp, snmp, etc...
> > -RickG
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Dennis Burgess
> >  wrote:
> >> RouterOS can identify Skype at layer 7 as well. .
> >>
> >> * ---
> >> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> >> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> >> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> >> WISPA Vendor Member*
> >> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> >> 
> >> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
> >> 
> >>
> >> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by
> >> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
> >> intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
> >> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> >> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use
> >> of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by
> >> persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is
> >> prohibited, If you
> >> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> >> material from any computer.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but
> >>> it is
> >>> difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to
> >>> be
> >>> hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the admin
> >>> tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and
> >>> detect
> >>> and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS
> >>> prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an
> >>> effort
> >>> to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an
> >>> internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being
> >>> propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out and
> >>> connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.
> >>>
> >>> Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,
> >>> nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators from
> >>> blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse
> >>> between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to detect
> >>> and control these things.
> >>>
> >>> Greg
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
>  Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you
>  might
>  be
>  able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you
>  see a
>  DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
>  Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of
>  the
>  options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.
> 
>  It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.
> 
>  Eric
> 
> 
>  -Original Message-
>  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-
>  boun...@wispa.org]
>  On
>  Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
>  Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
>  To: WISPA General List
>  Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?
> 
>  Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or
>  x86) for
>  doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based
>  servers
>  (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for
>  achieving
>  good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from
>  killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little
>  router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the
>  layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and
>  uTorrent. I'm
>  getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.
> 
>  Does anyone have any success stories?
> 
>  Thanks!
>  Greg
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>  http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> --

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[os10rules]

I put dns, email (ports 25, 110, 143, 465, 587, 993, 995) and voip  
(sip, h323, skype) at the top or maybe email just below voip and dns;  
web ssl and uncategorized in the middle of the range; and p2p at the  
bottom.

Greg
On Feb 13, 2009, at 11:09 PM, RickG wrote:

> Since we're on the subject, and RouterOS, what priorities do you put
> on your traffic? Web, pop3, smtp, dns, icmp, ssl, ftp, snmp, etc...
> -RickG
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Dennis Burgess
>  wrote:
>> RouterOS can identify Skype at layer 7 as well. .
>>
>> * ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
>> 
>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
>> 
>>
>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by  
>> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is  
>> intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged  
>> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use  
>> of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by  
>> persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is  
>> prohibited, If you
>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the  
>> material from any computer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but  
>>> it is
>>> difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to  
>>> be
>>> hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the admin
>>> tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and  
>>> detect
>>> and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS
>>> prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an  
>>> effort
>>> to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an
>>> internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being
>>> propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out and
>>> connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.
>>>
>>> Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,
>>> nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators from
>>> blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse
>>> between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to detect
>>> and control these things.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you  
 might
 be
 able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you  
 see a
 DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
 Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of  
 the
 options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.

 It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.

 Eric


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

 Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or  
 x86) for
 doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based  
 servers
 (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for  
 achieving
 good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from
 killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little
 router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the
 layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and  
 uTorrent. I'm
 getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.

 Does anyone have any success stories?

 Thanks!
 Greg


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[RickG]

Since we're on the subject, and RouterOS, what priorities do you put
on your traffic? Web, pop3, smtp, dns, icmp, ssl, ftp, snmp, etc...
-RickG

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> RouterOS can identify Skype at layer 7 as well. .
>
> * ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> WISPA Vendor Member*
> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> 
> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
> 
>
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only 
> for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
> review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
> from any computer.
>
>
>
>
>
> os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but it is
>> difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to be
>> hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the admin
>> tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and detect
>> and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS
>> prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an effort
>> to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an
>> internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being
>> propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out and
>> connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.
>>
>> Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,
>> nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators from
>> blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse
>> between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to detect
>> and control these things.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you might
>>> be
>>> able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you see a
>>> DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
>>> Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of the
>>> options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.
>>>
>>> It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
>>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?
>>>
>>> Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or x86) for
>>> doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based servers
>>> (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for achieving
>>> good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from
>>> killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little
>>> router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the
>>> layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and uTorrent. I'm
>>> getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any success stories?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirele

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[Dennis Burgess]

RouterOS can identify Skype at layer 7 as well. .

* ---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member*
*Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 

*/LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 


The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only 
for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from 
any computer.

 



os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
> The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but it is  
> difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to be  
> hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the admin  
> tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and detect  
> and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS  
> prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an effort  
> to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an  
> internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being  
> propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out and  
> connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.
>
> Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,  
> nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators from  
> blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse  
> between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to detect  
> and control these things.
>
> Greg
>
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:
>
>   
>> Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you might  
>> be
>> able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you see a
>> DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
>> Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of the
>> options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.
>>
>> It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
>> On
>> Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?
>>
>> Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or x86) for
>> doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based servers
>> (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for achieving
>> good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from
>> killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little
>> router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the
>> layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and uTorrent. I'm
>> getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.
>>
>> Does anyone have any success stories?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Greg
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>   



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless 

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[os10rules]

The problem I'm having is Skype is not impossible to detect, but it is  
difficult and some QoS mechanisms miss it because it's designed to be  
hard to detect and stop so it can slip out networks where the admin  
tries to block IM apps. The better network security devices and detect  
and filter or QoS it. But Skype doesn't use TOS or other QoS  
prioritizing bits and it greatly varies the ports it uses in an effort  
to not reveal itself. It's really quite amazing, if you have an  
internet connection but you have a DNS issue (no DNS info being  
propagated by DHCP for example) it will still find it's way out and  
connect. It's one quick indication of a good network with bad DNS.

Another problem is the newer P2P apps do likewise (random ports,  
nondescript packets/data) in an effort to prevent ISP operators from  
blocking or limiting it. So it's a continual game of cat and mouse  
between the program authors and the net admin folks trying to detect  
and control these things.

Greg

On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Eric Rogers wrote:

> Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you might  
> be
> able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you see a
> DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
> Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of the
> options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.
>
> It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.
>
> Eric
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
> On
> Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?
>
> Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or x86) for
> doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based servers
> (ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for achieving
> good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from
> killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little
> router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the
> layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and uTorrent. I'm
> getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.
>
> Does anyone have any success stories?
>
> Thanks!
> Greg
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

[Eric Rogers]

Have you done any packet captures?  If it is a small site, you might be
able to look at the TOS bit and prioritize accordingly.  If you see a
DSCP (TOS) of 46, I assume it is VoIP and tag it for queues.  In
Mikrotik, there is a "connection type" option, and SIP is one of the
options.  I also tag that one and set it to VoIP for the QoS rules.

It gets most traffic, but don't know about Skype.

Eric


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:18 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] RouterOS x86 for Skype QoS?

Does anyone have experience using RouterOS (on RouterBoard or x86) for  
doing Skype QoS? I've been trying many different Linux based servers  
(ZeroShell, pfsense, Endian, ClarkConnect specifically for achieving  
good QoS with Skype - more specifically to keep the P2P stuff from  
killing Skype - and so far nothing is performing as well as little  
router with Tomato firmware and it's QoS. The problem is having the  
layer 7 sniffer properly detect and categorize Skype and uTorrent. I'm  
getting ready to try RouterOS (x86) and Wolverine.

Does anyone have any success stories?

Thanks!
Greg




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/