Hi Mo, I have the latest hardware (gray cylinder) -- Typically 3 of 5 bars 4G Band: B2 5G Band: n71 --
Note the huge jitter only occurs inbound, which is difficult to measure without using WireGuard. The same UDP iperf3 tests outbound (gw-lan->linode) range from 3 to 8 ms jitter, regardless of bitrate. -- Speed ( less than 2 seconds) 10/15 Mbps (down/up) slowly ramps up to ... Speed ( after 20 seconds) up to 200/35 Mbps (down/up) -- Lonnie > On Apr 10, 2021, at 10:43 AM, Mo Balaa <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for sharing, I have also been running WG tunnels over T-Mobile home > internet and haven’t seen any of the jitter you are reporting. > > Did you try the same tests (outbound) without running them via WG? > Which modem do you have? How many signal bars are you getting? Also, what > does an non-tunneled speed test report? > > Cheers > > >> On Apr 10, 2021, at 10:31, Lonnie Abelbeck <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Greetings, >> >> I have been testing the T-Mobile Home Internet (4G/5G fixed wireless) >> service to a Linode VM via WireGuard. >> >> The TMHI service uses CGNAT plus an additional NAT in their modem/gateway >> with a MTU of 1420, so WireGuard is configured with a 1340 MTU. >> >> Everything works, but I thought I would share some jitter results that >> readers here might find interesting. >> >> [gw-lan WGIP:10.4.1.1] -- [TMHI modem/gateway] -- 4G/5G/CGNAT -- [linode >> WGIP:10.4.1.10] >> >> gw-lan ~ # mtr -wn -c 30 -s 1340 10.4.1.10 >> ... >> HOST: gw-lan Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev >> 1.|-- 10.4.1.10 0.0% 30 88.7 88.9 77.2 99.2 5.4 >> >> Looks to be as expected, in the direction of the CGNAT, now the other >> direction, against the grain of the CGNAT ... >> >> linode ~ # mtr -wn -c 30 -s 1340 10.4.1.1 >> ... >> HOST: linode Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev >> 1.|-- 10.4.1.1 0.0% 30 206.1 243.5 73.8 393.9 97.9 >> >> Huge jitter, and is very reproducible. But no packet loss. >> >> Further investigation shows for low traffic rates (linode->gw-lan) the >> jitter over WireGuard is huge, here are some UDP iperf3 tests showing how >> the jitter goes down as the traffic rate is increased. >> >> linode ~ # iperf3 -c 10.4.1.1 -u -b 5k -t 30 >> ... >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Jitter Lost/Total >> Datagrams >> [ 5] 0.00-30.25 sec 18.9 KBytes 5.11 Kbits/sec 68.428 ms 0/15 (0%) >> receiver >> >> linode ~ # iperf3 -c 10.4.1.1 -u -b 10k -t 30 >> ... >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Jitter Lost/Total >> Datagrams >> [ 5] 0.00-30.30 sec 37.7 KBytes 10.2 Kbits/sec 82.411 ms 0/30 (0%) >> receiver >> >> linode ~ # iperf3 -c 10.4.1.1 -u -b 50k -t 30 >> ... >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Jitter Lost/Total >> Datagrams >> [ 5] 0.00-30.14 sec 184 KBytes 49.9 Kbits/sec 7.532 ms 0/146 (0%) >> receiver >> >> linode ~ # iperf3 -c 10.4.1.1 -u -b 100k -t 30 >> ... >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Jitter Lost/Total >> Datagrams >> [ 5] 0.00-30.10 sec 367 KBytes 100 Kbits/sec 4.182 ms 0/292 (0%) >> receiver >> >> linode ~ # iperf3 -c 10.4.1.1 -u -b 500k -t 30 >> ... >> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Jitter Lost/Total >> Datagrams >> [ 5] 0.00-30.11 sec 1.79 MBytes 498 Kbits/sec 1.308 ms 0/1456 (0%) >> receiver >> >> >> So using VoIP a higher bitrate CODEC is actually better w.r.t jitter. >> >> Hope others find this interesting. >> >> Lonnie >> > >
