Hmmm ... Since its being discussed, I got interested and decided to run some actual tests on mine ... I had a gut feel that I lost a little performance when I enabled packet shaping but I did not think it was anywhere near half ... So I did the dslreports thing and marked it with and without packet shaing enabable ...
My ISP here at home is COX cable ... Without packet shaping my avg of 10 tests was 2021/8641 ... With packet shaping tweaked to settings 90% of the without readings was 1976/8354 ... With readings that close, I a bit surprised that I was able to get any gut feel at all ... And it is certainly not anywhere near the impact that Tom is reporting ... It might be that I have an advantage in hardware that is helping with this ... I am using a 1ghz VIA CPU here ... While its certainly no powerhouse, it is a bit stronger than the NET4801 or similar ... So maybe this is one of the areas where the stronger CPU tends to pay off ... G.Hendershot -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Lynn Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:37 AM To: Discussion of AstLinux - Asterisk on Compact Flash Subject: Re: [Astlinux-users] Is it a good idea to use astlinux as a router? Darrick, I completely understand. But over half of my download bandwidth evaporated by following the directions. I'd say I'm experiencing abnormal results, so I'm wondering if anybody has some advice on using this feature. On 12/20/06, Darrick Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gary G. Hendershot wrote: > > I will echo the thoughts of Tom Lynn ... > > > <snip> > > I am using voice prioritization on 2 including the one I keep in my home ... > > It seems that when I use the voice prioritization scheme, even when > > there is no voice traffic, the general internet access looses some of its steam ... > > But I have not run any definitive tests on it so at this point, its > > just gut feel, no proof ... > > > > What the voice priority scheme will do, is keep my wife's streaming > > audio/video adiction from messing with my voice traffic ... So even > > if it does have a modest hit, it seems to be worth it to me ... As > > always, your mileage may vary ... > > > I am not a traffic shaping expert, but I will do my best to explain > why it is impossible to do traffic shaping without taking some hit on > total throughput. In a nutshell, you MUST reduce the overall total > potential bandwidth purposely so that YOU become the bottleneck, not > your internet connection. So for example, if you have a 3 MB downlink > and a 512k uplink, you have no choice but to reduce those purposely to > say 90% of those values to do proper traffic shaping. If you are > unwilling to do that, you are willing to have your internet provider > do the shaping because once you reach the limit provided by your > internet provider, that's exactly what will happen. (to use Gary's > example, his wife will saturate the link with the video stream and > some packets will be dropped, making the voice link very poor). > > > Hopefully that explains it better, but you will see a drop in total > throughput with traffic shaping enabled. > > Darrick > > -- > Darrick Hartman > DJH Solutions, LLC > http://www.djhsolutions.com > > _______________________________________________ > Astlinux-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users > > Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
