On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 5:08 PM Nils Andreas Svee wrote:
>
> > For the record I helped do the original fq_codel port to the
> > edgerouter over a weekend back in 2013. the ubnt
> > community jumped all over it, polished up the configuration language
> > to use it, leveraged the sqm
> > spec and
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021, Stuart Cheshire via Bloat wrote:
Is implementing CoDel queueing really 10x more burden than running
“Ubiquiti’s proprietary Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) engine”? Is CoDel
4x more burden than Ubiquiti’s IDS (Intrusion Detection System) and IPS
(Intrusion Prevention
> For the record I helped do the original fq_codel port to the
> edgerouter over a weekend back in 2013. the ubnt
> community jumped all over it, polished up the configuration language
> to use it, leveraged the sqm
> spec and demanded the result in their next formal release... which
> ubnt did.
Was asked to chip in here, so I'll provide what little I know.
I never looked too hard at the new ARM-based units, because Ubiquiti's been
refusing to release the GPL archives for them [1].
But AFAIK they're based on Buildroot (there's some info about that in the same
thread [2]), and people
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 7:55 AM Dave Taht wrote:
>
> This review, highly recommending this router on the high end
>
> https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/best-router-2020
>
> also states that the sqm implementation has been dumbed down
> significantly and can only shape 800Mbit inbound. Long
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:43 AM Stuart Cheshire wrote:
>
> On 20 Jan 2021, at 07:55, Dave Taht wrote:
>
> > This review, highly recommending this router on the high end
> >
> > https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/best-router-2020
> >
> > also states that the sqm implementation has been
> On 22 Jan, 2021, at 11:09 pm, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen via Bloat
> wrote:
>
> As Sebastian says, the source of lower performance when using SQM on
> some boxes is the traffic shaper, and sometimes the lack of hardware
> offloads.
I have a strong suspicion that on some hardware, the offload
Sebastian Moeller writes:
> I am confident that this device will happily run CoDel and even
> fq_codel close to line-rate, as codel/fq_codel have a relative modest
> processing cost.
Yeah, the overhead of CoDel itself (and even FQ-CoDel) is basically nil
(as in, we have not been able to measure
Maybe I can help out here.
I believe you are talking about two different issues here. Dave notes that
"traffic shaping" performance seems to top out at ~800 Mbps and you interpret
that to mean CoDel being the rate limiting step here. The number seems a bit
low though, I have seen
On 20 Jan 2021, at 07:55, Dave Taht wrote:
> This review, highly recommending this router on the high end
>
> https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/best-router-2020
>
> also states that the sqm implementation has been dumbed down significantly
> and can only shape 800Mbit inbound. Long ago
This review, highly recommending this router on the high end
https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/best-router-2020
also states that the sqm implementation has been dumbed down
significantly and can only shape 800Mbit inbound. Long ago we did a
backport of cake to the other ubnt routers
11 matches
Mail list logo
