New Member
Posts: 25
Registered: ‎06-07-2014
Kudos: 1

QoS ERL

Does anyone have any simple input on entering QoS rules ionto ERL. 

Regular Member
Posts: 367
Registered: ‎05-09-2014
Kudos: 128
Solutions: 7

Re: QoS ERL

http://wiki.ubnt.com/Quality_of_Service_%28QoS%29


the major ones i use are the "shaper" (tc htb) and "fair queue" (tc sfq)

though be aware, once you enable any kind of QoS, hardware offloading gets disabled, and you are limited to ~80-90mbits worth of NAT transfer. don't think there's a solution for this at the moment.

Regular Member
Posts: 536
Registered: ‎11-12-2013
Kudos: 78
Solutions: 3

Re: QoS ERL


@train_wreck wrote:

http://wiki.ubnt.com/Quality_of_Service_%28QoS%29


the major ones i use are the "shaper" (tc htb) and "fair queue" (tc sfq)

though be aware, once you enable any kind of QoS, hardware offloading gets disabled, and you are limited to ~80-90mbits worth of NAT transfer. don't think there's a solution for this at the moment.


? i have ran 107mbit consistently with hw offloading disabled....

if a 600MHz RT-AC66U can do 180mbits with hw offloading disabled im pretty sure this dual core 500MHz ERL can do 300 + mbit without hw offload being enabled

newer dual core ARM routers (RT-AC56U, RT-AC68U, R7000) are all pushing 350mbit + with QOS on.....

those units are clocked anywhere from 800MHz to 1GHz.

some tomato devs even overclocked the 4909 on a R7000 to 1.4 giving it a total of 2.8GHz processing power.

the only people that should need HW offloading (aka HW acceleration?) are people who are pushing 300mbit.

if i get shaw 250/15 (hopefully soon if they would hurry up) and i need to turn HW offloading on to get full speed i will be sad

T1200 - ERX - UAP - R7000 - WEB6000Q
SuperUser
Posts: 11,667
Registered: ‎10-28-2009
Kudos: 3956
Solutions: 370

Re: QoS ERL

I tested the erlite with a simple tc class and was at 50% cpu usage at roughly 250Mbps.  500Mbps it was in the 85% range.

Tony Pierro
CTO - Wireless Internet Services, Inc.
Regular Member
Posts: 367
Registered: ‎05-09-2014
Kudos: 128
Solutions: 7

Re: QoS ERL


@WisTech wrote:

I tested the erlite with a simple tc class and was at 50% cpu usage at roughly 250Mbps.  500Mbps it was in the 85% range.


interesting. i may have some bad measurements.

curious, which qdiscs/classes were you using?

SuperUser
Posts: 11,667
Registered: ‎10-28-2009
Kudos: 3956
Solutions: 370

Re: QoS ERL

We tested with a simple htb rate queue.  My laptop was attached to the "lan" of the erlite, the erlite to the lan of our office network.  I then transferred to our Nas and another server and measured CPU usage while the router was queueing packets.  I'd say the pro would be perfectly safe without hardware acceleration to 500Mbps.

Tony Pierro
CTO - Wireless Internet Services, Inc.
New Member
Posts: 25
Registered: ‎06-07-2014
Kudos: 1

Re: QoS ERL

I will read through that wiki. Where I would really like to start is to place one subnet over the other. So can you set interface rules the same way as port rules.
New Member
Posts: 25
Registered: ‎06-07-2014
Kudos: 1

Re: QoS ERL

In defense of the ERL. I went from a AC66U to the ERL, and with qos rules enabled the router ran very hot and I also felt as though the qos rules were abandoned as traffic width increased. Bandwidth control was all but non-existent when enabled.
Veteran Member
Posts: 5,460
Registered: ‎03-12-2011
Kudos: 2749
Solutions: 129

Re: QoS ERL


@ConnorM wrote:

the only people that should need HW offloading (aka HW acceleration?) are people who are pushing 300mbit.


Which of course unfortunately means anyone with more than one layer2 at a location that you want to run at gigabit speeds as well, even if you only have a crappy ADSL line out to the internet because it's not possible to have offload disabled on one interface while enabled on another.

The only saving grace is that if you're using PPPoE (and not using the pppoe offload module in 1.5) you can force offload on using some commands so it still works on your LAN, and being that PPPoE with the offload module disabled isn't offloaded your netflow/qos/whatever works fine and dandy...

Selective offload disabling will be awesome when it finally appears. Man Happy

Regular Member
Posts: 367
Registered: ‎05-09-2014
Kudos: 128
Solutions: 7

Re: QoS ERL

[ Edited ]

so i reconfigured my ERL to do some iperf testing comparing speeds for enabled vs disabled offloading. 2 Win7 machines, NATed through the unit, plugged into eth0 and eth1. eth0 is configured as 172.16.16.97, connected to desktop 172.16.16.10. eth1 configured as 172.17.17.1, connected to laptop 172.17.17.2. Traffic from eth1 is masqueraded out eth0. The first test is offload enabled, second is disabled. No traffic policies are present

C:\>iperf -c 172.16.16.10 -w416k -t 25 -i 2
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 172.16.16.10, TCP port 5001
TCP window size:  416 KByte
------------------------------------------------------------
[360] local 172.17.17.2 port 38353 connected with 172.16.16.10 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[360]  0.0- 2.0 sec   226 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[360]  2.0- 4.0 sec   224 MBytes   939 Mbits/sec
[360]  4.0- 6.0 sec   225 MBytes   943 Mbits/sec
[360]  6.0- 8.0 sec   225 MBytes   944 Mbits/sec
[360]  8.0-10.0 sec   226 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[360] 10.0-12.0 sec   225 MBytes   942 Mbits/sec
[360] 12.0-14.0 sec   225 MBytes   943 Mbits/sec
[360] 14.0-16.0 sec   225 MBytes   943 Mbits/sec
[360] 16.0-18.0 sec   225 MBytes   942 Mbits/sec
[360] 18.0-20.0 sec   226 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[360] 20.0-22.0 sec   225 MBytes   943 Mbits/sec
[360] 22.0-24.0 sec   225 MBytes   942 Mbits/sec
[360]  0.0-25.0 sec  2.75 GBytes   944 Mbits/sec

C:\>iperf -c 172.16.16.10 -w416k -t 25 -i 2
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 172.16.16.10, TCP port 5001
TCP window size:  416 KByte
------------------------------------------------------------
[360] local 172.17.17.2 port 38354 connected with 172.16.16.10 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[360]  0.0- 2.0 sec  68.1 MBytes   286 Mbits/sec
[360]  2.0- 4.0 sec  66.5 MBytes   279 Mbits/sec
[360]  4.0- 6.0 sec  67.1 MBytes   281 Mbits/sec
[360]  6.0- 8.0 sec  66.6 MBytes   279 Mbits/sec
[360]  8.0-10.0 sec  69.9 MBytes   293 Mbits/sec
[360] 10.0-12.0 sec  67.6 MBytes   284 Mbits/sec
[360] 12.0-14.0 sec  68.0 MBytes   285 Mbits/sec
[360] 14.0-16.0 sec  67.4 MBytes   283 Mbits/sec
[360] 16.0-18.0 sec  67.1 MBytes   281 Mbits/sec
[360] 18.0-20.0 sec  67.5 MBytes   283 Mbits/sec
[360] 20.0-22.0 sec  67.2 MBytes   282 Mbits/sec
[360] 22.0-24.0 sec  67.9 MBytes   285 Mbits/sec
[360]  0.0-25.0 sec   845 MBytes   283 Mbits/sec

 so ~280mbits. higher than i'd first stated, so i stand corrected Man Happy

Regular Member
Posts: 536
Registered: ‎11-12-2013
Kudos: 78
Solutions: 3

Re: QoS ERL

[ Edited ]

yay Man Happy

shaw BB250 is 265/17 and that should be my next upgrade in internet speed Man Happy

bb250.png

glad i wont need offloading enabled to take advantage of it.

 

but i will definately be making use of the CPU pushing 200mbit+

T1200 - ERX - UAP - R7000 - WEB6000Q
Regular Member
Posts: 367
Registered: ‎05-09-2014
Kudos: 128
Solutions: 7

Re: QoS ERL

[ Edited ]

is shaw giving 265 down to you over regular cable? if so impressive. i can't even buy more than 100 from Comcast, unless i want them to install fiber to my house (and that means 1000's of dollars)

as a resident of the US i'm not even gonna ask how much you're paying. it would make me depressed, i'm sure Man Wink

Regular Member
Posts: 536
Registered: ‎11-12-2013
Kudos: 78
Solutions: 3

Re: QoS ERL

shaw is giving 265 down on 8X4 yes. but its only available in select areas (they stopped the roll out due to congestion, they will continue the rollout once they deploy 16 channel modems)

but yes. shaw does give 265 of the available 304mbit on the node

there giving 265/304 to one customer.... on nodes wiith 500-1000 customers lol

also. its very rare to see these full speeds. personally im limited on the shaw 100 (next tier down)

but i live in a ski resort and my node usage levels are usually sitting around 20% so im one of the lucky shaw customers who would probably get full 265 if they gave me the 250..

this is what my shaw BB100 looks like unshaped.

bb100.png

T1200 - ERX - UAP - R7000 - WEB6000Q