How I fixed apinger and packet loss (Hint: It wasn't broken)
-
Hi,
I found this thread very interesting. Had a go at applying CODELQ for my interfaces and managed to improve my buffer-bloat score.
As pointed out by Harvy66 the CODELQ algorithm doesn't actually use peak bandwidth as input parameter. Obviously, you want to do before- and after measurements, but there is no need to enter bandwidth value in the web form (for the sake of simplicity, the web GUI uses the same form for all scheduler types).
Best Regards
//Jimmy
-
I get a good buffer bloat score using just the standard CBQ traffic shaper setup on pfSense.
-
The default queue depth created for traffic shaping is 50 packets. You may have a good bloat result because of this, but your burst bandwidth and many-flow average bandwidth may take a sizable hit and you may notice some bursty packetloss.
The issue codel attempts to solve is a buffer large enough to handle bursts is typically too large to handle sustained. Codel is elastic and will allow a burst, but if the burst continues too long, packets start getting dropped at an increasing rate until the queue size comes back down.
-
Thanks all for the tips, my internet is 250/20. By setting up the traffic shaper using CODELQ without specifying the bandwidth on LANs, and disabled the gateway monitoring. My BufferBloat scores A (was C before), Quality scores A+, and Speed scores A~A+.
-
My BufferBloat scores A (was C before), Quality scores A+, and Speed scores A~A+.
Where & how is this "scoring" done?
-
@KOM:
My BufferBloat scores A (was C before), Quality scores A+, and Speed scores A~A+.
Where & how is this "scoring" done?
I think they are using this test: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest
-
@KOM:
My BufferBloat scores A (was C before), Quality scores A+, and Speed scores A~A+.
Where & how is this "scoring" done?
I was using: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest
-
I have a 250/25 cable connection and am running the latest pfSense version without any traffic shaper currently.
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest tells me I have a high download buffer bloat but a very low upload buffer bloat. This is a grade C in the end.
I would like to improve this now. I applied the CODELQ shaper to my WAN interface and set it to 250 MBit/s (I had to set a value btw, otherwise I get an error message).
Afterwards I deleted the state tables and ran the test again. No change. Same speeds, same ratings.
I miss something or is there just nothing I can do?
-
You can probably do nothing about download bloat upstream. Shaping controls traffic leaving an interface. You cannot control what happens upstream or when traffic arrives on WAN.
You almost certainly have higher bandwidth outbound LAN than inbound WAN. If you are 100M anywhere on LAN, you'll want to make that all gig.
-
I realize this is total necro, but this post shows up on the first page of DuckDuckGo results.
I was getting Ds and mostly Fs on DSL Reports bandwidth test.
In 2.4.2, setting CODELQ without bandwidth was not permitted by the interface.
Setting bandwidth to a number higher than my ISP advertised rate resulted in no change in bufferbloat.
Setting bandwidth to my ISP's advertised rate resulted in all As.
What I found interesting is that even though I can get ~10% higher than advertised actual speed, setting bandwidth to even 50 kbps higher than advertised resulted in increased bufferbloat.
