Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Fq-Codel

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Traffic Shaping
    13 Posts 8 Posters 3.1k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • superweaselS
      superweasel
      last edited by superweasel

      As @ghkrauss pointed out, there are no bugs currently reported on redmine, that's the good news! However, the biggest issue I have run into is there are varying accounts of how to implement FQ-Codel. This thread, playing-with-fq_codel, appears to have cracked the implementation just this week! If you followed the Netgate August Hangout implementation of FQ-Codel, the shaper would not perform very well. Making the changes outlined in the most recent posts in playing-with-fq_codel make a huge performance difference and from testing, appears to be the correct implementation.

      Give that a look and a try. It literally takes five minutes to setup and test. If it is not working correctly, it is very simple to just turn it off.

      pfSense rig: pfSense SG-4860/120GB SSD
      WAN: CenturyLink Gigabit Fiber

      occamsrazorO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • uptownVagrantU
        uptownVagrant
        last edited by

        There actually is a related bug
        https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/9024

        I'm planning on reporting it again as well as another one as soon as I get confirmation that others can recreate the issues.
        https://forum.netgate.com/topic/112527/playing-with-fq_codel-in-2-4/798

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • occamsrazorO
          occamsrazor @superweasel
          last edited by

          @superweasel said in Fq-Codel:
          If you followed the Netgate August Hangout implementation of FQ-Codel, the shaper would not perform very well. Making the changes outlined in the most recent posts in playing-with-fq_codel make a huge performance difference and from testing, appears to be the correct implementation.

          I did the August hangout implementation and followed the playing-with-fq_codel thread but then got utterly lost in the replies and what was better and what wasn't. Is there a new "simple" guide on how to implement it? Or a specific post in that thread you'd recommend that tells you currently-preferred implementation? Thanks

          pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
          Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
          Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • superweaselS
            superweasel
            last edited by

            Here are the steps from @Rasool from the thread:


            1- Create "out" limiter

            Tick Enable
            Name: pipe_out
            Set the bandwidth
            Queue Management Algorithm: Tail Drop
            Scheduler: FQ_CODEL
            2- Add new Queue

            Tick "Enable"
            Name: queue_out
            Queue Management Algorithm: Tail Drop
            Save
            3- Create "in" limiter

            Tick Enable
            Name: pipe_in
            Set the bandwidth
            Queue Management Algorithm: Tail Drop
            Scheduler: FQ_CODEL
            4- Add new Queue

            Tick "Enable"
            Name: queue_in
            Queue Management Algorithm: Tail Drop
            Save
            5- Add limiter in firewall rule

            Configure floating rule (as normal)
            In / Out pipe: queue_in / queue_out

            The difference between is this and the August Hangout is the Queue Management Algorithm is using Tail Drop.

            pfSense rig: pfSense SG-4860/120GB SSD
            WAN: CenturyLink Gigabit Fiber

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • L
              laped
              last edited by

              Pinging stills times out when using speedtest and tail-drop. So doesn't solve all problems.

              H 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H
                Harvy66 @laped
                last edited by

                @laped said in Fq-Codel:

                Pinging stills times out when using speedtest and tail-drop. So doesn't solve all problems.

                Still? This is your first post in this discussion and it's off topic. If you're having an issue, you should start your own.

                L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • L
                  laped @Harvy66
                  last edited by

                  @harvy66 I wouldn't call it off topic since its regarding codel-fq and it current state. I can see that the other post (playing with codel-fq) has started again with the same issue and a possible fix.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • KOMK
                    KOM
                    last edited by

                    Forgive me but I'm sitting here laughing at the irony. FQ-Codel was supposed to be the Holy Grail of QoS that magically does what you want without any twiddling, and people were desperately waiting for it. Now that we have it, nobody seems to know how to get it working.

                    😆 😆 😆

                    L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • L
                      laped @KOM
                      last edited by

                      @kom Heh yeah. Quote from bufferbloat:

                      CoDel is a novel “no knobs”, “just works”, “handles variable bandwidth and RTT”, and simple AQM algorithm.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • uptownVagrantU
                        uptownVagrant
                        last edited by

                        I can appreciate the cynicism but what we're all witnessing here looks to be more of an integration issue with pfSense than any real issues with schedulers or AQMs that are working in FreeBSD 11.2. The engine seems to work and perform! The integration of the engine with the rest of the drivetrain in pfSense... Well, I'm hopeful that it will be worked out soon. ;)

                        <img src="pollyanna.gif">

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • H
                          Harvy66
                          last edited by

                          I agree. Not an issue of the algorithm but the implementation. There seems to be no documentation on how to properly configure ipfw to make proper use. ipfw is the issue. It has a bunch of knobs and those can have negative interactions that ruin the benefits of fq_codel.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.