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

    Playing with fq_codel in 2.4

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Traffic Shaping
    1.1k Posts 123 Posters 1.8m Views 74 Watching
    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.
    • D Offline
      dtaht
      last edited by

      This really is the thread from hell isn't it? I'd do a new thread.

      Over on linux (and not bsd as yet), we did this:

      https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc17/atc17-hoiland-jorgensen.pdf

      Skip to the MOS score at the end, and work back. There's support now for intel, qca, and mediatek chips. However... if you can get the clients to dscp mark for the VO or VI queue for how your AP defines it, that helps in that direction, and
      it is generally possible to build a more complicated qos/sqm setup that explicitly prioritizes voip out of the ipfw tools.

      In general I'm a big believer in short (fair) queues and lots of 'em, and not huge on prioritization. sch_cake (also mentioned on this thread), has some built-in optimizations as well.

      cwagzC 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • cwagzC Offline
        cwagz @dtaht
        last edited by cwagz

        This post is deleted!
        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • cwagzC Offline
          cwagz @dtaht
          last edited by

          @dtaht said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

          This really is the thread from hell isn't it? I'd do a new thread.

          Over on linux (and not bsd as yet), we did this:

          https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc17/atc17-hoiland-jorgensen.pdf

          Skip to the MOS score at the end, and work back. There's support now for intel, qca, and mediatek chips. However... if you can get the clients to dscp mark for the VO or VI queue for how your AP defines it, that helps in that direction, and
          it is generally possible to build a more complicated qos/sqm setup that explicitly prioritizes voip out of the ipfw tools.

          In general I'm a big believer in short (fair) queues and lots of 'em, and not huge on prioritization. sch_cake (also mentioned on this thread), has some built-in optimizations as well.

          Thank you, dthat. I will look at this information.

          New thread:
          https://forum.netgate.com/topic/145924/prioritize-wifi-calling-traffic-and-fq_codel

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • provelsP Offline
            provels
            last edited by

            After limiters and rules are in effect and states have been initially cleared, is it necessary to dump the states every time a modification is made to the limiters during testing? Thanks.

            Peder

            MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
            BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

            X 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • X Offline
              xciter327 @provels
              last edited by

              @provels said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

              After limiters and rules are in effect and states have been initially cleared, is it necessary to dump the states every time a modification is made to the limiters during testing? Thanks.

              I clear them every time. Also monitor syslog to check if there are any errors.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • wgstarksW Offline
                wgstarks
                last edited by

                I keep seeing these errors in my system log-

                fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                

                They seem to show at random times maybe 2 or 3 times a week and will repeat for a few minutes before stopping. Not sure if they represent a problem or how to fix them? Could definitely use any advice.

                Box: SG-4200

                T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S Offline
                  subzerogts
                  last edited by

                  Hi guys, I'm new here and just followed the YouTube video from Netgate on how to set up fq codel with limiters. But then browsing this thread, I see people saying those settings are wrong and to use 'Tail Drop' as the queue management algorithm? I'm confused, why?

                  Also, any recommendation on settings I should use? I have a gigabit verizon fios connection. It's hit 940/900 on Verizon's test if I recall correctly. Actually the upload has gotten over 900 a few times, the download is usually 500-700 on normal speed test sites except Verizon's where it can hit 900+ (and dslreports which has gotten it to 800+ a few times). I have a Plex Media Server and a gaming machine on the network.

                  Using the settings from the YouTube vid got my Bufferbloat score to go from A to A+ in dslreports' test.

                  provelsP T 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • provelsP Offline
                    provels @subzerogts
                    last edited by provels

                    @subzerogts If you are at A+, I don't expect you have much to gain, LOL. I followed the video and also tried the tail drop config. Nothing seems to help me. Bloat is a B/C, Quality is A/B and Speed is D/F, even though the Ookla speedtest client gets me my advertised 300/25 to various local servers (even when limiting the Down limiter to 150. Nonsensical. Completely random speedtest-cli results testing from an inside server through pfSense and at the DSLReports test page. I don't know if maybe it's Comcast, my modem or what.
                    ddb1039d-0116-4bd4-8046-0d6ee00ab863-image.png
                    e0e0a0ac-6e24-472a-9da4-97854c1953af-image.png

                    Peder

                    MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                    BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                    T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • provelsP Offline
                      provels
                      last edited by

                      If I want to disable the limiters, I know there are checkboxes for that. But if I just disable the floating rules and reset states, that gets them out of the system anyway, right?

                      Peder

                      MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                      BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • T Offline
                        tman222 @wgstarks
                        last edited by

                        @wgstarks said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                        I keep seeing these errors in my system log-

                        fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                        fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                        fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                        fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                        fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                        fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                        fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                        fq_codel_enqueue over limit
                        fq_codel_enqueue maxidx = 797
                        

                        They seem to show at random times maybe 2 or 3 times a week and will repeat for a few minutes before stopping. Not sure if they represent a problem or how to fix them? Could definitely use any advice.

                        @wgstarks - what are your fq-codel parameters set to? One thing you might try is increasing the the value for the limit parameter. Here is a a link to some good documentation on what each parameter does:

                        http://caia.swin.edu.au/freebsd/aqm/downloads.html

                        Hope this helps.

                        wgstarksW 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • T Offline
                          tman222 @provels
                          last edited by

                          @provels said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                          @subzerogts If you are at A+, I don't expect you have much to gain, LOL. I followed the video and also tried the tail drop config. Nothing seems to help me. Bloat is a B/C, Quality is A/B and Speed is D/F, even though the Ookla speedtest client gets me my advertised 300/25 to various local servers (even when limiting the Down limiter to 150. Nonsensical. Completely random speedtest-cli results testing from an inside server through pfSense and at the DSLReports test page. I don't know if maybe it's Comcast, my modem or what.
                          ddb1039d-0116-4bd4-8046-0d6ee00ab863-image.png
                          e0e0a0ac-6e24-472a-9da4-97854c1953af-image.png

                          @provels - how do the results change if you reduce the number of parallel streams during the DSL Reports speed test? Also, have you tried changing / tuning any of the fq-codel parameters?

                          Something else I thought of: I admit that I don't know a lot about cable modems, but is buying a DOCSIS 3.1 cable modem an option? As far as I can tell DOCSIS 3.1 includes AQM part of the specification:

                          https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8034

                          Hope this helps.

                          provelsP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • T Offline
                            tman222 @subzerogts
                            last edited by

                            @subzerogts said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                            Hi guys, I'm new here and just followed the YouTube video from Netgate on how to set up fq codel with limiters. But then browsing this thread, I see people saying those settings are wrong and to use 'Tail Drop' as the queue management algorithm? I'm confused, why?

                            Also, any recommendation on settings I should use? I have a gigabit verizon fios connection. It's hit 940/900 on Verizon's test if I recall correctly. Actually the upload has gotten over 900 a few times, the download is usually 500-700 on normal speed test sites except Verizon's where it can hit 900+ (and dslreports which has gotten it to 800+ a few times). I have a Plex Media Server and a gaming machine on the network.

                            Using the settings from the YouTube vid got my Bufferbloat score to go from A to A+ in dslreports' test.

                            When you select FQ_CODEL as scheduler you don't have to worry about setting up queue management algorithms for the queues because fq-codel manages per flow created packet queues automatically as part of fq-codel algorithm. This is why you don't really see any difference in performance if you e.g. select Codel as the queue management algorithm if you have FQ_CODEL selected.

                            Having said that, fq-codel is a bit unique in this regard (in that it also manages per flow queues vs. just scheduling packets). In a way you can kind of think of fq-codel as a hybrid or all-in one packet scheduler and queue management algorithm. However, this is not the case for some of the other algorithms you have available to choose from as well as schedulers (e.g. QFQ, Round Robin, etc.). These are actually just scheduling algorithms that determine how packets should be dequeued from one more packet queues (e.g. Round Robin, weighted, etc.) When using one of these scheduling-only algorithms, you'll still have to setup packet queues and then choose an algorithm to manage those queues. In such as scenario, choosing a queue management algorithm will be important and will make a difference in performance.

                            Hope this helps.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • provelsP Offline
                              provels @tman222
                              last edited by

                              @tman222 BB goes to A and Speed tanks when I reduced DL streams from 24 to 6 or 12. Already bought the new Netgear modem after Comcast bitched about my Motorola for 2 years. Screw it. I'll monitor thread, but for now, I'm off the program.
                              Nbbe627a8-720e-48e1-87a4-390519e414ca-image.png

                              Peder

                              MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                              BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                              T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • T Offline
                                tman222 @provels
                                last edited by

                                @provels said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                                @tman222 BB goes to A and Speed tanks when I reduced DL streams from 24 to 6 or 12. Already bought the new Netgear modem after Comcast bitched about my Motorola for 2 years. Screw it. I'll monitor thread, but for now, I'm off the program.
                                Nbbe627a8-720e-48e1-87a4-390519e414ca-image.png

                                Thanks @provels for getting back to me. If you don't mind me asking, how are you testing? Are the results consistent across different machines and browsers?

                                provelsP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • provelsP Offline
                                  provels @tman222
                                  last edited by provels

                                  @tman222 My pfSense is a VM on Hyper-V and I'm testing from the host through the 10Gb Hyper-V interfaces through an Intel I340 Gb card hosting the v-switches via Cat6 to the modem. It's the only wired machine I have and no diff with other browsers. Results are completely random. Thanks for the help, but I'm not thinking it's worth the effort.

                                  Peder

                                  MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                                  BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • wgstarksW Offline
                                    wgstarks @tman222
                                    last edited by

                                    @tman222 said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                                    @wgstarks - what are your fq-codel parameters set to? One thing you might try is increasing the the value for the limit parameter. Here is a a link to some good documentation on what each parameter does:
                                    http://caia.swin.edu.au/freebsd/aqm/downloads.html
                                    Hope this helps.

                                    Limiters:
                                    00001:  25.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0 
                                    q131073  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65537 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                     sched 65537 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                    00002: 400.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0 
                                    q131074  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65538 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                     sched 65538 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                    
                                    
                                    Schedulers:
                                    00001:  25.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0 
                                    q65537  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 1 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                     sched 1 type FQ_CODEL flags 0x0 0 buckets 1 active
                                     FQ_CODEL target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 1514 limit 10240 flows 1024 NoECN
                                       Children flowsets: 1 
                                    BKT Prot ___Source IP/port____ ____Dest. IP/port____ Tot_pkt/bytes Pkt/Byte Drp
                                      0 ip           0.0.0.0/0             0.0.0.0/0        1     1390  0    0   0
                                    00002: 400.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0 
                                    q65538  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 2 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                     sched 2 type FQ_CODEL flags 0x0 0 buckets 1 active
                                     FQ_CODEL target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 1514 limit 10240 flows 1024 NoECN
                                       Children flowsets: 2 
                                      0 ip           0.0.0.0/0             0.0.0.0/0        1       90  0    0   0
                                    
                                    
                                    Queues:
                                    q00001  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 1 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                    q00002  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 2 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                    

                                    These settings were based on speedtest results.
                                    Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

                                    Box: SG-4200

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • wgstarksW Offline
                                      wgstarks @tman222
                                      last edited by

                                      @tman222 said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                                      @wgstarks - what are your fq-codel parameters set to? One thing you might try is increasing the the value for the limit parameter.

                                      The limit was set at default 10240 packets. I increased that to 10340, but I'm wondering if that is too small to make any difference. Should I try a larger increase?

                                      Box: SG-4200

                                      T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • T Offline
                                        tman222 @wgstarks
                                        last edited by

                                        @wgstarks said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                                        @tman222 said in Playing with fq_codel in 2.4:

                                        @wgstarks - what are your fq-codel parameters set to? One thing you might try is increasing the the value for the limit parameter.

                                        The limit was set at default 10240 packets. I increased that to 10340, but I'm wondering if that is too small to make any difference. Should I try a larger increase?

                                        When I saw these messages I ended up doubling the limit value from 10240 to 20480. That might be over-compensating somewhat, but thankfully I have not had any issues since. Hope this helps.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P Offline
                                          Pentangle @jasonraymundo31
                                          last edited by Pentangle

                                          @jasonraymundo31 I'll give it a try.

                                          Limiters

                                          Floating Rules

                                          You can see what I meant regarding having different limiters per WAN connection, and a single queue inside each limiter. In the second picture you can also see the use of a floating rule per IPv4 or IPv6 version of each WAN connection. In this instance my IPv6 is provided by Hurricane Electric, and is relatively irrelevant in this matter as it's so rarely used.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • J Offline
                                            JonH @uptownVagrant
                                            last edited by

                                            Have applied settings @uptownVagrant described in post of 27Nov. Running a traceroute (on iMac) I get unexpected results as others have posted.

                                            traceroute google.com
                                            traceroute to google.com (172.217.5.110), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
                                             1  pfsense.firewall.localdomain (192.168.10.1)  0.531 ms  0.247 ms  0.224 ms
                                             2  sfo03s07-in-f110.1e100.net (172.217.5.110)  0.942 ms  0.838 ms  0.906 ms
                                             3  sfo03s07-in-f110.1e100.net (172.217.5.110)  5.972 ms  9.392 ms  7.845 ms
                                            <snip>
                                            11  sfo03s07-in-f110.1e100.net (172.217.5.110)  9.272 ms  8.283 ms  8.661 ms
                                            

                                            With Floating Rules disabled it works normally

                                            traceroute google.com
                                            traceroute to google.com (172.217.5.110), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
                                             1  pfsense.firewall.localdomain (192.168.10.1)  0.389 ms  0.156 ms  0.243 ms
                                             2  192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254)  0.815 ms  0.810 ms  0.733 ms
                                             3  <snip>
                                             9  * * *
                                            10  108.170.237.106 (108.170.237.106)  8.826 ms
                                                72.14.235.2 (72.14.235.2)  9.178 ms
                                                74.125.252.150 (74.125.252.150)  8.790 ms
                                            11  108.170.236.61 (108.170.236.61)  8.752 ms
                                                sfo03s07-in-f110.1e100.net (172.217.5.110)  8.728 ms
                                                108.170.236.61 (108.170.236.61)  8.469 ms
                                            
                                            

                                            I think my limiters & rules are the same, EXCEPT I use pfBlockerNG and it has rules at the TOP of Floating.

                                            Limiter:

                                            Limiters:
                                            00001: 838.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
                                            q131073  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65537 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                             sched 65537 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                            00002: 910.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
                                            q131074  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65538 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                             sched 65538 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                            
                                            Schedulers:
                                            00001: 838.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
                                            q65537  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 1 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                             sched 1 type FQ_CODEL flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                             FQ_CODEL target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 300 limit 10240 flows 4096 NoECN
                                               Children flowsets: 1
                                            00002: 910.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
                                            q65538  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 2 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                             sched 2 type FQ_CODEL flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
                                             FQ_CODEL target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 300 limit 10240 flows 4096 NoECN
                                               Children flowsets: 2
                                            
                                            Queues:
                                            q00001  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 1 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                            q00002  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 2 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
                                            
                                            

                                            pfctl -vvsr | grep “Codel”

                                            @124(1566879036) pass out quick on igb0 reply-to (igb0 x.x.x.1) inet proto icmp all icmp-type trace keep state label "USER_RULE: work around for fq_Codel limiter"
                                            @125(1566882242) pass quick on igb0 inet proto icmp all icmp-type echorep keep state label "USER_RULE: work around for fq_Codel limiter"
                                            @126(1566882242) pass quick on igb0 inet proto icmp all icmp-type echoreq keep state label "USER_RULE: work around for fq_Codel limiter"
                                            @127(1566882594) match in on igb0 inet all label "USER_RULE: No Improvement in Buffer Bloat: WAN in Codel limi..." dnqueue(1, 2)
                                            @128(1566795208) match out on igb0 inet all label "USER_RULE: No Improvement in Buffer Bloat: WAN out Codel lim..." dnqueue(2, 1)

                                            /tmp/rules.limiter

                                            pipe 1 config  bw 838Mb droptail
                                            sched 1 config pipe 1 type fq_codel target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 300 limit 10240 flows 4096 noecn
                                            queue 1 config pipe 1 droptail
                                             
                                            
                                            pipe 2 config  bw 910Mb droptail
                                            sched 2 config pipe 2 type fq_codel target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 300 limit 10240 flows 4096 noecn
                                            queue 2 config pipe 2 droptail
                                            
                                            

                                            Any ideas of why I still have incorrect traceroute?

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