Traffic Shaper w Codel not doing a thing in 2.5

NOCling · May 27, 2021, 9:22 PM

Why you don't set up your real connection speed and look how well it will work?

ryk48 · May 27, 2021, 9:26 PM

@nocling i did that originally and it didnt seem to do anything so i thought well ill just put the speeds way off and for sure if its doing something ill notice, nope, didnt make any difference which tells me its not doing a darn thing.

NOCling · May 28, 2021, 6:48 AM

I use 1000/50 Cabel to and Codel works very nice.
If i run a NAS VPN Backup with full Upload, i don't recognize this.
No Bufferbload here.

To set the limiter speed, I use exactly the bandwidths from the provisioning file.

ryk48 · May 29, 2021, 4:07 AM

@nocling ive used a range of bandwidth settings and queue length settings and none of them made a lick of difference, sometimes i felt like one of the settings had made a difference but when i tested again later nope, still buffer bloat issues. Which is why i thought i would wildly play with the bandwidth parameters to see if anything would make any changes and so far none seem to so i am at a loss as to why it doesnt work, what all do i need to check?

NOCling · Jun 2, 2021, 9:29 PM

I use this Settings and it just works.

		<queue>
			<name>WAN-Down</name>
			<number>1</number>
			<qlimit>10000</qlimit>
			<plr></plr>
			<description><![CDATA[WAN-Down]]></description>
			<bandwidth>
				<item>
					<bw>1095680</bw>
					<burst></burst>
					<bwscale>Kb</bwscale>
					<bwsched>none</bwsched>
				</item>
			</bandwidth>
			<enabled>on</enabled>
			<buckets></buckets>
			<mask>none</mask>
			<maskbits></maskbits>
			<maskbitsv6></maskbitsv6>
			<delay>0</delay>
			<sched>fq_codel</sched>
			<param_fq_codel_target>5</param_fq_codel_target>
			<param_fq_codel_interval>100</param_fq_codel_interval>
			<param_fq_codel_quantum>1514</param_fq_codel_quantum>
			<param_fq_codel_limit>10240</param_fq_codel_limit>
			<param_fq_codel_flows>1024</param_fq_codel_flows>
			<aqm>codel</aqm>
			<param_codel_target>5</param_codel_target>
			<param_codel_interval>100</param_codel_interval>
			<ecn>on</ecn>
			<queue>
				<name>WAN-DownQ</name>
				<number>1</number>
				<qlimit></qlimit>
				<description><![CDATA[WAN-DownQ]]></description>
				<weight></weight>
				<enabled>on</enabled>
				<buckets></buckets>
				<mask>none</mask>
				<maskbits></maskbits>
				<maskbitsv6></maskbitsv6>
				<aqm>codel</aqm>
				<param_codel_target>5</param_codel_target>
				<param_codel_interval>100</param_codel_interval>
				<ecn>on</ecn>
			</queue>
		</queue>
		<queue>
			<name>WAN-Up</name>
			<number>2</number>
			<qlimit>500</qlimit>
			<plr></plr>
			<description></description>
			<bandwidth>
				<item>
					<bw>54784</bw>
					<burst></burst>
					<bwscale>Kb</bwscale>
					<bwsched>none</bwsched>
				</item>
			</bandwidth>
			<enabled>on</enabled>
			<buckets></buckets>
			<mask>none</mask>
			<maskbits></maskbits>
			<maskbitsv6></maskbitsv6>
			<delay>0</delay>
			<sched>fq_codel</sched>
			<param_fq_codel_target>5</param_fq_codel_target>
			<param_fq_codel_interval>100</param_fq_codel_interval>
			<param_fq_codel_quantum>1514</param_fq_codel_quantum>
			<param_fq_codel_limit>10240</param_fq_codel_limit>
			<param_fq_codel_flows>1024</param_fq_codel_flows>
			<aqm>codel</aqm>
			<param_codel_target>5</param_codel_target>
			<param_codel_interval>100</param_codel_interval>
			<ecn>on</ecn>
			<queue>
				<name>WAN-UpQ</name>
				<number>2</number>
				<qlimit></qlimit>
				<description><![CDATA[WAN-UpQ]]></description>
				<weight></weight>
				<enabled>on</enabled>
				<buckets></buckets>
				<mask>none</mask>
				<maskbits></maskbits>
				<maskbitsv6></maskbitsv6>
				<aqm>codel</aqm>
				<param_codel_target>5</param_codel_target>
				<param_codel_interval>100</param_codel_interval>
				<ecn>on</ecn>
			</queue>
		</queue>
	</dnshaper>

ryk48 · Jun 2, 2021, 9:29 PM

@nocling Looks like that is what i am using as well. Is there something i am missing in my screenshots?
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view
login-to-view

NOCling · Jun 5, 2021, 7:27 AM

Strange, i try the 10/1 MBit Settings and it works as expected.
Ping, Down, UP
login-to-view

But now i use 21.05. with so many fixed bugs. The CE will follow shortly. But try a Beta version in productiv is a risk, you have to balance.
If the limititer is important, you can give it a try.

ryk48 · Jun 5, 2021, 4:57 PM

@nocling yeah that’s why I found it strange no matter what setting i changed it didn’t seem to have any affect.

I wonder if it has anything to do or doesn’t work well with HA being setup because I have two pfsense boxes running in case one goes down the other picks up. They are vms on different PCs.

ryk48 · Jun 5, 2021, 5:01 PM

@ryk48 I’m running 2.5.1

MagikMark · Jun 6, 2021, 3:32 AM

For Q management use "Tail Drop" instead, as "Codel" has some bugs on it. The result is pretty much the same.

For scheduler use "FQ-Codel"

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 1:26 PM

@magikmark would i set this for both the limiter and its queue? When i set the queue to taildrop it doesn't like that ECN is enabled.

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 1:31 PM

@ryk48 assuming what i said was correct, i made those changes and did a dslreports test and once again made zero difference, like it might as well have never been enabled. With my bandwidth set so low i would have expected to see a significant drop in bandwidth when i ran the test, that way id know its actually doing something and I can set the bandwidth back to something more appropriate but no change.

tomashk · Jun 7, 2021, 3:03 PM

@ryk48 In the past I observed that the following made big difference while running test on dslreports:

testing on wi-fi vs cable
computer (so poor CPU, NIC and other parts)
antivirus software - even if disabled there was some strange buffering that completely break results - uninstalling has given me normal results
bufferbloat introduced by ISP's devices/software (it might be hard to change anything if your ISP doesn't know what to do to provide good connection :) )

I'm just thinking aloud and mention what I have seen when I have been trying to fix my bufferbloat.

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 3:08 PM

@tomashk computer is recent and fairly quick, I only run the browser when doing the test. It’s connected via 10gbit fiber to my switch, I’ve got mediacom 1000/50 cable service on a docsis 3.1 modem. I don’t run AV other than built in windows defender. Back when I had 300-500 mbit service the limiters used to work so I’m not sure what’s different now or why no matter what setting I change it seems to have no effect. Not sure if there’s a log I can check to see if it’s even using the limiters.

tomashk · Jun 7, 2021, 3:16 PM

@ryk48 to see if limiters are doing anything go to Diagnostics -> Limiter Info

login-to-view

Lines with red arrows don't appear if limiter/fq_codel is not doing anything. Or at least I understand it like that :)

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 5:05 PM

@tomashk said in Traffic Shaper w Codel not doing a thing in 2.5:

o Diagnostics -> Limiter Info

here is what i have:

Limiters:
00001: 10.000 Mbit/s 0 ms burst 0
q131073 1000 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: 1.000 Mbit/s 0 ms burst 0
q131074 1000 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: 10.000 Mbit/s 0 ms burst 0
q00001 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 1514 limit 10240 flows 1024 ECN
Children flowsets: 1
00002: 1.000 Mbit/s 0 ms burst 0
q00002 50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 2 weight 1 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
sched 2 type FQ_CODEL flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
FQ_CODEL target 5ms interval 100ms quantum 1514 limit 10240 flows 1024 ECN
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 1 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail

tomashk · Jun 7, 2021, 7:27 PM

@ryk48 While looking at limiter information, try running some speed test in the background. Lines that I showed on my screenshot disappear if there is no "heavy lifting" done by the limiters. If said lines don't show up during speed test, then it is indicating that fq_codel is not used.

(somebody please correct me if I'm wrong at any point - but that way of thinking helped me for my troubleshooting)

MagikMark · Jun 7, 2021, 7:59 PM

Do the ff:

Dashboard -> Firewall -> Traffic Shaper -> New Limiter -> New Limiter

Tick: Enable Limiter and its Children
Name: ISP-Download-Speed
Bandwith: 100 Mbps
Description: ISP Download Speed
Queue: Tail Drop
Scheduler: FQ-Codel
Tick: ECN

SAVE

Scheduler: Quantum=300 Limit=20480 Flows=65535

SAVE

ADD NEW QUEUE

Tick: Enable this queue
Name: WAN-Upload-Queue
Desciption: WAN Upload Queue
Queue: Tail Drop

SAVE

+NEW LIMITER

Tick: Enable Limiter and its Children
Name: ISP-Upload-Speed
Bandwith: 100 Mbps
Description: ISP Upload Speed
Queue: Tail Drop
Scheduler: FQ-Codel
Tick: ECN

SAVE

Scheduler: Quantum=300 Limit=20480 Flows=65535

ADD NEW QUEUE

Tick: Enable this queue
Name: WAN-Download-Queue
Desciption: WAN Download Queue
Queue: Tail Drop

SAVE

Firewall->Rules->Floating

ADD

Action: Match
Tick: Apply this action immediately on match
Interface: WAN
Direction: In
Address Family: IPv4
Protocol: Any
Description: Incoming traffic Queue

ADVANCE OPTIONS

In/Out Pipe: Wan-Upload-Queue Wan-Download-Queue

SAVE

ADD BELOW

Action: Match
Tick: Apply this action immediately on match
Interface: WAN
Direction: Out
Address Family: IPv4
Protocol: Any
Description: Outgoing traffic Queue

ADVANCE OPTIONS

In/Out Pipe: Wan-Download-Queue Wan-Upload-Queue

SAVE

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 8:27 PM

@tomashk when doing a speedtest i don't get that line in the limiter info section.

ryk48 · Jun 7, 2021, 8:30 PM

@magikmark Did you mean to have the upload que as part of the download limiter which is backwards from what ive read to set? Same story for firewall floating rules, did you intend to have it set as wandownq | wanupq instead of the other way around for the wan interface on the outbound direction?