Is QOS / Bandwidth control something that you always enable on your main home router?

[g67575]

For my VDSL2 connection, I've found it allows me to use the Internet reliably, even while others are watching videos, downloading or generally using bandwidth. This includes the ability to ping websites and the router itself, without dropping these network packets. I've configured my Asus router, via the QOS settings page, to cap upload and download usage of the total connection bandwidth, at 90%.

The other people using my home connection seem to like it too, as it ensures some bandwidth is always available to use on each device.

In general, browsing the web feels smooth, even when the download bandwidth usage is maxed out.

Are there any reasons why I might consider turning it off ever?

 

[bremen1874]

Are there any reasons why I might consider turning it off ever?

Only if you also enjoy activities such as punching yourself in the balls!

 

[g67575]

It's a shame really, a lot of routers sent from ISPs have a kind of in built crap version of QOS, that can't be configured and it often seems to work quite poorly (dropping a lot of packets for example).

I also had a TP-Link router (with configurable QOS) and the bandwidth control option wasn't very good, and only seemed to work some of the time.

 

[bremen1874]

Yes, very, very sad. I just don’t know how people cope.

 

[g67575]

I think I might need counselling, the trauma was intense

Tbh, I'm partly asking so that I can pretend to know what I'm talking about if I have to setup someone else's home network...

 

[WJA96]

QOS places a load on the CPU. So turning it on can reduce overall throughput. Check your total throughput with it switched on and off before you leave it switched on.

 

[g67575]

Makes sense. I guess this is less likely to be a problem in the future, as more powerful multicore routers become widespread.

I'm stuck on VDSL2 (40-50mbps depending on modem config) for at least another 3-6 years though, so the CPU usage hasn't been maxed out.

There's also another feature that some routers have, called NAT acceleration, which can improve throughput.

I'm curious though, would it be a good idea to apply similar QOS settings to a FTTP connection, assuming 1gbps download and upload bandwidth?

So, only allow 90-95% of the connection bandwidth to be utilized?

 

[WJA96]

Makes sense. I guess this is less likely to be a problem in the future, as more powerful multicore routers become widespread.

I'm stuck on VDSL2 (40-50mbps depending on modem config) for at least another 3-6 years though, so the CPU usage hasn't been maxed out.

There's also another feature that some routers have, called NAT acceleration, which can improve throughput.

I'm curious though, would it be a good idea to apply similar QOS settings to a FTTP connection, assuming 1gbps download and upload bandwidth?

So, only allow 90-95% of the connection bandwidth to be utilized?

You might be surprised at which routers suffer massively from processing QoS queues. The UniFi Security Gateway for example was infamous for being able to make a gigabit capable router run under 50Mbps with SmartQueues switched on.

And to answer your second question, of course. We have off-site backup and that port has priority over everything else. It always gets 500Mbps when it’s running (which is pretty much all the time).

 

[Rroff]

On a decent speed connection in a shared user environment I've only really needed to use upstream QoS to limit any one connection to 90% of available bandwidth to keep things working well - only needed a wider spread of QoS measures on slower connections.

Some stuff with heavy connection cycling like certain torrent applications can still decimate all but high end gear though without even using that much bandwidth.

 

[Sin_Chase]

The QoS on a residential internet connection is not true QoS as the ISP will ignore the tagging. It can be useful for setting up local priority queues or bandwidth throttles but I found in my experience it is more hassle than it's worth.

It can be useful on a really poor bandwidth line but if you have a half decent line I just would not bother.

I have a 1Gbit/1Gbit FTTP line and would never dream of enabling it. (But I don't need to either!)

 

[Rainmaker]

Bufferbloat is real and a problem on most lines, even FTTP. We had a world renowned expert join us in the VM thread last week, offering a metric ton of knowledge, tools and help in fixing it. The posts go on across the following week but you can see the improvements graphically. I’d highly recommend reading the research, papers and websites he linked.

My line never looked better. OP check out cake rather than crudely chopping off 10% of your bandwidth. You’ll never go back to not using it!

 

[z10m]

Bufferbloat is real and a problem on most lines, even FTTP. We had a world renowned expert join us in the VM thread last week, offering a metric ton of knowledge, tools and help in fixing it. The posts go on across the following week but you can see the improvements graphically. I’d highly recommend reading the research, papers and websites he linked.

My line never looked better. OP check out cake rather than crudely chopping off 10% of your bandwidth. You’ll never go back to not using it!

Would it actually help on VM Gig1 that’s practically used by one person.? I live only with my girlfriend and she is hardly ever at home and when she is the most bandwidth demanding task for her is watching 4K Netflix.
Me when I’m playing the rare online session I just don’t download anything so the line is used just for that.

 

[Rainmaker]

Would it actually help on VM Gig1 that’s practically used by one person.? I live only with my girlfriend and she is hardly ever at home and when she is the most bandwidth demanding task for her is watching 4K Netflix.
Me when I’m playing the rare online session I just don’t download anything so the line is used just for that.

Yes, absolutely. A single person can experience and suffer from bloat. It’s a network thing, not a ‘loads of people using the line’ thing.

 

[z10m]

Yes, absolutely. A single person can experience and suffer from bloat. It’s a network thing, not a ‘loads of people using the line’ thing.

Interesting.
I’m using a MikroTik router and I think fq_codel is working on the new 7.1x beta software so might give it a go.

 

[Sin_Chase]

Yes, absolutely. A single person can experience and suffer from bloat. It’s a network thing, not a ‘loads of people using the line’ thing.

What precisely is the symptom of so called bloat though?

I can download at linespeed and my ping times to most services are tiny. Got a link to the sorts of things which one might experience, jitter etc?

 

[Rainmaker]

What precisely is the symptom of so called bloat though?

I can download at linespeed and my ping times to most services are tiny. Got a link to the sorts of things which one might experience, jitter etc?

Bufferbloat is an increase of latency under load, not at idle (like when you're randomly testing pings). Best bet to test thoroughly is to run a Linux, BSD or macOS instance (a live USB is fine), and install netperf, flent and irtt. Run the flent rrul test to see how your line's performing. For example:

flent rrul -p all_scaled -l 60 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t Baseline_Measurements -o rrul.png

Lots of info at bufferbloat.net if you're curious. Essentially it causes things such as (but not exclusively) jitter - a synonym, drops and stuttering in video and voice calls, frame drops, lag in browsing, one machine 'hogging' bandwidth making others unusable, slow resolution of DNS and jittery/slow loading of sites, ping spikes in games, packet loss, retransmissions... Lots of things. It's absolutely a problem on the Internet today, even fast lines (though admittedly, FTTP is one of the best implementations simply because it's symmetric and fast with inherently low latency). It's also eminently fixable. See my gigabit before and after graphs on the VM thread, linked above.

 

[Sin_Chase]

Bufferbloat is an increase of latency under load, not at idle (like when you're randomly testing pings). Best bet to test thoroughly is to run a Linux, BSD or macOS instance (a live USB is fine), and install netperf, flent and irtt. Run the flent rrul test to see how your line's performing. For example:

flent rrul -p all_scaled -l 60 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t Baseline_Measurements -o rrul.png

Lots of info at bufferbloat.net if you're curious. Essentially it causes things such as (but not exclusively) jitter - a synonym, drops and stuttering in video and voice calls, frame drops, lag in browsing, one machine 'hogging' bandwidth making others unusable, slow resolution of DNS and jittery/slow loading of sites, ping spikes in games, packet loss, retransmissions... Lots of things. It's absolutely a problem on the Internet today, even fast lines (though admittedly, FTTP is one of the best implementations simply because it's symmetric and fast with inherently low latency). It's also eminently fixable. See my gigabit before and after graphs on the VM thread, linked above.

I installed it and dependencies on my PiHole Linux instance but can't get it to run. Keeps complaining matlabplot is not installed.

 

[Rainmaker]

I installed it and dependencies on my PiHole Linux instance but can't get it to run. Keeps complaining matlabplot is not installed.

What distro? On Ubuntu they don't pull in netperf as a dependency either, even though it's required. I've found it works fine on RHEL/Fedora, and *buntu after adding the deps. Have you searched matlabplot in your package manager? Note that you'll get more accurate results if you also install irtt (another tool by the same team, with much more millisecond-accurate pings). Flent will look for irtt, and if it's in path it'll use it. You'll need Go but it's easy. For example on Fedora (adjust accordingly) it was as easy as:

sudo dnf install -y go
go get -u github.com/heistp/irtt/cmd/irtt
sudo mv go/irtt /usr/local/bin/
sudo rm -rf go

Done.

 

[Sin_Chase]

It's a debian based OS. I'm a bit of a *nix nab so checking package manager is a but beyond me.

I have definitely installed it however.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Bufferbloat is real and a problem on most lines, even FTTP. We had a world renowned expert join us in the VM thread last week, offering a metric ton of knowledge, tools and help in fixing it. The posts go on across the following week but you can see the improvements graphically. I’d highly recommend reading the research, papers and websites he linked.

My line never looked better. OP check out cake rather than crudely chopping off 10% of your bandwidth. You’ll never go back to not using it!

Fascinating, thanks for sharing!

Im on a pretty poor connection at times so I should configure the setup to limit tbf.