Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Report issues relating to bandwith monitoring, bandwidth quotas or QoS in this forum.

Moderator: Moderators

Volaris
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby Volaris » Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:39 pm

d3fz wrote:
Volaris wrote:Leaving it to my ISP seems to break ACC at times (and I use a big ISP in the US; Comcast). It's almost as if pings to Comcast IP are exempt from speed cap because the ping remains low even when the line gets saturated.

That was my case as well (different ISP), ping remaining low even when the line was fully saturated. ACC would still work, but not at its best, as I happened to find out later after changing to an alternative ping target.

@Volaris, you seem to know a lot about QoS. There's an ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of alternative ping targets vs gateway (default). Would you mind sharing some thoughts on the subject?

Thank you.

Shared.

I got to test the new QoS default rules using the 01/22 beta. They seem setup for <128 byte prioritization on upload @ 90% (!) bandwidth and no rules or prioritization on download (just equal sharing among devices)

The new default rules work decent and always kept the connection usable, but I went ahead and changed them to <128 byte prioritization on both upload and download, at 50% bandwidth for both. The reasons I did this are because I could never get an A score on DSLreports buffer bloat test, browsing didn't feel as snappy without <128 byte prioritization on download (images in articles load instantly, for example), and I was wary of some rogue connections (torrents, and I think someone mentioned Steam uploads) taking control of 90% of my upload connection.
QoS Tip: Don't complicate your QoS settings. Gargoyle evenly splits available bandwidth between active devices as needed. Just delete all your classification rules and leave only one normal service class and you're done. No more arguing over bandwidth.

d3fz
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 7:34 pm

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby d3fz » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:55 pm

Thanks for your feedback.
TP-Link Archer C7 v2 - Gargoyle 1.10.X
TP-Link WR842ND v2 - Gargoyle 1.10.X
TP-Link RE450 AC v2 - Stock FW 1.0.4
TP-Link WA850RE v1.2 - LEDE 17.01.1

Tired of Chrome? Try Vivaldi - an advanced browser built for power users

GargoyleNoob
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:21 am

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby GargoyleNoob » Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:40 pm

My current settings. My bullets have been registering pretty well in COD as of late and although I'm only getting half of my DL speeds, I'm satisfied overall. B/W monitoring is off btw, so no graphs for me. TPL WDR3600

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/29967764

ACC on. Everything else unchecked:
https://gyazo.com/d7cc0087064adb1c12860e358d921a96

The 3% dedicated to UDP UL traffic makes my gaming experience night n day:
https://gyazo.com/617dea41571c9daa0942bc08c4f4d75f

I've gotten an A+ Bufferbloat rating every hour for the past 8 hours.

Bluey2444
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:59 am

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby Bluey2444 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:02 am

Hi, I would like to make sure I have the Qos set right.
I use iracing and all the upload traffic from my end uses UDP. As soon as someone else in the house uploads something I get kicked.
This is the Qos rule I've applied

ispyisail
Moderator
Posts: 4231
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:15 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby ispyisail » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:26 am

Bluey2444 wrote:Hi, I would like to make sure I have the Qos set right.
I use iracing and all the upload traffic from my end uses UDP. As soon as someone else in the house uploads something I get kicked.
This is the Qos rule I've applied


Start a new thread and post some screen shots

kanenas
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:53 am

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby kanenas » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:16 pm

This thread is an eye opener but it would help a lot if the first post had 2 screenshot one for upload and one for download with the recommended settings so that we are sure what we did is the correct one.

In my case after various updates from one version to the other it seems that I no longer have the default settings.

encro
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:52 am
Location: au.victoria

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby encro » Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:20 am

kanenas wrote:This thread is an eye opener but it would help a lot if the first post had 2 screenshot one for upload and one for download with the recommended settings so that we are sure what we did is the correct one.

In my case after various updates from one version to the other it seems that I no longer have the default settings.


These Rules in the OP haven't been applied to an Official Release. v1.11 will incorporate these default rules in addition to changes in the way ACC adjusts bandwidth.
Netgear WNDR3700v4 - Gargoyle 1.10.x
D-Link DIR-835 - Gargoyle 1.7.1 (Deceased)
How to manually set up PIA's OpenVPN in Gargoyle (Private Internet Access): https://www.gargoyle-router.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=9129&p=45410#p45410

Daeron
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:30 am

Re: Default QoS Rules Contest **Complete**

Postby Daeron » Tue Oct 23, 2018 5:21 pm

I have made some further research on the topic and decided to expand the ruleset as shown below. (Note that the class percentages are just placeholders, explained in detail below.)

With this setup downloading or streaming videos (at full speeds) seem to have barely any effect on my ping ingame. The bufferbloat tests are also returning nicely. Would like to see others input on this.

Download:
Image
Image

Upload:
Image
Image

Reasoning for the changes:

Previously I've been using 512/128 bytes rule on download/upload respectively to give priority to one class on each side. This has worked reasonably well but not perfect.

I monitored a couple games (mostly shooters) with different playercounts to see where their packets end up on the size scale. A decent amount seems to be caught by 512/128. Think of team deathmatch style games up to 12 players or so. (I actually expanded it to 576 as without it there seemed to be a couple uncaught packets).

However as player counts rise (24+) or theres some AI on the map this very quickly bleeds over the previous rule on the download side. You can see this with the net_graph command in Source engine (Valve) games or just by looking at the Gargoyle classes. With 30 players this easily climbs into the 800-1000 bytes range (depends on the server setting of course).

A second rule of up to ~1280 seems to catch all of these even at the highest playercounts. This would make sense considering Source engine games have a setting (net_maxroutable) that, by default splits packets larger than ~1100-1260 (exact number depends on the game and player settings) into multiple parts.

Most downloads or online video streams I tried seem to rely on very large packets. That means well above 1280 and up to 1500 (which is the maximum possible size). Thus they get automatically sent to bulk without any additional rules needed.

Some people mentioned using 128 bytes on the download side as well, from my testing I see little point in that. Even with just a couple people around ingame the bytes received climb over that. If someone really wanted to be be that granular I feel like 256 would work better for gaming. But generally speaking you just catch all those with the 576 bytes rule with barely any difference in bandwidth funneled into that class.

Perhaps the 128 bytes is about prioritizing ACK packets on the download side? Those would be more like 40/52 in sizes though. Maybe SYNs at 60 bytes or so. Perhaps I'll do more testing on these specifically.

Upload does not seem to scale with playercounts (which would make sense, you are only talking to the server about yourself) so the 128 byte rule catches most of these games. However even in my limited testing I found some games which, regardless of playercount will operate in the up to 256 bytes range and would not be caught by the 128 bytes rule.

I'm not sure how i feel about the 52 bytes rule yet. My understanding is that 40 bytes is the length of a TCP ACK packet or 52 if it also contains a timestamp. A lot of games seem to operate above it (so 53-128 range). Its possible something could be done with this fact, but im not sure yet. Having the 128/256 bytes classes would probably be sufficient for most so I'll probably end up removing it when I'm done testing.

Note that the class percentages are just placeholders. The optimal setup would probably be reserving a low amount to the bulk class (10-20%) and roughly equally sharing the rest between the 2 or 3 prioritized classes with the assumption that they will never actually fill up their limits. The ones with larger packet allowance perhaps should get a bit less reserved.


Return to “Monitoring / Quota / QoS Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests