New to Gargoyle, love it so far running on TL-WDR3600 bought for the purpose.
Have quotas sorted. Next hoping this is really simple??
I want to implement what in the QOS Wiki is called
"Percentage Bandwidth" .... "Example 2 – Equal Rights"
But that shares out bandwidth equally between devices, rather than equally between users.
The problem is one family member regularly has simultaneous heavy bandwidth use on two devices.
Dividing Quotas share between four users is dead easy, but I can't find any example of bandwidth sharing.
Would this work?
setting both upload and download service classes Normal1; Normal2; Normal3 & Normal4 at 25% - zero - no limit
Then making classification rules classing all user1 traffic as Normal1 for upload & download, ... etc.
I had noticed somewhere that you can enter an ip range here, which will help, in the format 192.168.1.10/20
(where as for quotas 192.168.1.10-192.168.1.20 is allowed! Just a bit odd.)
nb. Don't plan on setting QOS for gaming or VOIP.
Bandwidth Sharing for 'Equal Rights'
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Bandwidth Sharing for 'Equal Rights'
Yes what you propose is what is needed for per user sharing.
Per IP sharing is automatic.
Per IP sharing is automatic.
Linksys WRT1900ACv2
Netgear WNDR3700v2
TP Link 1043ND v3
TP-Link TL-WDR3600 v1
Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH2
WRT54G-TM
Netgear WNDR3700v2
TP Link 1043ND v3
TP-Link TL-WDR3600 v1
Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH2
WRT54G-TM
-
peterpiper
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 7:31 pm
Re: Bandwidth Sharing for 'Equal Rights'
Thanks.
Tried that and it seems to do whats needed.
Have since realised that specifying an ip range here is a bit more difficult.
I'd incorrectly thought that the range 192.168.1.10-192.168.1.20 could be entered as 192.168.1.10/20.
However in the latter, often called the slash notation, the "/20" is a a form of netmask notation - here meaning just use the first 20 bits of 192.168.1.10. Addresses are 32 bits (binary digits), so keeping just the first 20 masks out the last 12 bits. That's a 2^12 address block =4096 addresses.
The slash notation can be used to enter an address range here, but the address block size has to be 2; 4; 6; 8; 16; 32; 64 or 128.
I've chosen to allocate each user a block of 32 addresses, that's 2^5 or 5 bits.So the mask is 27 bits, or "/27" in the slash notation.
Adresses 192.168.1.0 - 192.168.1.31 are left for the router / MODEM / switches etc.
The first user ip range is 192.168.1.32 - 192.168.1.63 so enter 192.168.1.32/27
2nd user addresses ...64-95 enter 192.168.1.64/27
3rd user addresses ...96-127 enter 192.168.1.96/27
4th user addresses ...128-159 enter 192.168.1.128/27
Hope I got that right, battery going - no time to check.
Tried that and it seems to do whats needed.
Have since realised that specifying an ip range here is a bit more difficult.
I'd incorrectly thought that the range 192.168.1.10-192.168.1.20 could be entered as 192.168.1.10/20.
However in the latter, often called the slash notation, the "/20" is a a form of netmask notation - here meaning just use the first 20 bits of 192.168.1.10. Addresses are 32 bits (binary digits), so keeping just the first 20 masks out the last 12 bits. That's a 2^12 address block =4096 addresses.
The slash notation can be used to enter an address range here, but the address block size has to be 2; 4; 6; 8; 16; 32; 64 or 128.
I've chosen to allocate each user a block of 32 addresses, that's 2^5 or 5 bits.So the mask is 27 bits, or "/27" in the slash notation.
Adresses 192.168.1.0 - 192.168.1.31 are left for the router / MODEM / switches etc.
The first user ip range is 192.168.1.32 - 192.168.1.63 so enter 192.168.1.32/27
2nd user addresses ...64-95 enter 192.168.1.64/27
3rd user addresses ...96-127 enter 192.168.1.96/27
4th user addresses ...128-159 enter 192.168.1.128/27
Hope I got that right, battery going - no time to check.