kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
3 edits | More MLPPP goodness
Brought up yet another link in the stack 
(Note, this is classic DSL, no ADSL2+)
 R0CKY can I get another *EDIT*T-shiRt LMAO
(Lordy just caught that spelling error now)
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
HiVolt
30
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
clubs: | Bastard, that's sick!!! |
|
Angelo_
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18 | lol this made me think of a protentional issue thx to bell... |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to kewlkeed
The speeds aren't their full potential either as that was
1) Under load
2) Mikrotik (the router I'm using) does not handle MLPPP optimally due to a Kernel issue. If it was fixed or if I was using something like zeroshell this link would fly.
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
| reply to kewlkeed
I think that 8 is the max supported. Under our Tomato/ZeroShell/Linux MLPPP projects, one non-active link is used to maintain the bundle (otherwise your whole connection would die any time the "master" link went down), so 7 lines is the max that will work.
Microtik, if they take the same approach (and they'd have to unless they want to suffer from the problem I mentioned above) will top out at 7 (what you have). If they don't take that approach, they'll top out at 8. |
|
Jack17
join:2008-08-25
Sherbrooke, QC | reply to kewlkeed
So you have 7 line for that speed.....
7 X 29.95 = 209.65 that's a lot of moola..... |
|
Angelo_
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18
3 edits | under load on both ends
 |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| reply to Jack17
said by Jack17  :So you have 7 line for that speed..... 7 X 29.95 = 209.65 that's a lot of moola..... They'd be business lines. |
|
milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H2Z | Guspaz, it doesn't matter how high you make the limit. Someone out there will try to reach it "because it's there." |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to kewlkeed
The above test was run with 6 links on business speed.
I sadly don't have an extra port for 7 links otherwise I would have tried it hehehe!
I really wish I could see this on a non-Mikrotik base, or at least have MT fix their shit so it would work properly.
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
deaddawg
join:2006-01-16
Ottawa, ON
1 edit | reply to kewlkeed
Here is four residential lines at my house.
Using a Cisco 2821 router with two HWIC-1ADSL and two WIC-1ADSL.
Sync is 5056 / 736 on each line (stupid INKS remote)
Your upload seems very slow for 6 lines. Perhaps it was from the usage on the lines. |
|
mike12806
Premium
join:2007-08-28
Milton, MA | reply to kewlkeed
So that means you have six copper pairs (at least) running to your house? |
|
freejazz_RdJ
join:2009-03-10
| reply to kewlkeed
I still think it's amazing how this whole MLPPP ecosystem has evolved. From what I believe was an accidental discovery to a 30Mbps pipe and several platforms (Tomato, Zeroshell plus commercial IOS or Mikrotik), this has come a long way. Have you applied for an R&D tax credit?
Guspaz, are the current implementation CPU bound or is there some software issue that limits scalability? If it is CPU-bound, is it because of something resembling segmentation and reassembly, which I've seen kill performance in AAL5 ATM to ethernet scenarios? |
|
Inssomniak
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Cayuga, ON
| reply to kewlkeed
Im adding a 6th to my stack early next year. I think its as far as I will go. (this is on the Zeroshell project). Ill move to fiber I think after that in the fall.
5 6mb lines does a speed test of about 24mb per sec down, and 2900k up, the Mikrotik platform is not efficient as kewlkeed mentioned. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
1 edit | reply to freejazz_RdJ
said by freejazz_RdJ :I still think it's amazing how this whole MLPPP ecosystem has evolved. From what I believe was an accidental discovery to a 30Mbps pipe and several platforms (Tomato, Zeroshell plus commercial IOS or Mikrotik), this has come a long way. Have you applied for an R&D tax credit? The initial MLPPP results weren't 30mbit, they were from a while back with a few brave souls who messed around with it on Linux boxes with regular 5mbit links. Tomato came about to circumvent throttling, but that became a secondary concern early on; once it was done, there was nothing left to do for single-link. All the development since has obviously focused on multiple links.
ZeroShell came about when Candlelight contracted us to do that port, but it seems like they're moving in other directions, which is why we've more or less dropped development of it (unless they want us to start up again).
As for an R&D credit, Well, it's not a business... We (idly) thought about trying to turn it into one, but I don't think we're convinced that there's enough demand for MLPPP from ISPs to support DSL_Ricer working on it full time. I'm not even sure what the business model would be. Support contracts to various MLPPP-using ISPs? Probably not enough interest from them.
MLPPP was primarily intended for dial-up connections. The fact that Juniper told TekSavvy that they were probably the single largest MLPPP user in the entire world should give you an idea about how "new" this is to broadband.
Guspaz, are the current implementation CPU bound or is there some software issue that limits scalability? If it is CPU-bound, is it because of something resembling segmentation and reassembly, which I've seen kill performance in AAL5 ATM to ethernet scenarios? Well, we're CPU bound on the WRT54GL, but that's just because you've got a 200MHz MIPS processor with barely any cache. Although, I'm not actually sure if we're CPU bound or memory bandwidth bound or what have you; it's hard to tell. Newer routers would probably not be CPU bound as they have much more modern CPUs and much faster RAM. Unfortunately, Tomato doesn't support many platforms.
The 8-line limitation that I mentioned isn't on our end, it's the maximum number of lines supported by the Juniper hardware that TekSavvy uses. Other implementations (software-based, or Cisco's) probably don't have such limitations; they'd likely scale up to just about as many lines as you could throw at them. With Linux/MLPPP, you can bind as many connections as you'd like; we haven't set any limit.
We don't really have any data on scalability for large numbers of lines, though. I've only got two lines to my house, and it's unlikely TekSavvy cares enough about 3+ lines to start shoving more wires into my apartment. Justin and his 6 lines have shown that it does scale quite well up that high, at least with downstream. Unfortunately, Microtik's poor MLPPP performance (and horrible upstream scaling) is well known and unique to them.
Inssomniak is using ZeroShell/MLPPP, which is more or less the same code as Linux/MLPPP. If we account for DSL overhead at 15%, he's seeing 94% scaling on downstream and 85% scaling on upstream. That's not half bad, if you ask me. Because it's an untested scenario on our end, we could probably get upstream scaling closer to downstream, or at least investigate enough to explain why it isn't scaling as high.
I'll note that downstream and upstream use different techniques; upstream splits packets, while downstream uses round-robin. It's been a long time since I last discussed this with DSL_Ricer, but if memory serves, packet splitting decreases latency and allows you to send "oversized" packets (as in, you can send a full 1500 byte packet since it's going to get split), but increases PPP and ATM overhead. To get any more technical, DSL_Ricer would have to get involved.
It's possible that an optimal approach for large numbers of lines might be to use round-robin on the upstream for larger numbers of lines, but as said, we have no way to test that, and little incentive to put much effort into more than 2 lines. Getting UI support for 3 lines is about as far as we're willing to go.
When we started out on 2-line support, we had to do all our debugging remotely on JayMan's equipment (in another province, to boot) since we couldn't replicate a 2-line setup locally. Thankfully, TekSavvy eventually helped us out with that!
Wow, that *really* turned into one heck of a long rambling post... |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to kewlkeed
I hope in the next day or so if I get a midnight window I'll try and run some speed tests bare on the connection. I am sure it'll break the 30meg mark.
It's like the sound barrier of the MLPPP world
"I kewlkeed, vow to be the first soul to break the MLPPP 30meg barrier! God willing, and the internets at my fingertips, Mikrotik and TSI as my guide, I will do it! Bell and CRTC be dammed!"
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | Pfft, you'll have a much better chance of breaking barriers with a proper MLPPP implementation. |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to kewlkeed
Yeah I know I'm working on a bit of a crutch.
But sadly I don't have a machine I can dedicate to pushing the limits with another OS asides from MT.
(If anyone feels like sending me something to do it with, feel free)
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
sparkerson
join:2009-10-29
Seattle, WA
| reply to kewlkeed
nice...can you help me get that?
i'm in seattle...so no teksavvy for me...but just got two 7Mb lines from qwest and their tier 3 support says i should be able to do mlppp.
here is what i don't understand - i have separate credentials for each modem and tomato only has one place for me to enter the login and password....so how does that work?
also the mlppp video on youtube doesn't say to do this...but qwest tech support thought i should have the modems in transparent bridge mode.
thoughts? |
|
gord27
join:2005-05-01
Mississauga, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to kewlkeed
3x6meg lines. same old. i've had this setup for over 6 months now and prior to that was on 2x6meg for a year. debating dropping back down to two lines to save money but losing that upload speed would hurt. |
|
