 Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | reply to WebFooL
Re: Why use Untangle anyway? The QoS on my DD-WRT works with any problems for torrents and browsing.
Why would I "pay" for something when I can get it for free from other companies??? |
|
| You can use the free QoS for torrent traffic.
But then you need to bypass the UVM.
But in most cases where i use my Untangle i wan't to control the bittorrent usage and with my DD-WRT i had huge problems of blocking all of it.
But if you just are after QoS you have more than 100 opensource projects that you can use.
What i am saying is that Untangle have a good mix of all you need sure some moduls that you wan't might cost but then they have put allot of time to develop there product so i understand that they can't just give it away for free.
//WebFooL Untangle Evangelist |
|
Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | All I am saying is it is not worth the cost.
I dont see one application where someone needs this enough to justify the costs.
I hope someone is not dupped into purchasing this thinking it is so great because of the DSLr advertisement article. |
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:2
 ·Bright House
| reply to Oh_No
said by Oh_No:The QoS on my DD-WRT works with any problems for torrents and browsing. You've had a different experience than I had with it. Keep in mind that my last attempt was 3 years ago.
I originally jumped to DD-WRT (prob around v16) because I was frustrated with Sveasoft (and HyperWRT seemed to have gone adrift).
Between then and 2009 I had prob tried a doz ver.s on a doz routers.
I followed every post there was on QoS, trying to get DD-WRT to maintain VoIP while heavily bittorrenting.
I was never able to get it to work. From what I read in the threads, I'm not sure anyone else did either.
Obviously there's been a lot of development over there. I could believe they finally fixed it.
Even with it's QoS issues, DD-WRT was the best platform going. I still deploy it for bridges and APs.
Tomato is also excellent, but DD-WRT has been a better fit for me.
--
The Dark Tower's Skynet evolves from 4chan. |
|
|
|
Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | QoS worked without problems on my BEFSR41 from like 2001 to WRT54g from 2004 (still in use) and a E3000 from 2011.
I had sveasoft, then tomato, then DDWRT for most of the years. DDWRT works great.
I have always had QoS set to Max speed - calculated overhead and it has not locked up. |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Bright House
| said by Oh_No:QoS worked without problems on my BEFSR41 from like 2001 I don't know QoS under stock firmware. I'm just referring to DD-WRT's QoS.
I know a BEFSR41 couldn't have been running DD-WRT.
said by Oh_No:WRT54g from 2004 (still in use) and a E3000 from 2011.
I had sveasoft, then tomato, then DDWRT for most of the years. DDWRT works great. I never tried QoS Sveasoft. I know Tomato's QoS works.
I just went back through DD-WRT forum postings - pre '09, keywording for QoS and Torrent.
In the threads there'd be a number of people who tried every setting there is without success. Then there'd be one or two posts by a guy for whom it worked all along.
I didn't actually spot anyone who went from non-working QoS to working.
There were references to an inability to manage UDP or maybe encrypted UDP.
That said, there was one guy who ran a IPTables script from jffs, but he had to use a micro-build to get it to fit in the 4MB flash.
--
The Dark Tower's Skynet evolves from 4chan. |
|
