how-to block ads
reply to DaDawgs
Re: MT queue vs hardware limit
said by DaDawgs:In this specific instance, I am the customer. I have a router in my upstream provider's datacenter, and I set the queue for the speed I am purchasing from them. I know they check my graph from time to time to make sure I'm not using more than I'm paying for, but it's never been an issue since I use the queue to limit myself to what I'm supposed to be using.
If you expect the customer to shape his own traffic then that setup is going to be more efficient than traffic shaping.
So far, the queue has worked quite well. As I approach or reach my limit, the queue kicks in and ping times start creeping up, but traffic still flows quite nice. If I were to set a hard limit, I'm assuming it would be less CPU intensive, but would I also see every packet over the limit be dropped, rather than queued? It seems that a slight increase in ping times is better than just getting packet loss, right?
said by jcremin:Ah! In this case you should be running shapers to maximize your network performance and customer experience.
In this specific instance, I am the customer.
»Mikrotik Script to manage PPPoE Queues
Something like that works very well. You can also categorize traffic and change priorities. This is a good thing to do because it optimizes network performance for each traffic type.
Good thread => »Traffic shaping
Feel free to PM me if you want more information about priority queues on MT.
Once we IPv6 enable every device on the Internet we will have toasters, baby monitors, and security cameras joining the bot nets which today are populated only by idiots that can not refrain from clicking, "Yes I would like to see those titties..."