kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to snowpro2000
Re: Mikrotik queues accurate?
One thing to also consider, when using queues, use it to shape traffic. Not to throttle clients.
While it IS possible to use to throttle clients (To give them different service levels, etc) it's not the best way because the load/job of doing the traffic throttling is now placed on your MT, as well as the traffic still passes over your AP and Backbone, only to be rejected at the MT.
The NS units have their own QoS settings for doing exactly that, and they work very very well. Using those settings takes all that traffic off your network and the load off the MT. Technically it's not the MT's job to be doing that, it should be used only for routing and doing QoS on the general traffic flow, not individual client traffic flows.
On the last 2.x version the queues should be working fine. I think the problems only came in on version 3.x.
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
TSI Fanboy - "Dontchya wish your 'net was hot like mine! Ohhh Dontchya!"
Have a nice day! |
|
jlester
join:2005-02-07
N. Calif.
| I have a few NS2s and plans to install a few more, so far so good. The Qs seem quite accurate on my system.
One thing to also consider, when using queues, use it to shape traffic. Not to throttle clients.
I have a Mikrotik PR732 as my core router. It does all of the throttling with simple Qs. I have no throttling in the RB600 at the main tower, Motorola APs, Motorola SMs, PS2s, NS2s or CPEs
Would you use the RB600, Motorola SMs and or NS2s for throttling instead of my PR732?
PR732----Moto BH20BHM-->>>BH20BHS----RB600----Moto APs-->>Moto SMs----PS2-->>>NS2s
--
Motorola Canopy Wireless Broadband System
"Broadband For The Boonies"
Link Globally, Buy Locally. It Matters.
|
|
trc120
join:2006-02-01
Mosier, OR
| reply to kewlkeed
kewlkeed,
Are you saying to limit the download at the cpe? This would go against hitting the backhaul.
I have queues on 3.10(hotspot) and 3.17(pppoe) issued by radius using WISPR and MT rate limits that seem to work. However my heaviest ap only has 15 registrations and they are light users, so the RB433 is not stressed much.
I agree that download should be controlled as early as possible but I do not know of such an easy way to do this at the head end. As stated, the CPE is easy for the upload.
Any suggestions?
--
www.MoWiNet.com - Maximizing the Distance |
|
viperm
Carpe Diem
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Winchester, CA
1 edit | reply to kewlkeed
While this is a great idea to throttle at the client, it is not always possible. We throttle all our clients at the ap due to the fact the Tranzeo CPE radios we use do not allow this luxury. We are using the RB 433AH units and we very rarly hit 10-15% CPU utilization on the heavesy AP with 1 sr2 and about 60 clients all throttled..
Now we are looking at using the NS2 units and have field tested 2 of them with good results. The only problem I see is the wide beam of the antenna on these things and when you throw up a bunch of them you may run into issues. (not that we have any now with the tranzeos)
Just an FYI.. |
|
Inssomniak
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Cayuga, ON
| Ive always throttled at the core router(ROS), all PPPoE terminated via IP tunnels from other APs (also mikrotik ROS). I (will) have another router that handles the wan pipe and overall QoS. my core router is a p4 1.6, 200 users with 35% CPU at peak time.
I try to keep all unnecessary traffic off the backhauls! |
|
