dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
34
share rss forum feed

Cloneman

join:2002-08-29
Montreal
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Fibe

1 edit
reply to Cloneman

Re: Tomato QoS major bug (resolved - normal behavior)

Just had a small epiphany -

The reason I was able to get moderate QoS success on the downstream is because I was reserving bandwidth to a point where my low classes added up to less than 100%.

I guess I "projected" the same logic on the upstream (even though it's unnecessary).

Would be interesting to have downstream and upstream classes which are independent of each other, since clearly their needs and implementations are different.

Ideally (and I'd have to do more testing to confirm this) I'd want many classes on my upstream (QoS works) and only 2 high/low classes on my downstream (where QoS is more difficult to successfully achieve).

EDIT: Further testing seems to indicate that shibby (and most likely vanilla tomato) does not have a "global inbound" limit, which is why inbound QoS sucks. However, recent Toastman builds appear to have this properly implemented (and to no surprise, given how extensive that guide is)



silvercat

join:2007-11-07

I have excellent success with downstream QOS using one of Toastman's latest firmwares (modification of TomatoUSB). No problems what so ever.


Cloneman

join:2002-08-29
Montreal
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Fibe

said by silvercat:

I have excellent success with downstream QOS using one of Toastman's latest firmwares (modification of TomatoUSB). No problems what so ever.

This is what I'm seeing as well (so far). Toastman's downstream QoS has a proper global limit, whereas other implementations aren't as clever.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

2 edits
reply to Cloneman

said by Cloneman:

....Further testing seems to indicate that shibby (and most likely vanilla tomato) does not have a "global inbound" limit, which is why inbound QoS sucks.

However, recent Toastman builds appear to have this properly implemented (and to no surprise, given how extensive that guide is).

 
I currently have a Shibby build in my WRT54GL, and in the credits, I believe he says that his build includes Toastman's QoS mods.

So is Toastman's version better, and is there any particular build number to choose ?

After trying Shibby with QoS enabled for a while last year, my QoS is currently disengaged, for other unrelated reasons, and I have (both during and since) been doing what I always did in the past - setting bandwidth limits for both up and downstream within p2p apps - and the results have been satisfactory as a rule.

Interesting thread regardless.


silvercat

join:2007-11-07
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

said by Davesnothere:

I currently have a Shibby build in my WRT54GL, and in the credits, I believe he says that his build includes Toastman's QoS mods.

So is Toastman's version better, and is there any particular build number to choose ?

Since January 9th, 2012, Toastman has included an IMQ based QOS ingress system (coded by "Tiomo") -- so basically, Incoming QOS. I am not sure if this is included in the Shibby builds. It seems that the Shibby builds have always included Toastman's "outgoing" QOS mods.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

Click for full size
said by silvercat:

Since January 9th, 2012, Toastman has included an IMQ based QOS ingress system (coded by "Tiomo") -- so basically, Incoming QOS. I am not sure if this is included in the Shibby builds. It seems that the Shibby builds have always included Toastman's "outgoing" QOS mods.

 
Here is a screenshot of my version's 'About' page.

It looks like it is from before the date you mentioned, based on the Toastman credit.

jibby

join:2008-03-31

my router on toastman lists this:

"Tiomo" Features:
- IMQ based QOS Ingress
- Incoming Class Bandwidth pie chart
Copyright (C) 2012 Tiomo

don't see that on your shibby list so maybe it's not in there?



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by jibby:

my router on toastman lists this....

 
Thanks.

Looks like I should try Toastman's build, if I want to play with QoS again.

Yours & Cloneman's last post are compelling.

Which version of Toastman are each of you using, and will it work on Cisco/Linksys WRT54GL router ?

jibby

join:2008-03-31
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

mine probably wouldn't apply 'cause its on an RT-N16 but i think the QoS stuff is the same in all versions

(but if you're curious im running v1.28.7496 MIPSR2-Toastman-VLAN-RT K26 USB VPN-NOCAT)

i gotta get around to getting my 54GL jtag'd back to life



silvercat

join:2007-11-07
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to Davesnothere

said by Davesnothere:

Which version of Toastman are each of you using, and will it work on Cisco/Linksys WRT54GL router ?

I'm using version 1.28.0500.5 (from the RT-N branch) on an Asus RT-N66U. But there is a newer version that just got released: 1.28.0501

I use the NVRAM64K version, for the N66U.

To enable Incoming QOS, i do nothing special. I'm on the 30/2 package with Start. So i set the upload limit to 1700 KB/sec (maximum - 15%), and the download limit to 30000 (since on a speed test we get around 31000 for the download). It works for me. You could even set the download limit a little less if you wish.

Of course you can get the newest version of Toastman's firmware from here:
»www.4shared.com/dir/v1BuINP3/Toa···79224764


silvercat

join:2007-11-07
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to Davesnothere

said by Davesnothere:

Which version of Toastman are each of you using, and will it work on Cisco/Linksys WRT54GL router ?

Also it looks like the best firmware (and most updated one) for your WRT54GL router would be from the ND branch (2.4 kernel):
tomato-WRT54G_WRT54GLUSB-1.28.7633.3-Toastman-IPT-ND-VPN

Seems like it has Incoming QOS from "Tiomo", according to the changelog, but i'm not sure the ND branch is being actively developed anymore.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

4 edits

said by silvercat:

said by Davesnothere:

Which version of Toastman are each of you using, and will it work on Cisco/Linksys WRT54GL router ?

....it looks like the best firmware (and most updated one) for your WRT54GL router would be from the ND branch (2.4 kernel):
tomato-WRT54G_WRT54GLUSB-1.28.7633.3-Toastman-IPT-ND-VPN....

 
Thanks, folks.

Just over 24 hours ago, I had looked around and reached the same conclusion - tomato-WRT54G_WRT54GLUSB-1.28.7633.3-Toastman-IPT-ND-xxx series (BTW, there seem to be 6 flavours even of THAT one), though had not yet read the specific notes on it.

My current Shibby 1.28 series build is based on the 2.4 kernel too.

The 4shared site wanted me to register to get anything, so I tried the MediaFire site »www.mediafire.com/?88t1vzzcgrphx (both sites were suggested by the author »www.linksysinfo.org/index.php?th···s.36106/ ), and it showed me all of the .BINs, including that series, (not sure that 4shared did that) and it needed no login.

BACK STORY :

My original reason for researching Tomato was that I was considering MLPPP with my (then) 5M/800K DSL, so I went out and bought the WRT54GL.

Never got around to that, but I put the router into service anyway, and when I later got more serious about VoIP (which was one of several contributing factors in my switching to Cogeco cable just over a year ago, and later to START's 20/1.5/300 plan last April), the QoS issue raised its ugly head.

Apparently, DD-WRT and Open-WRT also have some sort of QoS too, but I only installed DD-WRT Mini briefly as a way to get Tomato installed, as the factory firmware has its own limit to the .BIN size.

BTW, I was worried that the WRT54GL itself would bottleneck my (then) 30/2 Cogeco feed, but was pleasantly surprised that it did not, EVEN with latest factory firmware at the time, and I tried Tomato anyway sometime afterwards.

I have not needed to buy a newer router so far, and the Shibby build seems 'not too shabby', other than what we just covered here regarding QoS.

--

We have only 2 things about which to worry :
(1) That things may never get back to normal
(2) That they already HAVE !
-
START Forum »Start Communications
Or you can still use Canadian Broadband.