CakeQOS CakeQOS-Merlin

[Wade Coxon]

I try loading the menu by inputting CakeQoS.

The command is "cake-qos" (no capitals and with a dash).

 

[lilstone87]

The command is "cake-qos" (no capitals and with a dash).

LOL.. my bad, and thank you. It's a bit early this morning. I guess i need to wake up more, before trying to mess with stuff.

 

[TechTinkerer]

There is a new update to the script which allows a bandwidth value of 0 (unlimited) to be entered - this allows unlimited to be set in either or both directions. It would be interesting to hear how people find it works set to unlimited just on download where they have asymmetric connections and the download is being limited by cake performance but they need shaping on the upload.

For other options I've been editing the cake-qos script on my own router - do this at your own risk - although you can always reinstall

There is an issue open on GitHub regarding the ability of setting options for upload and download separately. If you want to add your own use cases there is more chance of the functionality being added as currently I've struggled to make a case which is convincing the development team.

would you mind sharing what changes you made? Thanks Brum

 

[ugandy]

@rgnldo

i'm using the 'unlimited' keywork on "Extra Options"

cake-qos status shows:

CakeQOS-Merlin: > Download Status:
qdisc cake 800c: dev ifb9eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth unlimited diffserv4 dual-srchost nat wash ingress ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce
CakeQOS-Merlin: > Upload Status:
qdisc cake 800b: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth unlimited diffserv4 dual-srchost nat nowash ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce

shouldn't it be instead:

CakeQOS-Merlin: > Download Status:
qdisc cake 800c: dev ifb9eth0 root refcnt 2 unlimited diffserv4 dual-srchost nat wash ingress ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce
CakeQOS-Merlin: > Upload Status:
qdisc cake 800b: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 unlimited diffserv4 dual-srchost nat nowash ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce

that is, the "bandwidth' keyword is used to specify speeds, and it takes a numeric parameter. If you already have "unlimited" the 'bandwidth' keyword should be removed. or did I misread the man page?

 

[ugandy]

@Adamm
@maghuro
@ttgapers

can I make a request for cake-qos menu, to allow control of which directions to enable cake? up, down, or both?

maybe only apply cake if the specified bandwidth is non-negative?
that way, specifying "-1" would prevent applying cake in that direction.
(assuming that it is ok to have cake in only one direction)

not sure this is the best implementation, but it is a suggestion.

it's also possible, that we'd want to apply something like "autorate-ingress' to the UL only.

thanks

 

[lilstone87]

Well recently in this thread, I have seen people mention using the "unlimited" option. Well I just tried it a few minutes ago, and it did exactly what I thought it would do. Which is bypass the down, and up limits I have set. So overall it allows the connection to be maxed out. Which I did two tests, with, and without it. With it, it caused BB to be higher, and jump around. Without it, BB was very steady, and low. I got A+'s across the board without it.

So just my opinion.. on my docsis connection, I don't recommend using the "unlimited" option as an extra option.

 

[ugandy]

Well recently in this thread, I have seen people mention using the "unlimited" option. Well I just tried it a few minutes ago, and it did exactly what I thought it would do. Which is bypass the down, and up limits I have set. So overall it allows the connection to be maxed out. Which I did two tests, with, and without it. With it, it caused BB to higher, and jump around. Without it, BB was very steady, and low. I got A+'s across the board without it.

So just my opinion.. on my docsis connection, I don't recommend using the "unlimited" option as an extra option.

i also think that fixed limits give better results, but only if your ISP gives you consistent bandwidths/speed. my UL varies from 2 to 20Mbps :-(

due to my docsis UL characteristics, i've settled on this, for now:

CakeQOS-Merlin: Running...
CakeQOS-Merlin: > Download Status:
qdisc cake 8010: dev ifb9eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth 350Mbit diffserv4 dual-srchost nat wash ingress ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce
CakeQOS-Merlin: > Upload Status:
qdisc cake 800f: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth unlimited diffserv4 dual-srchost nat nowash ack-filter split-gso rtt 100.0ms noatm overhead 18 mpu 64 no-sce

 

[lilstone87]

@ugandy

Well I am using "ack-filter docsis dual-srchost" with my limits set currently to 300mbps down, and 24mbps. I get 930-940 down, and 35 up. Obviously we know i'm not getting no where near 900+ down. So I settled for 300 for now. Also went a bit lower with my up at 24. However I will play around with my upload limit.

Still with the currently options I listed above, and using 300/24 limits. I hit A+'s across the board. Which I am happy with. As for my speed's from my provider, they're pretty steady to be honest. So using unlimited, especially on my upload side, caused a lot of BB when I ran a test.

 

[ugandy]

@ugandy

Well I am using "ack-filter docsis dual-srchost" with my limits set currently to 300mbps down, and 24mbps. I get 930-940 down, and 35 up. Obviously we know i'm not getting no where near 900+ down. So I settled for 300 for now. Also went a bit lower with my up at 24. However I will play around with my upload limit.

Still with the currently options I listed above, and using 300/24 limits. I hit A+'s across the board. Which I am happy with. As for my speed's from my provider, they're pretty steady to be honest. So using unlimited, especially on my upload side, caused a lot of BB when I ran a test.

cool! who's your cable provider?

 

[lilstone87]

cool! who's your cable provider?

Cox. I have had my share of issues with them, due to noise. Which is a well known issue for HFC networks. At my current place, bandwidth is pretty steady, only gets funky when noise affects my node.

 

[ugandy]

Cox. I have had my share of issues with them, due to noise. Which is a well known issue for HFC networks. At my current place, bandwidth is pretty steady, only gets funky when noise affects my node.

cox! heard some stories
here, comcast in california started offering gigabit recently, but their UL is horrible unless all the neighbors are sleeping
i hear that it will get better with docsis 4.0 (better symmetric connections) in 2022 :-/
i'm waiting to see which will come first, docsis 4.0, or the zombie apocalypse

 

[lilstone87]

@ugandy

I might bump my down up to about 370-380. As I ran a couple tests with unlimited on. When I first installed I was hitting between 440-450 down. However I did enable a feature, or two, after I reinstalled Cake. So now I am hitting around 400-410 max. Which is more than okay with me honestly.

 

[ttgapers]

So just my opinion.. on my docsis connection, I don't recommend using the "unlimited" option as an extra option.

I agree

 

[ttgapers]

Someone noted KISS in this thread for a reason. There are niche use cases where some users require more control/tweaking, but for most first time users start with "besteffort" then perhaps move to "diffserv4" depending on usage patterns.

Other base parameters would be based on connection type, which triggers docsis for cable modems etc. Use ack-filter for docsis/cable modem connections.

 

[ttgapers]

I am curious about diffserv4. As I remember reading a couple days back, a person, or two, seemed to comment as if traffic was mostly being put in best effort. As if traffic really wasn't be tagged much. Has anything changed in that regard? Just has me wondering why you're using it currently.

Based on your total up/down, have a look at how diffserv4 splits the "tins", and you may notice most dedicated to the "besteffort" tin, which is what I noticed. Most of my traffic stuck into besteffort and personally haven't had a need for the Video or Voice "tins" based on my household usage.

I run this at another "busier" mixed use location, and users haven't complained about besteffort at all....thus besteffort it is for me.

 

[no_name]

KISS works great for my needs [emoji4]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Wade Coxon]

KISS works great for my needs [emoji4]

Your results are overshooting your bandwidth settings by quite a lot.
Not sure how other high bandwidth users find theirs, but on my slow VDSL connection, the bandwidth is always clamped very hard to my settings.

 

[no_name]

Your results are overshooting your bandwidth settings by quite a lot.
Not sure how other high bandwidth users find theirs, but on my slow VDSL connection, the bandwidth is always clamped very hard to my settings.

I did wonder about that myself, it may change when people are home this evening putting more load on the network


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ugandy]

Your results are overshooting your bandwidth settings by quite a lot.
Not sure how other high bandwidth users find theirs, but on my slow VDSL connection, the bandwidth is always clamped very hard to my settings.

it is rather strange. in my case, when i used hard limits, they behaved like hard limits.
on the other hand sometimes i get strange dslreport results, that contradict spdmerlin/pingplotter

 

[no_name]

I was curious so I increased my UL to 195 and DL to 18 and rebooted the router a 2nd time. I believe these results are more accurate and similar to other users. KISS is still working well for me so I shall stop tinkering [emoji4]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk