QoS issues for VOIP (are some better than others)

[Twice_Shy]

I currently have a NetGear N600 'wireless dual band router' (although I dont use the wireless because it literally gives me headaches its so powerful) and recently switched to a VOIP phone. Despite turning QoS on I noticed that VOIP completely goes to crap whenever another computer is hammering the ISP link (which is 25mbit down 3meg up) despite to my knowledge turning on the QoS option. I'm not even sure how to test if the QoS is properly working though which mostly seems to claim to filter by type of traffic. (where i'm more interested in filtering by IP either in addition to or instead of - to just plug a hardware VOIP box into a 'priority port')

My question is wondering if there is a significant difference in QoS implementations... whether I should look at things like older Linksys WRT54G's and their ability to be flashed to Tomato/DD-WRT (something I know mostly by name/i've never used them and dont know - I probably have one sitting in an old box somewhere but wont go dig if it's no better than what I have now) or whether newer routers are better performing at this job.

I would like to be able to limit traffic possibly with additional overhead if it's a contributing factor, like a call on LAN port 1 just drops everything else to 80% speed if it has to, or 70% speed. Perhaps I dont need to and that's not the problem though.. Or to also have one 'priority' computer for web browsing which would come 2nd priority, and would slow down whomever is on netflix because if i'm browsing it's for work more important than someone's streaming HD. FWIW I don't need gigabit on the 'top tier' router since the internet link is only 25mbit, it's only between important LAN stations, so 100mbit cheap routers can be recommended that are hackable and testable for a pittance as well. (since I wasn't looking to go spend another $100 on something new anyway)

I guess i'm just curious whats out there and whats worth comparing against. I got VOIP to save money but if I cant netflix, browse, torrent, and be on a call at the same time it defeats the purpose. I just want calls to take 1st and browsing to take 2nd priority above all other traffic.

 

[kvic]

Some router/firmware can handle better QoS than others. Skimming through your prose, I can't help but jump in to suggest Edgerouter X. Smart Queue (qos) in ERX is easy to use. I believe that will solve your VoIP issue. If not, you will need to turn to "basic queues" (next Tab to Smart Queue), here is a bit involved where you need some understanding on creating QoS rules. But for your VoIP usage, plenty of canned solutions available on UBNT forum/KB. At $50 it can't go wrong badly.

Before you decide to buy new gear, Netgear users might be able to help you sorting out QoS on N600. Your usage scenario shouldn't be hard to solve with a few QoS rules.

 

[Twice_Shy]

Lol prose, yeah sorry I get wordy trying to overdescribe things. Usually because I don't know the acronym or term something might have and when I wrote short messages people seem to get confused at what I said more.

Watching this

seems excellent/exactly what I had in mind TY. Just seems prioritizing packets without some overhead and specific port priorities still glitches and I at least know a good option to just buy if I try other cheaper options first and they dont work out. (not that I thought it was too expensive, but if I set a half dozen other friends up with 'my system' I can literally gift them WRT54G's which I see used for $5/peanuts)

Do I need to shop for certain models with more memory (EdgeRouter Lite) or is something like this just as good? https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00YFJT29C/?tag=snbforums-20

Are those abilities sorta unique to this router brand or have they migrated to things like Tomato/DD-WRT/custom firmware options anywhere? When I read around it's suggested (but I can't verify) that this mostly sounds like a gigabit speed version of what those custom firmwares can do... so older things for typically 100meg routers may be good enough at my meagre 25mbit connection speed. (though when I later upgrade to fast-fast it wont be)

 

[DanH]

I'd say an ERL is fine for your connection speed right now, but the ERL tops out at ~60Mbps when hardware acceleration is off (QoS on) so definitely get the ER-X.. The ER-X is faster in that regard, despite being cheaper.

 

[kvic]

Smart Queue is fq_codel + HTB which isn't unique in Edgerouter. It might be available in Tomato. However, combined with a newer 3.x Linux kernel, I think it's unique in Edgerouter. Tomato/DD-WRT are derivatives from WRT as you've used in WRT54G. Personally I'm not fond of them in 2017 and haven't tried any before. But there is a KONG derivative that performs very well under Ars Technica's router rumble test (you might want to read the article). WRT shows its ageeeeee. Its design shall be long abandoned IMHO. The architecture in EdgeOS which runs Edgerouters appears much cleaner and modern.

Indeed as DanH said ERX is a better fit for you as a SOHO user. It is overall a better router than ERL. For such a tiny device in size and resource you want it to simply run as a router. The extra memory provides no additional benefit in SOHO but the faster processor and overall newer architecture in ERX provides higher performance in almost all categories except where you need high throughput among three separate networks which is hardly the case in SOHO environment.

 

[Trip]

For smaller networks, Smart Queue alone should normally take care of most access-level VoIP issues, let alone any other contention/latency-related problems. Classing and prioritization shouldn't really be needed, at least for flat(ish) topologies that are SOHO in scale. Assuming the rest of your network is setup properly and you're using quality gear (switching, patch cords, wireless, etc.) you should be good to go!

 

[Twice_Shy]

Thanks for the great responses people. Was looking for specific info and tests just like that - funny how you can have a gigabit router that bottlenecks at 60meg/sec under a certain mode which again means if I can find the equivalent in an older hacked router I may have the same experience.

Yes right now my ISP needs are a bit limited - something like the cheaper Edgerouter (or even tomato/wrt on the wrt54g if I hack one) put upstream, or some equivalent, should be fine. Need to save the money for my crazy home server and Ultrium tapes for awhile. In the future I hope to upgrade to 200meg down internet which is available in my area (so is full gigabit down, but the upload is no faster so I dont need it) and i'll plan for that later but it's probably two years off before I bother.

My priority right now is VOIP first as that saves on my phone bill so any future upgrades I'd do like under 200meg down broadband would require a router that can keep up QoS even at those rates.

 

[Trip]

If you don't mind having a $50 solution for that you'll probably have to upgrade when you get faster service, the ER-X is a nice option for the time-being. For something more "future-proofed" that could handle QoS at higher speeds, the cheapest option would likely be a spare or eBay x86 box running a Linux firewall featuring fq_codel as a qdisc, such as IPFire for something more basic, or Sophos UTM 9 community version for more UTM features onboard. Just some food for thought.

 

[DanH]

If you don't mind having a $50 solution for that you'll probably have to upgrade when you get faster service, the ER-X is a nice option for the time-being. For something more "future-proofed" that could handle QoS at higher speeds, the cheapest option would likely be a spare or eBay x86 box running a Linux firewall featuring fq_codel as a qdisc, such as IPFire for something more basic, or Sophos UTM 9 community version for more UTM features onboard. Just some food for thought.

Actually it all depends how complex you want to get to fix the issue, and how much throughput you plan on future proofing for. The Mikrotik hEXr3 is doing QoS (11 firewall rules, 2 simple queues) at my home and getting 350Mbs with only 45% CPU usage. It's $49 on balticnetworks. It's not fq_codel, but it fixed my bufferbloat issue, so I am happy. The best I could do with a ERL was ~60Mbs. Not sure what the ER-X does.


No QoS:

QoS :

 

[sfx2000]

I currently have a NetGear N600 'wireless dual band router' (although I dont use the wireless because it literally gives me headaches its so powerful) and recently switched to a VOIP phone. Despite turning QoS on I noticed that VOIP completely goes to crap whenever another computer is hammering the ISP link (which is 25mbit down 3meg up) despite to my knowledge turning on the QoS option. I'm not even sure how to test if the QoS is properly working though which mostly seems to claim to filter by type of traffic. (where i'm more interested in filtering by IP either in addition to or instead of - to just plug a hardware VOIP box into a 'priority port')

Just a curious question - what kind of traffic is "hammering" the connection - and is this WiFi or Wired on that segment..

 

[Trip]

Re- the ER-X, it's 880Mhz-clock MIPS chip (compared to the 500Mhz MIPS in the ERL) should crank out 150 Mb/s or so of Smart Queue, no problem, maybe even a bit more for simpler configs.

 

[kvic]

From my tests, ER-X can max out QoS performance at 541Mbit/s with Smart Queue. It's more than 'anyone' would need at home. I would even deploy for a 500/500 fiber connection with QoS always on. But I think QoS has little place when congestion isn't an issue in fat pipes.

Look at the numbers under "Upload and QoS Performance" in my tests.

I believe hEXr3 can perform the same if not better. fq_codel isn't available in routerOS v6 but will be in v7. System optimization is a strength for Mikrotik team.

 

[Trip]

Not to hijack, but one can't help but wonder when ROS v7 will materialize (if at all....?)... at the rate they're currently moving, I wouldn't be surprised see the first beta not land until 2018, and an upgrade-worthy stable release by late-'18/early-'19... Oh well, hopefully it'll be worth the wait.

 

[kvic]

Not to hijack, but one can't help but wonder when ROS v7 will materialize (if at all....?)... at the rate they're currently moving, I wouldn't be surprised see the first beta not land until 2018, and an upgrade-worthy stable release by late-'18/early-'19... Oh well, hopefully it'll be worth the wait.

lol.

v7 (or next major upgrade) is a matter of time for Mikrotik if they want to survive as a firm. One of the main reasons I bought into EdgeOS because of Ancheng (who left UBNT shortly after I purchased my ERX. Bad timing on my part). Not sure how long it'll take UBNT to show up a strong EdgeOS team (mid of 2017? early 2018? or 2019?). Even when ANcheng was there, system optimization in EdgeOS appeared overall lag behind routerOS. The new prominent hire (i.e. the pfsense guy) 'appears doing nothing' to me. UBNT also hasn't responded publicly to the poor performance as demonstrated in Ars technica test on USG.

 

[Trip]

Yeah, I really would love both companies to also add higher levels of direct support as well, via subscription if necessary. Probably a pipe-dream with Mikrotik, but perhaps doable at Ubiquiti. A "TAC" ala Cisco/Juniper, NBD replacement ala HP, etc. , would a very welcomed option and I think they could do it properly with the right planning.

 

[kvic]

@Trip yourself can provide this level of support to clients. Very nice VAS

 

[Trip]

Haha, well the VARs out there are already doing this for sure, myself included. It's just nice to have the "mothership" to fall back on if/when you're indisposed to provide support yourself, and/or out of stock or reach of replacement hardware, or the use-case just calls for direct coverage from the get-go. I've had a few instances already where I've had to swap some gear (had a failed ER-X recently), and fortunately had enough spare stock to cover the need, but the point remains it would be nice if true levels of enterprise servicing could be extended all the way back to the supply source itself. Of course, this would probably just net out in the form of drastically increased MSRPs and a model that's closer to what already exists in the enterprise space, so I digress.