speed bumps - new modem

[sfx2000]

New modem and a carrier profile update...

 

[sfx2000]

another perspective - need to look into the retransmits

morpheus:~ $ iperf3 -c iperf.he.net -i1
Connecting to host iperf.he.net, port 5201
[ 6] local 192.168.1.100 port 52342 connected to 216.218.227.10 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 6] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.01 MBytes 8.46 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.34 MBytes 11.2 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.35 MBytes 11.3 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.27 MBytes 10.6 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.29 MBytes 10.8 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.34 MBytes 11.3 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.24 MBytes 10.4 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.34 MBytes 11.3 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.34 MBytes 11.2 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.36 MBytes 11.4 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 6] 0.00-10.00 sec 12.9 MBytes 10.8 Mbits/sec sender
[ 6] 0.00-10.00 sec 12.8 MBytes 10.7 Mbits/sec receiver

iperf Done.

morpheus:~ $ iperf3 -c iperf.he.net -i1 -R
Connecting to host iperf.he.net, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host iperf.he.net is sending
[ 6] local 192.168.1.100 port 52352 connected to 216.218.227.10 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 6] 0.00-1.00 sec 14.3 MBytes 120 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 1.00-2.00 sec 19.0 MBytes 160 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 2.00-3.00 sec 17.0 MBytes 143 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 3.00-4.00 sec 18.0 MBytes 151 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 4.00-5.00 sec 19.0 MBytes 160 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 5.00-6.00 sec 19.4 MBytes 163 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 6.00-7.00 sec 20.0 MBytes 168 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 7.00-8.00 sec 13.6 MBytes 114 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 8.00-9.00 sec 11.1 MBytes 93.0 Mbits/sec
[ 6] 9.00-10.00 sec 12.4 MBytes 104 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 6] 0.00-10.00 sec 168 MBytes 141 Mbits/sec 67 sender
[ 6] 0.00-10.00 sec 164 MBytes 138 Mbits/sec receiver

iperf Done.

 

[L&LD]

sfx2000, nice upgrade to your ISP speeds! Is this Fibre?

 

[sfx2000]

sfx2000, nice upgrade to your ISP speeds! Is this Fibre?

DOCSIS 3.0 Cable - SB6183...

 

[sfx2000]

sfx2000, nice upgrade to your ISP speeds! Is this Fibre?

Oddly enough, doesn't really feel any faster than my finely tuned 50/5 connection previously...

Nice to have some extra capacity/bandwidth however - and it was a pretty cheap upgrade with offers from the operator - princely sum to many outside of the US - this is a $75/month connection here, with a 1TB monthly cap...

 

[L&LD]

Oddly enough, doesn't really feel any faster than my finely tuned 50/5 connection previously...

Nice to have some extra capacity/bandwidth however - and it was a pretty cheap upgrade with offers from the operator - princely sum to many outside of the US - this is a $75/month connection here, with a 1TB monthly cap...

Is this running on your little 'home brew' router?

That is a great price compared to what some of my customers pay (about a third less for 4 times the speed). That 1TB monthly cap is impressive too.

 

[sfx2000]

Is this running on your little 'home brew' router?

That is a great price compared to what some of my customers pay (about a third less for 4 times the speed). That 1TB monthly cap is impressive too.

yep

 

[sfx2000]

What drove the update for me was more the uplink speed - 10Mb/Sec is more important for me as I need to VPN into the office for work, and going from 50/5 to 150/10 was a very nice step forward...

 

[L&LD]

What drove the update for me was more the uplink speed - 10Mb/Sec is more important for me as I need to VPN into the office for work, and going from 50/5 to 150/10 was a very nice step forward...

Yes. With an asymmetrical connection, the uplink speed is usually the one that suffers (they can't market it as easy as 'look, higher download speeds').

In using different ISP's at various customer locations, the higher the upload speed, the faster the 'internet' seems and in some cases, the faster the particular computer seems too.

I can't wait for the next step up in ISP's where symmetrical up/down speeds are offered as a standard. And yes, I would accept a 50/50 plan over my current one (105/23) too.

 

[sfx2000]

FYI - spent an hour with Customer Care last night trying to figure out why the increase wasn't taking - checked provisioning on the carrier side, bunch of testing/reboot, unplug, reprovision, etc...

Then it dawned on me that I had a traffic shaper in place, and had not reset/updated it for the new link speeds - doh!

Happens even to folks like me, lol... we see this on some of the other forums where folks complain about routers being slow - and I'm willing to bet it's a similar situation - old settings

 

[somms]

I can't wait for the next step up in ISP's where symmetrical up/down speeds are offered as a standard. And yes, I would accept a 50/50 plan over my current one (105/23) too.

http://www.utopianet.org/pricelist/

FWIW: ISPs that currently offer service over the Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA) fiber to the home network are ALL symmetrical (up/down) standard speeds. Google Fiber with their closed single-provider network doesn't compare to the price/competition when multiple ISPs are able to operate successfully over a true Open-access network!

 

[L&LD]

http://www.utopianet.org/pricelist/

FWIW: ISPs that currently offer service over the Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA) fiber to the home network are ALL symmetrical (up/down) standard speeds. Google Fiber with their closed single-provider network doesn't compare to the price/competition when multiple ISPs are able to operate successfully over a true Open-access network!

Those prices look too good to believe. Too bad USA only.

 

[sfx2000]

Those prices look too good to believe. Too bad USA only.

Keeping in mind that the infrastructure is publicly funded - the UTOPIA backbone and everything to the premises are government money (e.g. taxpayers) - so that needs to be considered when looking at those price points.

 

[sfx2000]

This afternoon - did the clean up on the LAN side - tracing down every connection, each node... this is 10 years worth of growth, so there was a fair amount of planning here, and quite a few nodes/vlan's etc...

Reset every unit - power down - tracking down power and connectivity - so a nice chance to clean up old cruft that had built up over time - got a box full of old cables/power adapters/and a switch that probably wasn't needed... and then rebuilt routing tables on the main router, setting up the VLAN for untrusted devices (and the WiFi Guest VLAN).

Helps to draw things out in the notebook - tried to sort out current, but decided it was better just to do the future plan - that plan got deployed today... spare time planning over a couple of weeks.

Anyways - got everything sorted and back up - wow... what a difference... LAN/LAN traffic is full speed and much less latency, and we've got better VLAN support (I was doing it in the router, and still am for routing, but the VLAN separation is now at the switch, so less load on the router itself)

Also sorted out the power issue - and now we have all critical nodes on the UPS, and there, under max load, we're seeing about 90 watts - the critical core is the router/switch/singleAP/NAS, with the NAS power loss at 5m for shutdown - so have around 6 hours of LAN up with WiFi/Routing/WAN if power goes down... the NAS is the biggest part of the load there.

Critical path nodes FWIW;

• Moto/Arris SB6183 - WAN connection (CoxHSI cable 150/10 nominal)
• Netgate RCE-V 2440 - this is the main router running pfSense on Intel x86 - C2358 to be specific
• Netgear GS108T - primary switch behind the router
• QNAP TS-453Pro - NAS box running Intel J1900 and 12TB storage (short leash there, if the UPS detects power loss, it shuts down)
• Dell i3050 - mini-desktop, NUC like, but a bit smaller - hotel/intranet server/monitor for the LAN- J1800 silvermonts here - also my current VPN end-point
• Airport Extreme AC in Bridge Mode - we don't need routing, but WiFi will be needed until power is completely down.

This, like I said, takes around 90 watts total... gotta love Intel's low power stuff...

Secondary switch handles things that are not on the critical core - which is a few desktops, and the other AP (also Airport Extreme AC), along with a TP-Link AV1200 span...

Watching the Wireshark - much better objectively, and subjectively from the nodes, all better...

 

[sfx2000]

Should add that the 90W power budget is including QNAP doing a QSirch reindex and backup to a seagate 5TB BackupPlus drive (USB3) at the same time, so once things settle down, should be less, much less...

 

[sfx2000]

In any event - no matter what the WAN is - make the most of the LAN...

With the exception of the AP's and the switches, my critical path nodes are X86, including my Router.

Why? Simply put - memory bandwidth and clock speeds - the AP's are good enough (Airport Extreme AC's, how many other AC1900 class AP's with ESSID/VLAN tags at less than $150USD - not many, I've looked for them) - the switch is a known fast switch - Netgear does an awesome job there...

So it really came down to the Router - simple enough, and breaking out traffic to dedicated nodes... the NAS is standalone - and while some might suggest Intel's small cores aren't fast enough, I'll tell you up front, they are... even with Plex and Transcoding in the J1900's, QuickSync works with QTS...

Blaster - which some have seen in my posts - this is the inhouse debug/hotel server - and it's also a Docker/LXC host, and I can run a VM on it if needed - and it also runs tools that quantify the network - SNMP and Cacti, along with Nagios are your friends here. And blaster is a j1800 box... it doesn't need to be big, just needs to be there...

I've spent a fair amount of cash here, just on the home network more than most would tolerate - but it's a network that's fairly flat - two VLAN's, one public VPN endpoint, one SSH endpoint, and it's not about the horsepower on the desktops - primary focus has been getting latency down on the LAN and LAN/WAN interfaces... it's a side effect of being overbuilt, probably about 4 to 10 times over...

My home LAN could probably support 400 users over the wire, and over 100 on the WiFi, and not break a sweat. But that's what I did in the real-world job, and we have an enterprise/carrier grade network network inside - and I've built this looking forward to SDN/NFV type of implementations along with how to deal with the Internet of Insecure Things.

Can't do that with a dead-spider, even at a quarter of the cost... and I've done this with half the cost...

 

[L&LD]

Internet of Insecure Things. Lol... is that trademarked? I like it.

 

[sfx2000]

Internet of Insecure Things. Lol... is that trademarked? I like it.

(c) 2016 - sfx2000

 

[sfx2000]

Should add that the 90W power budget is including QNAP doing a QSirch reindex and backup to a seagate 5TB BackupPlus drive (USB3) at the same time, so once things settle down, should be less, much less...

Now that the core has settled down - it's running at around 76 watts idle - put some pressure on it, and it'll ramp up to around 85 - the 90 watt max was the NAS backing up to the external USB drive (on the same circuit)...

 

[Darcy]

DOCSIS 3.0 Cable - SB6183...

Just curious as to why you did not go for the SB6190 modem or wait for DOCSIS 3.1 ? I'm still running a SB6120 modem which is an end of life device on comcast but I'm looking to upgrade.