addresses in traffic shaping rules for IPv6?

[meyergru]

I doubt that. I had the same problem, when my MTU settings were wrong and once more, when I used the traffic shaper and found that sometimes, you need a reboot to apply the traffic shaper settings correctly. That was discussed here: https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=46990.0, but I thought the problem had been fixed in the meantime.

If the tests fails for you, then something is wrong in your setup. Maybe, you use adblockers that interfere with the tests on those pages.

[Seimus]

Why is the limiting by the ISP so terrible?

Ask your ISP.
ISPs usually don't care to accommodate possible congestion in their networks. The bufferbloat community developed a LibreQoS platform that is targeted to be used by ISP, they try to make ISPs to take advantage of this to mitigate buffer bloat in their networks. But once again most of the ISPs do not care.

During that speedtest, the numbers for the latency keep changing all the time, so I can't really tell what it is.  Upload latency seems to be much lower than the download latency.

You have to check the latency number after the test is done if you do ooklaspeedtest... But, just go with the other two test sites they will tell you more precisely.

When I set the pipe numbers to half the bandwiths I'm supposed to have, bandwith is lower and the latency seems the same.  When I set the numbers to double the bandwidth, latency is like half and I'm getting about 10% more bandwidth than I'm supposed to get.  When I set the numbers to 10% over what I'm supposed to get --- and that is more than the limits the ISP suggests --- I'm getting better bandwidth and lower latency.

This doesn't give any sense at all. Plus the way how you previously described that you check for latency during load, I am honestly not sure if you even get proper readings in first place.

I can only guess that shaping on the router doesn't kick in because I'm not reaching the bandwith.  So I guess I could as well delete all the settings because they don't give any measurable benefits and only lower the usable bandwidth.

FQ_C is an active AQM, even if you are not reaching the "BW" it measures time of each packet within the flow/queue. Once again I am honestly not sure if you even get proper readings in first place.

So what is the point of this traffic shaping?  It seems to only lower the bandwith I'm getting and to increase the latency.  This doesn't make sense.

This is just not true. If you are having worse latency when doing FQ_C, most likely you do something wrong. Or you don't properly read the output of the testing results.

BTW, there's one difference with no traffic shaping: at the start of the test, download bandwidth may spike up to about over 2.5 times of what I'm supposed to get before it goes down.  With traffic shaping, that doesn't happen.  But does it even matter?

It does matter, that latency bump you see on start is cause by burst of traffic. This causes a lot of problems with start of transmissions and application startups.

What do you suggest?  Should I just delete the settings?

Read the documentation and properly read the outputs of the tests. Because from what I read so far I am really not sure you read the outputs of the test correctly.

Regards,
S.