IPv6 Control Plane with FQ_CoDel Shaping

[Seimus]

I think maybe these:

https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=43856.0
https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=45135.0

It'll take some time to play but if I find a way to improve the Household test score I will post back.

Nice you found it!

I should maybe again reconsider, to test and maybe write about Weighted scheduler + Latency Queue management. I previously did think about it, but it does require more configuration and could confuse the general user.

Regards,
S.

[OPNenthu]

I think the CoDel options outside of the FQ_CoDel scheduler are not effective, based on some preliminary testing.

I tried two things:

1)
Pipes set to WFQ
Queues set to CoDel + ECN
Result: bufferbloat score went way down (B-C range, +80ms on upload latency)

2)
Pipes set to WFQ + CoDel + ECN
Queues set plain (no options)
Result: same as above

There seems to be something special about the FQ_CoDel scheduler on pipes that makes them effective for Bufferbloat management which other CoDel options do not have.

If that's the case, then it won't be practical to classify and prioritize traffic types as the latency won't be acceptable.

The only way might be to use separate pipes with FQ_CoDel but I don't want to carve up my bandwidth.

Are you seeing the same?

[Seimus]

2)
Pipes set to WFQ + CoDel + ECN
Queues set plain (no options)
Result: same as above

This actually will not use the CoDel in the Queues (tab). If you enable CoDel in the Pipe you need to attach your rules directly to the Scheduler instead of Queues you manually Created. Because CoDel in Pipes is configured on the dynamic created Queues. When you attach your rules to the manually created Queues, they use FiFO qdic.

There seems to be something special about the FQ_CoDel scheduler on pipes that makes them effective for Bufferbloat management which other CoDel options do not have.

If that's the case, then it won't be practical to classify and prioritize traffic types as the latency won't be acceptable.

The only way might be to use separate pipes with FQ_CoDel but I don't want to carve up my bandwidth.

The magic most likely is due to the FQ scheduler, + the fact FQ_C allows to set quantum, it does not create such overhead as WFQ or QFQ. FQ_C is a fine tuned version of CoDel. CoDel itself because is just a qdic needs a proper scheduler. Its usually advised to use CoDel with QFQ which performs better.

https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/

Are you seeing the same?

Honestly I did not had the chance to test this yet :)

Regards,
S.