Router guru's, question inside

[Tx Redneck]

These are the default settings for the Vz FiOS router. Are they optimal for heavy traffic over wireless? If not, what should be changed?

Tia

[big_tiger]

If you're streaming video, you should have QoS on. Are you experiencing an issue?

If you dont care about battery life on your wireless devices, you could try turning WMM power save off. With a ton of devices the buffer could fill up. (Im just guessing)
It's too late to go thru this, but I think it explains the WMM-PS function.

http://community.arubanetworks.com/aruba/attachments/aruba/tkb@tkb/37/1/U-APSD%20explained%20and%20debugged_i62_R2.pdf

The underlying concept of WMM PowerSave is that the station (STA) triggers the release of buffered data from the access point (AP) by sending an uplink data frame. Upon receipt of such a data (trigger) frame the AP releases previously buffered data stored in each of its queues. Queues may be configured to be trigger enabled, (i.e. a receipt of a data frame corresponding to the queue acts as trigger), and delivery enabled, (i.e. data stored at those queues will be released upon receipt of a frame). Queues refer to the four ACs defined for WMM.

[ceyko]

What are you trying to do specifically? QoS is not just turn on/off, there are a lot of aspects.

[hunt4m3x]

He is trying to stream uporn and redtube faster via WiFi

[Tx Redneck]

I just want to know if the settings VZ defaults are optimal. We have 2 laptops, 3 smartphones, a tablet and WD Live TV box all streaming from my main pc/media server.

I can't say with any certainty that there's been any issues, just curious if more than anything they're optimal.

Tx

[ceyko]

Well...remember...

Once a packet hits the Internet QOS is null and void. There is not QoS on the Internet and it's only applicable to you local LAN/Network.

From an Internet pipe point of view all you can really do is shaping/policing, but those markings you posted have no validity outside of your network.

[Tx Redneck]

That I knew, but w/the plethora of devices connected, are the settings ideal or is that relative? I also have another pc that's used as an android build box. It and the other desktop/media server are on a gig switch, the rest is on N band wireless only, due to the microwave oven killing G.

[Nash B.]

That I knew, but w/the plethora of devices connected, are the settings ideal or is that relative?

FYI, that's not a plethora.

[Tx Redneck]

FYI, that's not a plethora.

Poor choice of words and noted.

[mustang_revival]

I honestly think QOS services on your router will be a wash. You'll need to go there if your having issues with VOIP or some protocol specific traffic that is sensitive to TCP latency or packet loss, and therefore need to be at the head of the traffic priority list as it transcends the network. (These are inherit problems with wifi, anyway.)

You'd do better performance wise by examining your hosts and how they connect.

All your clients in your wifi network will be as fast as your slowest device.

If you have a 802.11n router, 3 802.11n laptops and a 802.11b tablet for example

Your wifi will now be operating at 802.11b speeds even on your N devices.

Here's a link I found that be more helpful.. http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wirel...w-80211n-speed

[Tx Redneck]

Thanks for the info gents.

[ceyko]

So those are markings assigned to queues in the router you have and who knows what those queues really are without some research.

Now the kicker is, what markings are your devices/applications using and wtf markings is that router looking for there?

An example would be a PC usually has no markings, so goes in the best effort bucket.

However, a Cisco phone is DSCP26/AF31/COS3 (Last I looked, it changes sometimes. Cisco UCM has it's own markings for call control traffic and so forth. These are all defaults.

With that said a stock Cisco switch out of the box is going to treat both the PC and IP Phone traffic identical. Once you configure QoS (Manual or auto), it then starts matching the IP Phone traffic, putting its traffic in different queues...etc...etc. Meanwhile, the PC stays with BE.

So, in theory - if the PC has a bad NIC (remember those days?) and is flooding the switch with traffic - the phone traffic will not be affected since it is has reserved bandwidth, priority queueing...etc...etc. (assuming switch CPU is not pegged)

With all that said, the examples are to demonstrate that you need end to end QoS on the LAN.

1. Devices/applications have to put traffic on the network with QoS markings
2. Network devices have to be configured to match those markings
3. Network devices also have to be configured to know what to do with those packets with the markings

Then if you have another hop with another device - it has to do the same crap or most likely the packet will lose its QoS marking and the packet will just be another lemming.

Generally speaking - this is one of many areas that enterprise gear blows the consumer gear out of the water. My exposure to consumer gear makes me puke when trying to do "QoS" - since it tends to be very generic and simple. By being simple, it makes it ineffective and give the illusion of providing QoS. The most I've seen that is effective is simple policing of traffic and providing some bandwidth to a specific IP address/host.

IP/Host based matching/QoS is generally not a good practice

[Tx Redneck]

I honestly think QOS services on your router will be a wash. You'll need to go there if your having issues with VOIP or some protocol specific traffic that is sensitive to TCP latency or packet loss, and therefore need to be at the head of the traffic priority list as it transcends the network. (These are inherit problems with wifi, anyway.)

You'd do better performance wise by examining your hosts and how they connect.

All your clients in your wifi network will be as fast as your slowest device.

If you have a 802.11n router, 3 802.11n laptops and a 802.11b tablet for example

Your wifi will now be operating at 802.11b speeds even on your N devices.

Here's a link I found that be more helpful.. http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wirel...w-80211n-speed

Speaking of B/G/N, I had to manually set the router to N only. We got a new microwave last summer(panasonic 1250w inverter jobber) that for some reason kills B/G. The one it replaced never did that and it took me an inordinate amount of time to figure out why wireless kept goin out.

So those are markings assigned to queues in the router you have and who knows what those queues really are without some research.

Now the kicker is, what markings are your devices/applications using and wtf markings is that router looking for there?

An example would be a PC usually has no markings, so goes in the best effort bucket.

However, a Cisco phone is DSCP26/AF31/COS3 (Last I looked, it changes sometimes. Cisco UCM has it's own markings for call control traffic and so forth. These are all defaults.

With that said a stock Cisco switch out of the box is going to treat both the PC and IP Phone traffic identical. Once you configure QoS (Manual or auto), it then starts matching the IP Phone traffic, putting its traffic in different queues...etc...etc. Meanwhile, the PC stays with BE.

So, in theory - if the PC has a bad NIC (remember those days?) and is flooding the switch with traffic - the phone traffic will not be affected since it is has reserved bandwidth, priority queueing...etc...etc. (assuming switch CPU is not pegged)

With all that said, the examples are to demonstrate that you need end to end QoS on the LAN.

1. Devices/applications have to put traffic on the network with QoS markings
2. Network devices have to be configured to match those markings
3. Network devices also have to be configured to know what to do with those packets with the markings

Then if you have another hop with another device - it has to do the same crap or most likely the packet will lose its QoS marking and the packet will just be another lemming.

Generally speaking - this is one of many areas that enterprise gear blows the consumer gear out of the water. My exposure to consumer gear makes me puke when trying to do "QoS" - since it tends to be very generic and simple. By being simple, it makes it ineffective and give the illusion of providing QoS. The most I've seen that is effective is simple policing of traffic and providing some bandwidth to a specific IP address/host.

IP/Host based matching/QoS is generally not a good practice

Thank you both for taking the time to type all that out. I learn a lot from those like you who take the time to share like that.

You and Joey both are gentlemen and scholars.