Buffer Bloat

General discussions and other topics.
29 posts Page 2 of 3
by virtualmike » Mon Dec 07, 2015 12:47 am
Image

Pace 5168N on Fusion X2 (not FTTN).
by geogriffin » Mon Dec 07, 2015 7:36 am
Ah ha, figured out how I scored so well on the bufferbloat test. I have QoS enabled on my ASUS router, with limits set at 5Mbps downlink and 1Mbps uplink. This morning, with QoS disabled:

Image
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/2161815

and with QoS enabled:

Image
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/2161854

Considering we don't measure any bufferbloat on downlink, it sounds like I should disable QoS in that direction to squeeze out that extra 0.3Mbps :cry: (sad that a 0.3Mbps gain is significant to my connection.) OTOH, sacrificing 0.04 Mbps on the upload path to perform QoS seems worth it to maintain sane latency..
by johnv » Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:01 am
My Pace 5168N is running in bridge mode. It then goes to my Asus N66U. However, when I connected my laptop directly to the Pace modem and set my laptop to my fixed IP address, I still got the same results.

From this, I concluded that the problem is with Sonic or the Sonic provided Pace modem.

I guess I could play with QoS, but I should not have to.
by geogriffin » Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:15 am
agreed.. interesting it's only on the upload path. anyone have an idea why that would be?
by geogriffin » Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:21 am
geogriffin wrote:agreed.. interesting it's only on the upload path. anyone have an idea why that would be?
I just realized a possible answer to my own question.. if the bufferbloat was on the Pace itself, that would affect the upload path, whereas Sonic's equipment's buffers would affect the download side (and they are fine.)

So the question is, can you (Sonic) adjust buffering in the Pace or otherwise convince Pace to address the issue in a firmware update? It'd improve all of your customers' experience significantly.. I noticed DNS gets delayed quite a bit by this, which kills browsing speed.
by brycem » Sat May 21, 2016 1:09 am
Did this ever get any attention/resolution?

I have the exact same issues on my Pace 4111N.

I really don't want to buy an extra router, but I guess I'm going to have to to get rid of this issue. And reconfigure my local network. Weeee....
by Guest » Sat May 21, 2016 9:43 am
by Guest » Sat May 21, 2016 9:45 am
Ignore that link above...I messed up.

I still have a grade of F on uploads, so no, it has not been solved.
by robert_s » Mon May 23, 2016 2:31 pm
Hi,

We are definitely always trying to improve QOS and actively working with Pace. brycem, if you wouldn't mind calling Support at 1-888-766-4233. We are open 7 days a week from 8 AM to 10 PM. It is worth making sure your line is healthy.
Robert S.
Proud Sonic Employee
707-547-3400
by dane » Mon May 23, 2016 4:08 pm
I think that buffer bloat is a red herring here, and suspect that QoS is the real challenge. This is something we are actively working with Pace on, the 4111N doesn't currently support upstream ACK prioritization, and that can impair performance during times of upstream saturation with some applications.
Dane Jasper
Sonic
29 posts Page 2 of 3

Who is online

In total there are 22 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 22 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 999 on Mon May 10, 2021 1:02 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests