Now you’re all digressing a little 😉
If the line is full due to other traffic (my use case) then QOS helps a specific device not to be crushed. Even if the line is not fully utilised, properly implemented QOS should improve the latency of time-critical traffic (VOIP, video etc). QOS counterproductive? Yes for the kids or if the IB3 would greatly increase the latency due to QOS because the CPU is too weak, too little memory or something, otherwise I don’t see how this could happen in my use case.
I was also able to test how it is via cable. Download from a pc that fills the line, prioritise my laptop and everything is wonderful. But it would also be nice to be able to enjoy this via WLAN, then I wouldn’t be tied to the desk in my office and could change places from time to time without having to pull a cable.
The questions about your individual bandwidth are quite relevant, because on the vast majority of consumer routers, such as the Swisscom Internetbox, switching on QoS functions not only leads to an additional overhead consumption of bandwidth, but also to additional limits for the individual client at approx. 250 - 300 Mbit/sec.
Hence the questions again:
- what is the total bandwidth of your own connection?
- what does a concrete comparative test on your PC with and without QoS switched on show?
Hobby-Nerd ohne wirtschaftliche Abhängigkeiten zur Swisscom
Again, the question is not what it does or does not do, but why the one device is not visible in the config screen when connected via WLAN.
We are also talking about a QOS rule and not 1000 per proto and devices or something like that, which the IB3 can’t do at all. I know QOS, even on 100Gbps left…
Zoom, for example, suffers extremely when my line is full. Video and sound. With QOS I don’t notice any difference whether something else is running or not. I would also like that via WLAN.
I have a downlink of 140Mbps and an uplink of 40Mbps because it’s only copper, far away from the distribution box and Swisscom can’t offer anything better at the moment. Yes, I’m actually paying for 1Gbps.
fly4beer I don’t think that IB supports QoS over WiFi. It‘s a shared medium after all. I know that some enterprise solutions support 802.11e.
for me this is more of a general prioritisation problem that should actually be solved by the router without prioritising individual devices.
https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat
My IB delivers a B- with g.fast 450/120, and an A+ even under full load if I configure my downstream router accordingly.
Try doing the test.
I assume that this is exactly why your “internet experience” is not so great. Under load, the IB still gets bogged down with the even distribution of resources.
By the way, here is a thread in which the topic of performance and bufferbloat has already been discussed.
https://community.swisscom.ch/d/766796-pfsense-schlechte-performance-mit-modem
It is now almost 2 years old, the topic was already present at that time, and apparently a solution was already being worked on. Perhaps this error (O-Ton on the Bufferbloat test page: Bufferbloat is a software issue with networking equipment that causes spikes in your Internet connection’s latency when a device on the network uploads or downloads files.) has already been fixed in the new IB5pro? It is also interesting to note that, contrary to other statements, this technology is also effective at higher bandwidths.
I still get practically identical measurement results today, unfortunately not much has changed in the meantime on the software side with the IBs.