Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FurryNutz]

I'll give that a try....I don't do much FTP however I'll check for consistency on uplink speeds and ping...

Reason for assigning based on IP is that in my house I prefer to have the gaming consoles set for high priority(50) and all other devices set for normal(128) while gaming is going on. Seems to work and still allows all other devices to get internet well..

How do you have our rules set up? How is the QOS rule set up for ports?

[shm0]

im lazy and use the automatic classification

but for manual setup:

create one rule to put everything in default class 255.
for that you leave everything at default.
local ip range 0.0.0.0 - 255.255.255.255
remote ip range 0.0.0.0 - 255.255.255.255
local port range 0 - 65535
remote port range 0 - 65535
just change priority to 255.

for the other rules.
leave local and remote ip, local port range at default.
change the remote port range to the port(s) you wand to QoS. like 80 for http.
and assign a priority.

you do this for every service you dont want to put in the default class with priority 255.
assing each service a priority class that makes sense. like gaming and real time services i would give a priority of 50.

but i think that hassle isnt worth it. the automatic classification works just fine.

[FurryNutz]

Kewl, thanks for the details.

Ya, seems a bit more harder to set up that way...good info though.

Soon as I get time with the router and not body is online, I'll test QoS again and post.

Ya, looking good so far...I have have to pose this mod question to my admin and see if it's ok for us to post this and make sure they are ok with it. We do understand that it's not supported and it's a mod and as long as users understand this can void any warranties with D-Link support, I think D-Link will ok with this here in the forums. I guess if D-Link isn't going to do any changes in the EU region, I need to find out if the NA region will do anything since they do handle things differently here. I have asked about it and haven't received much in information about it so I presume that nothing maybe done with it officially. This seems like they could do it however there maybe other issues behind the scenes, problems or issues that may prevent this that we don't know about. Keep your source files handy though. This seems like a nice mod to help get over the cap on the Uplink. If the 857 testing done well, I might have you check out the 827 and 657 FW as well as those have the same TS engine. 

Thanks for all your time and efforts. 

[FurryNutz]

Ping test with TS/QoS enabled, PC rule set for normal priority of 128;


Speedtest:


Router status:
Measured Uplink Speed :   3358 kbps

Ping test with TS/QoS Disabled:


Speedtest:

[shm0]

Thanks for posting mate.

can you please do

ping somehostyouknowthathastable.com -n 1000

in a cmd window

and then do some uploading and watch if your ping raises?
One time with QoS on and one time with QoS off.
And only using Automatic Classification.

Without Qos i get around 150ms pings with it on it stays below 50ms. So far so good.

[FurryNutz]

Ok so I sent an email from one web email to another with an attached 15Mb file:
C:\Windows\system32>ping www.speedtest.net -n 1000

Pinging cs62.adn.edgecastcdn.net [72.21.92.82] with 32 byt
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=92ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=87ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=87ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=92ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=94ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=98ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=96ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=89ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=94ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=89ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=86ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=99ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=94ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=86ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=89ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=86ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=94ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=98ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=92ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 72.21.92.82: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 72.21.92.82:
    Packets: Sent = 67, Received = 67, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 101ms, Average = 59ms

[shm0]

Thank you.

Was this with QoS and Automatic Classification on? The Spikes to 100ms doesnt look that good.

[fousa]

I used the 1.0 Source/Toolkit.
Extracted the files from 1.04 firmware.

Sorry to bother, can you explain more about the source/toolkit ?

I want to do similar with DCS-2332L IP camera, increasing the maximum recording size...

[FurryNutz]

Eh, now that you mention it, I'll need to check again, I forgot to look, LOL. Believe they were on. 

Thank you.

Was this with QoS and Automatic Classification on? The Spikes to 100ms doesnt look that good.

[JavaLawyer]

The DCS-2332L GPL Source can be downloaded here: http://tsd.dlink.com.tw/

[FurryNutz]

Please carry this post over to the DCS-2332L forum.

Thank you.

Sorry to bother, can you explain more about the source/toolkit ?

I want to do similar with DCS-2332L IP camera, increasing the maximum recording size...

[FurryNutz]

Enable Traffic Shaping :    Check
Automatic Uplink Speed :     Check
Measured Uplink Speed :      3358 kbps
Connection Type :    
Detected xDSL Or Other Frame Relay Network :      Cable Or Other Broadband Network
QoS Engine Setup
Enable QoS Engine : Check   
Automatic Classification :      Check
Dynamic Fragmentation : Un-Checked

[shm0]

Mayne the measured uplink speed of 3358 is a bit high. try with 3072 and test if the ping raised above 100ms.

The Toolkit for the DCS-2332L is not the same as for the DIR857.
However it should be still possible to mod the DCS-233L.
How do you notice the recording limit?

[FurryNutz]

  Mayne? Maybe?

So manually set 3072? This is what the router is automatically detecting after it does it's check.

Not sure what you mean here.

Please carry posts over to the DCS-2332L forum regarding FW mods. I don't want to confuse this thread.

Thank you.

Mayne the measured uplink speed of 3358 is a bit high. try with 3072 and test if the ping raised above 100ms.

The Toolkit for the DCS-2332L is not the same as for the DIR857.
However it should be still possible to mod the DCS-233L.
How do you notice the recording limit?

[shm0]

yes i mean maybe. sorry was to early in the morning.
yep set 3072 manually.