Please help me - need advice on splitting bandwidth

dOn Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:15:38 -0500, Terry Arif wrote in :

Your BEFW11S4 is too old to solve your problem. Get one of the supported devices and use DD-WRT firmware

thread:

You can also try cooperation with your roommates. It is possible to reduce the bandwidth of those torrent programs. Unless you have the only password to the new router, you will have the same issue. That is, other people will just change the QOS.

John Navas hath wroth:

Agreed. DD-WRT v24 RC6.2 works. I'm suprised that your BEFW11S4 doesn't crash and hang from all the P2P traffic.

Also see: Optimization for Bittorrent to prevent crashes.

Quality of Service:

under prioritization by application or MAC address.

You can also just block P2P protocols. Under "Access Restrictions" there are a list of common P2P protocols. See:

Indeed, I wonder which rev. it is. In a previous post I mentioned my troubles with that device which I have repackaged for outdoor use. When it was subjected to many days of below zero F temperatures, the frequent crashes vanished. I can't say how long that will last, but it suggests some mechanical problem with the board rather than the design.

Michael

Most v4 mutations seem to suck. v2 seems to work. No clue on the others.

The specs on the BEFW11S4 are 0C to 40C.

Nope. I now have 4 of the v4 losers and they all hang or crash. However, I setup one of them with some new 1.52.06 firmware for v4 that was "leaked" out of Linksys. (1.52.02 is the latest on the Linksys web pile). See:

The web based update mechanism does not work due to bad checksums on some lines. However, the TFTP upload method works just fine.

I haven't done much testing with this version. I also updated a customers. No complaints yet, but that might be because they owe me money.

Get a Netequalizer appliance and problem solved. They start at $1,800 and they work very effectively. That's what we run.

DTC hath wroth:

Hmmm.... $1800 is about 5 years worth of $30/month DSL service. He could buy the P2P addicts their own DSL service for 5 years, for the price of the hardware. After 5 years, both the roommates and the hardware will probably have depreciated to zero value.

If he's plugging and unplugging the gear what makes you think he'll go along with throttling the connection?

Who owns the equipment? Who's the subscriber to the internet service? Unless that's you then you've got a problem that's unlikely to be going away any time soon.

If it's your equipment and you're the person named on the account for internet service then you might have options. You could start by setting up a router that has features for reporting usage. Start tracking which ports and computers are using the bandwidth. Use that as evidence in a discussion with your roomates, especially when it comes to calculating who's going to be paying MORE for gobbling up the bandwidth.

The next step would be to move the equipment into some sort of locked box. Not one that blocked the wireless signal though.

You'd probably have better luck just moving out. Roomates are a pain in the ass.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:00:51 -0500, "Bill Kearney" wrote in :

Or just get your own private service.

If his roomate is devious enough to be pulling the plug, he'd be just as likely to steal that too.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:18:01 -0500, "Bill Kearney" wrote in :

3G wireless? ;)

heh. I live in a room mate situation like this myself. basically, I do everything here wired. even the wireless is inside the lan (as it should be). I run an openBSD 4.1 pf based firewall with bandwidth shaping capabilities. it and the cablemodem (and the wireless AP) are in a locked cabinet that I have the only key to. all equipment in that cabinet are also on a UPS with a nice long uptime. Now, since I have a block of IP's here, I have the OpenBSD machine setup as a firewalling bridge (its complicated but workable). the other roomies have their own IP's and the AP is locked to a non-routable lan IP address which is fully natted.

Now, if any of them start complaining about bandwidth, I remind them of 2 facts:

1. I hold all the keys to the kingdom
2. I pay for the service. if they want more, then pay me.
3. you share intellectual property, expect to be cut off and you deal with the parties involved)

so far, I have only had to enforce these rules once (right after a cease and desist order was written to me by my provider for copyright infringement). the IP was listed and I knew exactly who it was.

in any case, you can do much to secure your physical hardware. if your roomie wants to hog all the service, he can do with none (cut off the house and have him do dialup).

How do you dare take the risks? If it is DMCA related, the prosecution would be draconian, and even though you are not the infringer, you may be held liable and certainly the costs to defend would be severe.

Michael

its simple actually, they send you a warning. if you continue past that warning (which is also a grace period) then they attempt to prosecute.

as for their Draconian prosecution, well, it can only go as far as the litigants are willing to fight. present a hard to win case and they tend to back off and leave you alone (easier fish to fry elsewhere). besides, I have documentation as to who was doing what and where. they would have to make a very powerful case for it and a single letter and some bits on a wire aren't sufficient cause.

I checked with a lawyer on this was he helped me to draft the response needed. it helps to have a friend who is a lawyer. :)

| > | >> so far, I have only had to enforce these rules once (right after a cease | >> and desist order was written to me by my provider for copyright | >> infringement). | >

| > | >

| > How do you dare take the risks? If it is DMCA related, the prosecution | > would be draconian, and even though you are not the infringer, you | > may be held liable and certainly the costs to defend would be severe. | >

| > Michael | | its simple actually, | they send you a warning. if you continue past that warning (which is also a | grace period) then they attempt to prosecute. | | as for their Draconian prosecution, well, it can only go as far as the | litigants are willing to fight. present a hard to win case and they tend to | back off and leave you alone (easier fish to fry elsewhere). besides, I | have documentation as to who was doing what and where. they would have to | make a very powerful case for it and a single letter and some bits on a | wire aren't sufficient cause. | | I checked with a lawyer on this was he helped me to draft the response | needed. it helps to have a friend who is a lawyer. :) |

I'd be interested in reading the text of that responce if you care to share.

Right the NetEqualizer starts to make sense when you manage 20 or so users (sharing a link and paying for it) Below that level the investment does not make sense

I have a Dlink DGL4300 that doesn't cost anywhere near that much, and has some pretty useful QoS stuff included. I've said this before: this is a very nice consumer router. Gigabit ethernet is nice for the wired side and the Mac Pro.

(Note that Dlink have invented some technical terms of their own that will need deciphering. The online help-file is pretty good, though.)

Warren Oates hath wroth:

Well, methinks the "GameFuel" QoS (traffic shaper) in the DGL-4300 is rather crude. It will also NOT do what the original poster wanted. See setup at:

The configuration is by port number range only, with no provisions for control by IP or MAC address. No bandwidth limits by percentage of available bandwidth, by kbits/sec, or by some priority scheme. Crude.