DumaOS on the Netduma R1 is now in Open Beta! Learn more here: http://forum.netduma.com/topic/26315-dumaos-on-the-netduma-r1-is-now-in-open-beta/


Jump to content


Clubhouse Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About lilstone87

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. I'm here, and no you can't take over my computer LUL kidding...
  2. lilstone87

    Why is my Anti-Bufferbloat not working?

    Good to hear Alex. I spent a couple days messing around with things on my end, and finally on the test's end with settings. Plus i overlooked many test result's, before i decided to post these findings. I'm not one who will post about something, unless i feel 100% confident it's true. So like i said i took my time on this, and honestly probably burnt threw 10-15gb of data over a couple day period, just running this test repeatedly. Ultimately i'm happy you were able to take the info i provided, put it to use, and get the same kind of results i got. Which are what people want to see, if their connection is running optimally. Finally i hope others who are having trouble getting results they want with this test, see my earlier post, and are able to put my suggestions to good use. As i think the test can be good to use, it just isn't optimized to provide accurate results, when using its default settings.
  3. lilstone87

    Why is my Anti-Bufferbloat not working?

    Here's a test I just did, to show I'm not just posting what I feel might be right. I forgot to attach it to my post from a few minutes ago. EDIT: Here's another test I just did from a minute ago, where I severely limited my speeds, I still got "A" for bufferbloat. Before best I seen was "B" for bufferbloat. Disregard the "F" for speed, as that's based off my average which would normally be 330/30. But I limited my speed for this test, and a little bit for the test above as well.
  4. lilstone87

    Why is my Anti-Bufferbloat not working?

    Well I have did more testing, and digging on this, the last couple days. I noticed a couple things, and I'm gonna share my findings below. 1. Oddly at times I noticed my result's were not the best while using google chrome. I used firefox, and things seemed more steady. I have been able to get some good result's with chrome as well though. So I wouldn't say not use it. I tried using windows 10 built in IE browser, however I tried a couple test's, all failed when trying to do the upload side of the test. So I say stay away from IE for testing. 2. When running this test, I strongly suggest cutting all bandwidth usage on the device you're testing on. So if you're on your pc, which you shouldn't be testing over a wifi device anyways. So testing while on a PC/Laptop. Close any apps/browser tabs that are using active bandwidth till testing is over. Also I highly recommend when testing on dslreports.com, try to only have it open within the browser you're using. I feel that will minimize any other tabs within the browser somehow causing the test an issue. 3. Do yourselves a favor, and create an account on dslreports.com, will only take a short time to do so. Reason being, you can configure your "Preferences" settings for the speedtest, once saved, they will stay linked to your account. I feel configuring the preference settings is VERY important with this speedtest. I will explain more below. 4. Reason to setup preference settings. First you can select the servers you want to use, for the test. At the top you have a option to let it pick some servers for you based off of either Latency, or Bandwidth. I suggest using the "Latency" option. After that's done running, it will have the servers it picked with a check on them. After that, you can look at the one's it picked, and unselect some of them if you want. I did a couple for myself, pick the ones closest to me. After this, make sure to hit the save button at the bottom. However I'm not done with the preference settings yet... After getting a small number of servers picked based off latency by it's own testing, and also checking over them yourself. I wouldn't have no more then 8-10 servers selected. Now scroll down a little, and you will see "No. download streams" with a box beside it. You can pick between 1-32. I honestly think for most of us "4" will be enough. That will be the amount of servers it will use while testing. Do the same for the upload side, which is right below it. For awhile I was using 16+ for each test I done, and I now don't recommend using that high of a number of servers for each test. Reason being, your overall result's will depend on all the servers used during that test. For me, I'm on the east coast of the US, and when I'm doing one of these test using 16+ servers. I'm likely using several servers on the west coast of the US. With a mixature of servers all over, there's so many things that can affect your routing from one minute to the next. So my final opinion on this, keep the number of servers used for the test low, and use servers close to you. Because this to me will give you more accurate result's, when it comes to the bufferbloat part of this test. Finally make sure after any preference setting changes, you make sure to click the "save" button at the bottom. 5. After doing the stuff above, I have been seeing more steady result's with the dslreports.com speedtest, in terms of bufferbloat, and my overall results. I don't feel the current default settings used for their speedtest, is optimized very well for testing, and getting the most accurate results. Ultimately I think by default they're running the test using to many servers, which can be from far away. With that, comes a lot of possible routing issue's. Some of them you have no control over, and isn't an issue with your connection. However whatever each server is reporting back, ultimately is included at the end of the test, and will factor into your final result.
  5. lilstone87

    Why is my Anti-Bufferbloat not working?

    Fraser, I will get back to you as soon as I can. But until then, I plan to dig into this more from my end as well. This has me very curious as to why it's happening. dslreports speedtest bufferbloat part of the test depends on result's it collects while stressing your bandwidth. Oddly for the upload side, as you have seen... The result's are worst while Anti-BB is enabled. Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as I'm only using 25% of my upload with it enabled, vs 100% without it. I'm very curious why its shows latency average higher, and with higher spiking. With Anti-BB enabled, is the router cpu strictly doing all the processing? I know often times certain features being enabled, disables other stuff, which normally keeps the cpu load down.
  6. lilstone87

    Why is my Anti-Bufferbloat not working?

    Well I have had the XR500 for well over a month now, and I have waited till now to mention it. As I wanted to test over a period of time, and see what result's I come up with. I have noticed when using the dslreports speedtest, my result's are better without "Anti-Bufferbloat", then with it enabled. Which honestly is a bit backwards, and should be the opposite. I have run many of tests the past month, or so, and everytime my bufferbloat results are better when I leave my speeds uncapped. I plan to post the results of two recent tests in this post. One without it, and the other with my speed's capped to 25% of my overall total bandwidth. As you will see bufferbloat isn't exactly improving "bufferbloat" when enabled. I actually recently been paying close attention to the test being run, and with Anti-bufferbloat enabled. During the upload side of the testing, the latency average increases, spikes a lot more often, and higher. Which when you think about it.. With me having my limit's set to 25%, I can only use a max of 7.5-7.75mbps of upload bandwidth. I actually get 30-32mbps by my provider. So overall, latency, and ping spikes should stay very low, and consistent. Currently that isn't the case, and I feel whatever the issue is, it's router side. Because testing without it, latency, and spikes, are much less. This is while maxing out my upload at 30-32mbps, which would be the time for my latency to be at its highest, and spike the most. However that isn't the case. So at this point in time, I feel using "Anti-Bufferbloat" is a waste, and isn't doing exactly what it's designed to do. Here's a test done without Anti-Bufferbloat: Here's a test done with Anti-Bufferbloat, with my limits set at 25% of my total bandwidth: As you see Anti-Bufferbloat isn't exactly making things better. Now I will show you the "Grades" graph the test gives you for each test. Without Anti-Bufferbloat: With Anti-Bufferbloat: Overall this isn't what I would consider result's you should be seeing with a feature that's considered to help with this. These result's, show it isn't helping at all, only making it worst. Finally here's direct links to both of these test's, for the ones who are curious... I have nothing to hide, and so I will provide the links to show you all, nothing is being doctored on my end. I want to see what the netduma guys have to say about this, and why it's happening. Because currently.. This isn't helping, and I'm better off not using "Anti-Bufferbloat". Without Anti-Bufferbloat test link: https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/31992941#share With Anti-Bufferbloat test link: https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/31993024#share
  7. lilstone87

    traffic priotization

    Fraser, using this option even for the PS4 works. I don't own a xbox, but I would bet using the "Unreal Engine" option will work to prioritize for all systems. As I think they use the same ports, or whatever is used within that option, for both consoles, and PC.
  8. Yeah whenever my router is rebooted, I have to re-setup admin/password settings, wifi settings, and such. So pretty much what I would consider a factory reset type state.
  9. Fraser, Remember a little while back, I mentioned this happen to me as well. Actually happen while we were all sleeping, so never found out what exactly triggered it to happen. Also I want to mention, every time the router is rebooted, or powered off. When it comes back online, I'm greeted with having to go thru the setup process once again. As if the router has been factory reset. This is something I find annoying, and shouldn't happen. So please get with the dev's on this, and try to get this resolved. I had to deal with this over the weekend, a couple times as I moved the router to another location, and after powering the device back on, or simply hitting the reboot button within the gui, once the router was back online, I had to go thru the setup wizard again.
  10. lilstone87

    Anti bufferbloat issue

    Fraser, wasn't some people having issue with HTTP vs HTTPS being selected when testing? I thought we went over this in another thread a little while back...
  11. That's the reason I prefer more, and more games being added. Over stuff like "DumaOS Classified Games" and "Game consoles" options. As them options have many marked port's for gaming. So I prefer if I'm playing say call of duty. Adding my console, and selecting the current game I'm actively playing, which in this case would be "COD". I say this as an example as well.... As there currently isn't any "COD/Call of Duty" option to select. Also this shouldn't be to hard for you guys to do, and add for games. The tricky part is getting access to the games, but once you guys have the games in hand. It will be simple as loading these games up, and playing a couple matches. While grabbing data, seeing what ports are being used, and passing active data while in a match. On top of that, most games use very little data for online matches. So not to hard to see port "5665" is actively passing data at a rate of maybe 5-10KB's max. Again port 5665 was just an example I was using. I just hope you guys make a bigger list of at least the more popular games, so people can select just the game they're playing if they choose to. Finally I'm not saying "all in one" options like "DumaOS Classified Games" is bad with it's DPI engine. I just know there can be false positives at times, in which traffic that isn't actually gaming data, is being given high priority access. I know it's likely with something like "DumaOS Classified Games" with the DPI engine involved. It could be classifying high priority traffic based off the ip address the data is being passed to. As it's a known game server, or such. Like the way Geo-Filter works. But that system isn't perfect by any means. However... finding the port's used for each game while in a match, can eliminate a lot of mistakes from happening. Hell a lot of the more popular games, they will post/release the ports they use for gaming traffic, and if they don't list them. As I mentioned above, it isn't to hard to collect data while in a game to find the ports being used.
  12. Fraser, Another thing that needs to be added/modified, is "games console" option. Because once you select it, and the device is added. It shows under service "Xbox". Which can/will be confusing to certain people. As they add this to their playstation, and they likely thinking "What the hell...". If anything there should be at least two "game console" options, PS4/Xbox. I dunno if/how much a demand there's for the Switch, and such.
  13. Personally I would like them to add the most popular games to the list, so they can be selected, over having a "all for one" option, like the DumaOS Classified Games option. As that's having a lot of different ports marked as gaming ports. Next thing you know someone is using a non gaming app, and it just happens to be using the same port as one of the "Marked" gaming ports. Now suddenly wrong traffic is being classified as gaming packets. It a much better option to have people add the current games they're playing, then it minimizes the amount of ports marked for gaming at one time. I have been playing mostly Fortnite myself, and so I have the DumaOS Classified Games option disabled. I added my PS4, with the "Unreal Engine" selected. As that's what Fortnite uses, it's the same as PUBG. So now only when I join a battle royale match, that's the only time my high priority traffic light turns red. I will say I'm a bit surprised the Netduma guys don't have a "COD" option to use. As Call of Duty is still a popular game to a lot of people. So having a option for it I think is only right. I'm sure they can do some testing with PS4, Xbox, and PC. To see what ports it actively uses while matches are in play, and take them ports, and make it into one option aka "Call of Duty" or "COD".
  14. lilstone87

    Help with Xr500

    Iain, This is something we will have to disagree on. Because it's like me trying to tell you how halo works... Would be stupid on my part. Not calling you stupid either. Just saying the COD devs built the networking of their multiplayer with a lag comp system in place, and it does have negative affects on players with better connections. When I say this.. I'm strictly talking COD only. I play fortnite now, and I have played BF, and TF2 a good amount in the past. None of them games have the connection type issues COD does. I don't have a single doubt in my body, it's something(lag comp likely) within their network coding, and it has been there several years now. I have zero reasons to talk bad about COD, without a good reason. I have paid for every COD since COD4, spent a lot of money on it over the years. Between what I mentioned above, and this jump to jetpacks, and now back to WW2 boots on the ground with terrible map designs. I don't play it anymore. Last two years, I purchased COD. IW i played for maybe 2 weeks, stopped playing it. This year WW2 played for a solid 2-3 days, haven't touched since. As even with being back to BoTG, people camp there asses off, as if we're fighting a real war. I honestly wish COD would get rid of stats for multiplayer. Because to many kids are playing for stats, rather then fun. To many kids now a days think a 2-3K/D makes them a good player. However camping for every kill to get to that kind of a K/D, is pathetic, and any player can do that. COD isn't a run, and gun shooter anymore. Which makes it no longer enjoyable for me to play, and i know many others feel the same way. COD is dying for this reason. WW2 really put the icing on the cake for me, for COD. As the map designs for most of the game, every corner they have a box/barrel that sits shoulder high. So only your head sticks over it, and so players can head glitch these objects, and not have to move. Promoting camping by map design, that's COD for you now... Simply pathetic.