Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About azza10

  • Rank

Basic Info

  • DumaOS Routers Owned

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Jack - having a bit of trouble getting quoting working on my phone. If I understand you right regarding bandwidth allocation and shared excess, we're talking about different scenarios. In your scenario, your gaming devices might need 40% but are only allocated 15%. Nothing else is using bandwidth so their share is given to the gaming devices. All is well there. In my example I'm talking about 2 gaming device's trying to use, say, 70% of the connection each. Hold up, I know, this sounds silly and you're probably trying to come up with a way to explain that your router can't make bandwidth out of thin air - but bear with me. So, the router QoS then throttles both gaming devices back to 50% as that's the maximum can be given to both devices. Now I know this is likely a gross oversimplification of the QoS system, but my understanding is that the QoS systems main way of throttling services and devices is by dropping packets. So when your connection is being saturated by 2 gaming device's, you have a dilemma of which to prioritise - in other words, which to drop packets from. In my experience playing BF4 with my partner both running discord VoIP I often experience packet loss icons in game. Often when other devices are trying to do things, but also when we are both home alone. BF4 game data is manually prioritised for both devices. Port 3659, pulled from wireshark. Turning upload bandwidth to 50% on both gaming device's minimises this behavior, but it still sometimes happens. I would say this could just be an issue with the connection upstream but pingplotter tests don't indicate any issue under idle. Old routing gear didn't exhibit these symptoms either, even when the network was saturated. Ping would be high, but no packet drop icons + rubber banding I get with the XR500. My concept is that by allowing >50% bandwidth to more than one device it would allow more than one gamer a better experience on poor connections as QoS isnt dropping packets. I know it doesn't really solve any problem and the experience will still be poor, it's just a trade off. And it carries a ton of other pitfalls to go with it. However if this is in fact what's happening I think it would be good to document as you probably have a lot more people on very poor quality connections who are just tech savvy enough to want to buy the router but not enough to realize a router simply cannot overcome a shortage of bandwidth. Just the clarify, I'm not looking for this to be solved. If this is indeed what is going on, the solution is simple. Get better internet. I'm waiting out the NBN network here in aussieland at the moment and I think it will solve a lot of issues with this type of problem. Reading some old threads here though I see a lot of people describing symtoms that sound a lot what I've experienced and I just wonder if more thorough documentation on how certain features specifically work in conjunction with the rest of the router then a lot of the speculation like what I'm posting now could be avoided.
  2. I also have fairly low bandwidth available, around 10-16Mbit down and around 650Kbit up. Up being the main limitation. I haven't found anything that thoroughly explains how the QoS works in such a low bandwidth scenario. I can say, the sliders determines how much is available to the bulk traffic afaik. Any traffic that is covered under a traffic prioritization rule is not supposed to be throttled (to my understanding) and therefore can use the full bandwidth available. This is based on what the advertisement of the router touts. In my experience, the router DOES seem to throttle high priority traffic if you do not allocate enough bandwidth to the gaming device, even if it doesn't show as dropping packets in the QoS menu. This means in extreme low bandwidth cases, say you have 2 computers gaming and both need 400Kbit each on your 750Kbit connection, the router will throttle (drop packets) on both devices. It may be a case of me not having 100% of the games traffic prioritized, but that is another story. The router really needs a better system for working out what ports games are using. Other than that, this would be because the bandwidth being asked for by both devices exceeds 50% of the total bandwidth and as you cannot allow more than 50% to 2 devices this poses a problem. One suggestion to this problem would be to allow grouping of devices into QoS 'classes" where every device in the class is allowed to use up to the amount of bandwidth allocated to that class. I can see why this isn't the perfect solution as the user can potentially nullify QoS by allocating more than 100%. This could be partially mitigated by the router doing a simple calculation and telling the user when they have assigned more than 100% of bandwidth and explaining why they might not want to do this and why they might. But read on and I'll explain why I think this could be beneficial. For example, you have 4 computers, 2 general use and 2 gaming. In your gaming class you have the 2 gaming PC's with 70% allocated to that class. While typical usage might only be 40% for one gaming pc, you may get spikes to 70% for example. This means one gaming pc can use up to 70% in its class without hogging all the bandwidth from the general use devices. But then say you want to play on your other computer. Now currently with how QoS works, you would only have 30% bandwidth left to allocate between your other gaming PC and your 2 other devices. Definitely not enough to play your game on and leaves nothing for the other devices. With the class system, I would propose both gaming devices have 70% bandwidth available to them at all times, which I understand is 140% of available bandwidth and would cause latency issues when both devices need 70% each, but I would argue it is better in games to receive packets late than to experience packet drop. This still leaves the 2 other devices out of luck when both gaming pc's want all the bandwidth, however there is still 30% allocated for them for the times when the gaming pc's are using less than 100%. I have noticed on my home connection, when gaming other devices can sometimes experience delays and connection problems as there is commonly less than 1% available for each device after allocating 50% to the 2 gaming pc's. I understand when you run out of bandwidth it it simply not possible for QoS to fix it, but currently I feel like it can make it worse at times. Overall though the router has been better than the previous by far, and does quite a good job. As said, you can't overcome a bandwidth limitation with QoS. As an aussie I can only hope the NBN network rolls out soon with higher bandwidth and it is as good as promised.
  3. xlr, I've found if you reboot and the device isn't actually connected that will allow you to delete it. the router thinks it still is connected hence why you can't delete it.
  4. Ping assist is not "only for cod" it just works best in games that use peer to peer connections to establish game servers. For dedicated servers you need to look at which servers are nearby you and set up your geofilter to only allow that server. The reason you need to do this is there is a small pool of dedicated servers which may not be in the right distance or ping range for the router to put you in that server consistently. With peer to peer games you have every other person playing acting as a server. And so there is a much larger number of "servers" to connect to. It's got nothing to do with EA or the game, it's just the difference in network structure. The router fundamentally can't put you on a dedicated server that doesn't exist. You're setting up connection conditions that the router is not able to match for you. What admin is asking you to do is figure out where the server you want to connect to is and set your connection conditions in geofilter to match.
  5. I would try Netgears firmware recovery tool first, just to be sure.
  6. I've noticed blizzard launcher does trigger high priority when downloading using the dumaos classified games list. I have reported this error. I run uTorrent with no issues.
  7. I can see 2 main problems with both requests. I'm no programmer, but I have dabbled a bit. I can see useability issues with dynamic values displayed in a tool tip. For one, the bar you hover over is constantly moving. This means you might have the bar disappear from under the mouse and your tooltip would disappear. With the %, the values inputted are not network maximum speed, it should be your network average speed or even minimum speed if your connection is fairly stable. If your network is running below the values you have inputted into QoS then QoS doesn't work at all. The issue that arises here, if you have inputted your connection values into QoS properly you will get %'s over 100 when something maxxes out your connection. Consumers are stupid for the most part, and having a percentage would create a support nightmare (my network is only using x% on your router or my network is using 120% what gives?) An alternative I would suggest would be the ability to not have the graph dynamically adjust up and down with utilization, and instead has a set range. This would give a visualisation of percentage without confusing users with explicit values.
  8. Alternatively, set your port to something outside the typical ranges used by games. Do you have your Pc set as a game console in QoS as a workaround for the manual traffic rule error on xxx.32? Try disabling that as it covers a lot of ports. If it fixes it try setting utor to Port 15xxx as that's a range I don't see used by games often.
  9. So what happens if you set it to max range?
  10. Do you have your console/pc in filtering mode or spectating? Also some servers are required for authentication and are not able to be blocked.
  11. a temporary fix is to roll back to .22 til next update, that will make manual rules work again. you can also try setting your Pc with game console pri, be aware this can prioritise other traffic than game traffic.
  12. the error is a known issue and is supposed to be fixed in the next update. have you tried the basic league of legends classification?
  13. For myself, and I think for a large majority of people who are forward thinking enough to be cautious of where we enter CC details, that not having paypal isn't the end of a purchase. Consistent good reviews, good return policy, and warranty are a big factor. Couple that with, and I struggle to find the right description here, but a non shady looking website (we all know the style), goes a very long way to convincing me your product is worth the risk. An often overlooked area as well, negative reviews. If you can see a product or company has negative reviews that had a positive or neutral outcome for the consumer they will be much more likely to want to give it a go. Example: Product didn't perform to customers expectation, support attempted to sort the issue however the product just wasn't right for the customer. Item shipped back, refund issued. This is a good negative review. We the consumer can see your support is top tier, and wants the customer to be happy with their purchase. Another example: Product didn't perform as expected. Customer goes to support page where they have to fill in a premade form with options that don't describe their issue. They put it as other and do their best in 120 words or less to describe the issue in the box they're given. Days go by and you finally get a response. It's some canned BS telling you to reboot the product and uninstall, reinstall. You perform the instructed procedure to no effect. Support basically throw their hands up and close your ticket. This is a bad negative review. One I recently had regarding a firmware update issue. I had already done all the canned response instructions before contacting support and expected better. I paid $250 for this experience. End result, my device works currently however isn't recognised by the computer and cannot ever be updated again. Love the product, hate the support. Will not buy another product from them that uses their software interface ever again. I recently had an experience where I bought from an unknown to me company and had to provide credit card details. The experience was in my opinion, exemplary. I received emails at each step of the transaction, order received, payment processed, item in stock at warehouse, order dispatched. I even got a personal phone call from a support staff member just to let me know that they had received my order and it was expected to be shipped the next day. Before I even got the phone call, the consistent communication had already won me. The item arrived less than a week from ordering. This order was worth $36. $36, with free shipping. You can bet your bottom dollar who I'm going to next time I need a product they sell. TL;DR If as a company your goal is to provide a product that you support and endorse, customers will see this and support you. If your goal is make as much money as possible while delivering the least you can and still make sales, you may succeed financially but don't expect long term customers.
  14. I think this would run into technical limitations with RAM and storage, unless you were to plug a flash drive in and they figured out a way to let you log to an external storage device. I agree that a little bit longer window for usage stats would be nice though. Maybe the window could be extended to show 5 minutes of usage?
  • Create New...