Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > Traffic shaping at home on an ADSL connection

Reply
Thread Tools

Traffic shaping at home on an ADSL connection

 
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-13-2005
Hi,

I'd like to purchase a router with which to do traffic shaping on my ADSL
connection at home. So far I'm narrowing it down to a Cisco 1751 +
WIC-1ADSL.

Questions:
1) Is there a better/cheaper option than the one above? Should I be looking
at a 1721, 1701 or something else?
2) Can one specify the traffic shaping policies on the ADSL interface, the
Ethernet interface, or either?
3) What's the preferred way to treat HTTP traffic (ie. web browsing) with
the highest priority? I am just reading about NBAR.


Current setup:
A number of PCs connected via a non-Cisco switch to a non-Cisco router.

Clearly, whenever I am streaming video or downloading large files, web
browsing and email traffic suffers. Subsequently, I would like to upgrade my
equipment to allow traffic shaping whereby web browsing, email and chat
would get highest priority. This is to avoid the various time out messages
one gets at the moment whilst streaming data or downloading large files.

I'd appreciate if someone could point me in the right direction. Cisco or
other links are welcome

Thanks,
Voitec


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-13-2005
With regard to Question 1, just adding to my router alternatives: Cisco 837.
Cheapest option but will it do the job?


"Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:8o0he.1621$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to purchase a router with which to do traffic shaping on my ADSL
> connection at home. So far I'm narrowing it down to a Cisco 1751 +
> WIC-1ADSL.
>
> Questions:
> 1) Is there a better/cheaper option than the one above? Should I be

looking
> at a 1721, 1701 or something else?
> 2) Can one specify the traffic shaping policies on the ADSL interface, the
> Ethernet interface, or either?
> 3) What's the preferred way to treat HTTP traffic (ie. web browsing) with
> the highest priority? I am just reading about NBAR.
>
>
> Current setup:
> A number of PCs connected via a non-Cisco switch to a non-Cisco router.
>
> Clearly, whenever I am streaming video or downloading large files, web
> browsing and email traffic suffers. Subsequently, I would like to upgrade

my
> equipment to allow traffic shaping whereby web browsing, email and chat
> would get highest priority. This is to avoid the various time out messages
> one gets at the moment whilst streaming data or downloading large files.
>
> I'd appreciate if someone could point me in the right direction. Cisco or
> other links are welcome
>
> Thanks,
> Voitec
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
X--Eliminator
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-13-2005
You can determine whether traffic shaping is supported by researching
the IOS image & platform on the Cisco website. A 1720 is fine with a
WIC-1ADSL with 16MB flash/48MB DRAM, but the cost of those items
purchased used ($500+) would far exceed the cost of a used 837 on eBay
for around ($350). I think that you can also do traffic shaping on and
827/827-4v with a late 12.3/12.4 IOS.

It also depends what other functionality you want from your IOS
feature set & how much $ you want to spend.
==============================================
On Fri, 13 May 2005 11:59:56 GMT, "Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>With regard to Question 1, just adding to my router alternatives: Cisco 837.
>Cheapest option but will it do the job?
>
>
>"Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:8o0he.1621$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to purchase a router with which to do traffic shaping on my ADSL
>> connection at home. So far I'm narrowing it down to a Cisco 1751 +
>> WIC-1ADSL.
>>
>> Questions:
>> 1) Is there a better/cheaper option than the one above? Should I be

>looking
>> at a 1721, 1701 or something else?
>> 2) Can one specify the traffic shaping policies on the ADSL interface, the
>> Ethernet interface, or either?
>> 3) What's the preferred way to treat HTTP traffic (ie. web browsing) with
>> the highest priority? I am just reading about NBAR.
>>
>>
>> Current setup:
>> A number of PCs connected via a non-Cisco switch to a non-Cisco router.
>>
>> Clearly, whenever I am streaming video or downloading large files, web
>> browsing and email traffic suffers. Subsequently, I would like to upgrade

>my
>> equipment to allow traffic shaping whereby web browsing, email and chat
>> would get highest priority. This is to avoid the various time out messages
>> one gets at the moment whilst streaming data or downloading large files.
>>
>> I'd appreciate if someone could point me in the right direction. Cisco or
>> other links are welcome
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Voitec
>>
>>

>


 
Reply With Quote
 
stephen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-14-2005
"Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:0F0he.1639$(E-Mail Removed)...
> With regard to Question 1, just adding to my router alternatives: Cisco

837.
> Cheapest option but will it do the job?
>
>
> "Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:8o0he.1621$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to purchase a router with which to do traffic shaping on my

ADSL
> > connection at home. So far I'm narrowing it down to a Cisco 1751 +
> > WIC-1ADSL.
> >
> > Questions:
> > 1) Is there a better/cheaper option than the one above? Should I be

> looking


have a look at the new 1801 - $1000 list bundle including ADSL (and ISDN
backup if you want that) - no embedded Voip interfaces - which is the only
reason you would have gone for 1751 over a 1721.

www.cisco.com/go/isr

> > at a 1721, 1701 or something else?
> > 2) Can one specify the traffic shaping policies on the ADSL interface,

the
> > Ethernet interface, or either?


Yes
> > 3) What's the preferred way to treat HTTP traffic (ie. web browsing)

with
> > the highest priority? I am just reading about NBAR.
> >


usually you dont - HTTP is well behaved compared to many protocols, so
voice, streaming and various others tend to be given higher priority.
> >
> > Current setup:
> > A number of PCs connected via a non-Cisco switch to a non-Cisco router.
> >
> > Clearly, whenever I am streaming video or downloading large files, web
> > browsing and email traffic suffers. Subsequently, I would like to

upgrade
> my
> > equipment to allow traffic shaping whereby web browsing, email and chat
> > would get highest priority. This is to avoid the various time out

messages
> > one gets at the moment whilst streaming data or downloading large files.


The big problem here is that shaping / priority only works if your router
can control which packets get sent into the bottleneck on a path

with an Internet feed (which is what this sounds like), you cannot apply
priority to the stuff you get sent by your ISP - they would have to do that.
> >
> > I'd appreciate if someone could point me in the right direction. Cisco

or
> > other links are welcome
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Voitec

--
Regards

Stephen Hope - return address needs fewer xxs


 
Reply With Quote
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2005
Thank you both.

It looks like I may settle for the 837 as I don't really need any additional
bells and whistles offerred by the other models and cost is the main factor
here since this is only a router for home use. That makes the 1800s bit too
pricey for my wallet

I understand that in a corporate environment one would want to prioritise
delay sensitive traffic such as voice but in my home environment where the
majority of traffic is related to large data transfers and email and http, I
need to make http #1 to counteract the link saturation that occurs at times
of large file movements. This is the main reason why I need a router that is
QoS-capable.

With regard to an internet connection, why would I not be able to prioritise
the traffic entering my LAN? Does that mean that I would have to have 2
routers connected in series to one another before splitting the feed to my
local PCs? Seems a bit of an overkill...


"stephen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:scphe.4873$(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:0F0he.1639$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> With regard to Question 1, just adding to my router alternatives: Cisco

> 837.
>> Cheapest option but will it do the job?
>>
>>
>> "Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:8o0he.1621$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'd like to purchase a router with which to do traffic shaping on my

> ADSL
>> > connection at home. So far I'm narrowing it down to a Cisco 1751 +
>> > WIC-1ADSL.
>> >
>> > Questions:
>> > 1) Is there a better/cheaper option than the one above? Should I be

>> looking

>
> have a look at the new 1801 - $1000 list bundle including ADSL (and ISDN
> backup if you want that) - no embedded Voip interfaces - which is the only
> reason you would have gone for 1751 over a 1721.
>
> www.cisco.com/go/isr
>
>> > at a 1721, 1701 or something else?
>> > 2) Can one specify the traffic shaping policies on the ADSL interface,

> the
>> > Ethernet interface, or either?

>
> Yes
>> > 3) What's the preferred way to treat HTTP traffic (ie. web browsing)

> with
>> > the highest priority? I am just reading about NBAR.
>> >

>
> usually you dont - HTTP is well behaved compared to many protocols, so
> voice, streaming and various others tend to be given higher priority.
>> >
>> > Current setup:
>> > A number of PCs connected via a non-Cisco switch to a non-Cisco router.
>> >
>> > Clearly, whenever I am streaming video or downloading large files, web
>> > browsing and email traffic suffers. Subsequently, I would like to

> upgrade
>> my
>> > equipment to allow traffic shaping whereby web browsing, email and chat
>> > would get highest priority. This is to avoid the various time out

> messages
>> > one gets at the moment whilst streaming data or downloading large
>> > files.

>
> The big problem here is that shaping / priority only works if your router
> can control which packets get sent into the bottleneck on a path
>
> with an Internet feed (which is what this sounds like), you cannot apply
> priority to the stuff you get sent by your ISP - they would have to do
> that.
>> >
>> > I'd appreciate if someone could point me in the right direction. Cisco

> or
>> > other links are welcome
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Voitec

> --
> Regards
>
> Stephen Hope - return address needs fewer xxs
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Jo Reed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2005
it's not what's entering your lan that's the problem, it's what the ISP
pushes down your pipe. You have no control over what they push.

> With regard to an internet connection, why would I not be able to
> prioritise the traffic entering my LAN? Does that mean that I would have
> to have 2 routers connected in series to one another before splitting the
> feed to my local PCs? Seems a bit of an overkill...



 
Reply With Quote
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2005
I don't follow. How can an ISP be pushing something down my pipe that I did
not request? If I'm downloading files and requesting web pages what else is
there in the equation?

The bottom line is: I want to give HTTP traffic the top priority
irrespective if what's entering or exiting my LAN.



"Jo Reed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:wCjie.9501$(E-Mail Removed)...
> it's not what's entering your lan that's the problem, it's what the ISP
> pushes down your pipe. You have no control over what they push.
>
> > With regard to an internet connection, why would I not be able to
> > prioritise the traffic entering my LAN? Does that mean that I would have
> > to have 2 routers connected in series to one another before splitting

the
> > feed to my local PCs? Seems a bit of an overkill...

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2005
Ooops...typo...the latter should have read:
"...irrespective if it's entering or exiting my LAN."



"Voitec" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:eykie.6201$(E-Mail Removed)...
> I don't follow. How can an ISP be pushing something down my pipe that I

did
> not request? If I'm downloading files and requesting web pages what else

is
> there in the equation?
>
> The bottom line is: I want to give HTTP traffic the top priority
> irrespective if what's entering or exiting my LAN.
>
>
>
> "Jo Reed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:wCjie.9501$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > it's not what's entering your lan that's the problem, it's what the ISP
> > pushes down your pipe. You have no control over what they push.
> >
> > > With regard to an internet connection, why would I not be able to
> > > prioritise the traffic entering my LAN? Does that mean that I would

have
> > > to have 2 routers connected in series to one another before splitting

> the
> > > feed to my local PCs? Seems a bit of an overkill...

> >
> >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
anybody43@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2005
The "bottom line" is you can't control what
enters your link. Send me your IP address
and I can send you unsolicited traffic. I can fake the
source address so that you don't even know the
origin of the traffic.

I bring up new internet connections from time to time
and unsolicited traffic to the address range usually appears
right away. I assume that the source is malicious code
loaded into millions of computers that are scanning the
whole address space looking for new machines to infect.

Even in the case where the traffic is requested by you
you cannot control to achieve effective traffic
shaping. A simple example is you request a file
download. You have no direct control of
how TCP manages the download.

That is interesting:- In principle, in the case of TCP,
it should be possible to regulate the receive window to
manage the network load. I have never heard of this being
done (but then I don't listen very hard.

With UDP though this control is not possible even in principle.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Voitec
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2005
Hmmm...this thread has taken a detour.

I agree that unsolicited traffic hits my router on a daily basis. However,
at any given time such traffic does not take up a noticeable amount of my
bandwidth. Hence, as far as I'm concerned, and for the purposes of my
original question, the traffic going across my internet connection is ONLY
traffic that I have requested.

So once again let me re-iterate what I am trying to achieve here:
1) If I do not perform any data downloads/transfers from PC #2 to the
internet and back, then PC #1 can browse web pages, send emails and do
whatever it likes. This is irrespective of whether there is any unsolicited
traffic going across my link or not. As such, for the purposes of the
exercise, bringing up the notion of me being unable to control what my ISP
sends me is irrelevant. Why? Because any unsolicited traffic that I may get
does not in any way have an impact on my ability to use PC #1 for the tasks
outlined above.

2) Once PC #2 starts performing heavy data transfers, the internet link gets
saturated and PC #1 starts having problems. Web pages take a very long time
to load or they just simply time out. Emails are unable to be sent or
received as the connection to an external mail server times out. If I stop
the data transfers on PC #2, PC #1 can once again perform its tasks.

So, in summary, there's only one reason why my link gets saturated and only
one reason why PC #1 cannot perform its normal web related tasks: heavy data
transfers on PC #2.

As such, I would like to go back to my original question, that is, what is
the best way to control MY traffic going across the internet connection so
that the web related tasks of PC #1 are unafffected?

Apologies if only now I am making myself clear on what I am trying to
achieve and thanks to everyone that has responded so far.

Thanks,
Voitec




<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> The "bottom line" is you can't control what
> enters your link. Send me your IP address
> and I can send you unsolicited traffic. I can fake the
> source address so that you don't even know the
> origin of the traffic.
>
> I bring up new internet connections from time to time
> and unsolicited traffic to the address range usually appears
> right away. I assume that the source is malicious code
> loaded into millions of computers that are scanning the
> whole address space looking for new machines to infect.
>
> Even in the case where the traffic is requested by you
> you cannot control to achieve effective traffic
> shaping. A simple example is you request a file
> download. You have no direct control of
> how TCP manages the download.
>
> That is interesting:- In principle, in the case of TCP,
> it should be possible to regulate the receive window to
> manage the network load. I have never heard of this being
> done (but then I don't listen very hard.
>
> With UDP though this control is not possible even in principle.
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Traffic-shaping traffic with precedence 2 tpdasilva@gmail.com Cisco 1 10-04-2011 06:32 AM
Azereus, Traffic shaping (avoid traffic shaping in with azereus) Nova NZ Computing 2 03-20-2006 09:03 AM
How does typical ISP traffic shaping/bandwidth limiting work ? Do ISP's allow bursty traffic per second ? Skybuck Flying Cisco 0 01-19-2006 08:50 PM
traffic-shaping limit ftp traffic Hypno999 Cisco 5 10-08-2005 07:25 AM
Frame Relay Traffic shaping, adaptive shaping Kenny D Cisco 1 12-05-2003 05:15 PM



Advertisments