Running Pfsense with fq_codel and works well for me too.
In the video it shows PFsense version 2.4.4, ADDITIONALLY SQM was not added to PFsense per-spec, this is why buffbloat.net the creators don’t list PFsense as support on their site, its not proper implementation of SQM.
PFsense DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR WAN SPEED VARIANCE!!?? In one of his videos i thought this one he shows in untangle where you put your lowest speeds from your ISP.
My Apologies! HERE: https://youtu.be/jJ5-dc9lax0?t=614
The top comment of the last video i had ou wat has a top Comment from Dave Taht, mentioning
Blockquote I have a couple points to make. 1) As one of the creators of sqm and fq_codel, I wish my own videos could garner 12000 hits!!! Can I get in an interview with one of you famous youtube folk to talk about bufferbloat? 2) It is very, very, very important to get the underlying network framing right for each access technology (be it dsl/ethernet/cable/wifi/etc). Most tutorials miss that entirely (and do most commercial implementations) - and it’s critically important for a perfectly debloated experience. 3) Recently we released sch_cake, which we hope is superior for htb + fq_codel in a multitude of ways (among other things, making getting framing right easy), and I do hope we see more folk porting it to their OSes and using that. 'round here we tend to write code and papers, and don’t get much gaming time in, but a good paper on what cake does that’s better than pure fq_codel is here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.07617.pdf
Finally IF PFsense DOES account for the speed variance by liek untangle does then the ONLY gripe is the always off. I have to agree though that seems like it would really suck to have to manually enable every service and port for the games and streaming services you use. It would be very optimized though!
AND IF we are going down the practicality rabbit hole, i’ve seen PFsense through multi decade veteran network engineers for a loop multiple times before. Where i’ve seen green horns spinup networks for small offices with untangle before.
I’m sure the REAL answer is some sort of config for PFsense that is some sort of low security deal like a normal home router w/ uPnP.
It sounds to me like you guys have made your mind up about PFsense, so you might as try it! sounds like for all you want it will work fine.
EDIT: A new video is up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjJW_s5gQ9Y
answers your question about naming in the first few minutes!
Like you say PFSense does not support full active que management, but with proper configuration it does well enough for what most users want.
I live in South Africa and that means I can only get shitty DSL where I live. PFSense and PRIQ + Codel active queue has been the best thing I have ever found. I’m pretty sure there are better software for specific use cases - but I use allot of features on PFSense that’s not supported on other router OS’s. At the end of the day users have to look at their use case and the best tool for them.
This is from a test from dslreports.com while having steam downloading and uploading files to google. drive.
how does it do when your ISP gets congest during peak periods?
I appreciate the info. I will test pfsense first and then crank up a untangle box and try it also.
The queue stays clear irrespective of ISP congestion.
I will say this - Untangle does react faster when network conditions changes abruptly. PFSense doesn’t fully support ACM and as a result jitter can be a bit higher at times. Codel still does what it is supposed to do - keep them queues short!