now seems work even with the cache simple queues at the bottom of list.

im trying with v6.0 now, maybe they change the order of execution.

arrrgh, you're marking the traffic, that's why dynamic queues do not catch it

anyway, if somebody do the same without marking, it will affect him...

actuallly not work as should do :/

use both queues at same time so the hotspot queue still limit the final bandwith of the client.


any way to avoid use both queues ? just the first with priority or other kind of order it ?

system restart every 1 hour.....


..
..
..

Send the support file generated when reboot happens to support ppl, they will give you details about it.

What would then need to change with a current v5 Queue tree setup when upgrading to v6? As there is only a global queue do you specify a parent queue for up and download bandwidth and set the child queues to their specific parent as marked in the mangle (post & prerouting for in and outbound traffic) I tried this and it works but the router (TILE) crashes every hour also. What am I missing?

So there is no more need to remember who will get traffic first - simple queues or queues in "Global" queue tree. Now traffic can be captured by both separately and independently.

So there is no more need to remember who will get traffic first - simple queues or queues in "Global" queue tree. Now traffic can be captured by both separately and independently.

yep, but you need to remember: first queue tree, then simple queues

Can anyone explain to me what's the meaning of the priority parameter in Simple Queues. I do understand what this parameters does when specified on the child queues in a Queue Tree, but that does not quite seem to apply to Simple Queues... Or does it? Any thoughts?

as far as I (I hope) can (still) understand, Simple Queue with parent=none creates up to three hidden queues of queue tree with parent=global (well, according to this topic, simple queues are now completely separated from queue tree, so let's call it one more queue tree with the name 'global-2' )

Best Answer

I think you should add thumbs up icons for most appropriate answer.

no, no problem at all with that, just need get used to think it other way.

anyway is working now with simple queues.

my last question is about the priority in queue list, i mean, the dynamic ones always are in top of the list.

how works the execution order in simple queue list? by order list? or by priority?

why dont you use this script to move the desired queue to top
script :

/queue simple print
/queue simple move [find name="queue name"] 0


schedule it to run every 2 sec

Can someone please clarify this for me. I'm trialing ROS 6.x and got confused regarding QoS.

I was running double QoS on 5.x
- mangle prerouting + global-in to prioritise traffic
- mangle forwarding + global-out for PCQ to give each client equal bw
Just like found on many MT presentations and documents..

Now in 6.x there's no global-in/out but only 'global'.
The first post here suggests that double QoS can be achieved by combining simple queues and qtree.
That's fine, but isn't a packet in v6 now pulled though 'global' queue twice? Can't I reuse the principle from before v6 by using only 'global' for both prioritising and shaping?

If a packet gets marked differently before each pass through 'global', isn't that the same as if going first through 'global-in' and then 'global-out'?

Am I missing something?

Thanks!

isn't a packet in v6 now pulled though 'global' queue twice?

no, it's not

Can someone please clarify this for me. I'm trialing ROS 6.x and got confused regarding QoS.

I was running double QoS on 5.x
- mangle prerouting + global-in to prioritise traffic
- mangle forwarding + global-out for PCQ to give each client equal bw
Just like found on many MT presentations and documents..

Now in 6.x there's no global-in/out but only 'global'.
The first post here suggests that double QoS can be achieved by combining simple queues and qtree.
That's fine, but isn't a packet in v6 now pulled though 'global' queue twice? Can't I reuse the principle from before v6 by using only 'global' for both prioritising and shaping?

If a packet gets marked differently before each pass through 'global', isn't that the same as if going first through 'global-in' and then 'global-out'?

Am I missing something?

Thanks!

I exactly have a scenario like this.
with Ros 6 is not possible anymore, packet pass through first in queue tree (with parent on global) then in simple queue.
First i used to do qos in 2 independent stages, in prerouting and in postrouting. now its impossible.
The way you can achieve the same results is doing same marks in prerouting and make a simple queue for any IP you have to shape.
Since simple queue are quite faster the only problem is write the configuration.

Hello everybody.
I have a question that may help many people.
I´m working with RouterOS 3.xx and I have strong difficulty for implement QOS (double WAN) in version 6.xx. So I'll describe a small scene and would like to give a example of how would be only one rule in each row for understain the new concept table.

I'll use an example of a RB450G to facilitate understanding of the concepts of many users.

Interface Ether 1 = WAN-A ( Dedicated 1 IP Link FULL ) - ( Bandwidth 5mb /5mb ) <-Default Route.
Interface Ether 2 = WAN-B ( Link ADSL with 1 Dynamic IP PPPoE ) - ( Bandwidth 30mb / 3mb ) <-Second Link FailOver.
Interface Ether 3, 4 , 5 = (LAN Bridged and NATed).

I have two situations :
1 - All users are in the same group (shre range internal ips bridged) .
2 - All share the same internet link WAN-A with 5 MB FULL upload / download and WAN-B with 30mb(dw) e 3mb(up).
3 - There fail over WAN links between WAN-A and B. If the WAN-A goes down, the router will take navigate with WAN-B.
4 - I have just Queue HTB -Tree for all links but bandwidth speeds are different.

In this situation , anyone can give an example of how to create queue-three HTB in the mangle table for the WAN-A ( 5mb/5mb ) and WAN-B ( 30mb /3mb ), to control the upload and download traffic of these two interfaces and also in the ranks of queue table.

It is important to say. I have 8 HTB priorities example :
1 = DNS , ICMP ,other .
2 = SIP
3,4,5,6,7,8 = other...

I believe that answer of this example can help a lot of people, including after on Wiki.

Thank you all.

I believe that no one can answer this question. Not even in training is possible for someone to answer this question clearly.
Thnx

So what is the question exactly and why didn't you make a new thread since this one is for v6?

QoS for Dual-Wan should control the max tx and rx of each WAN.

I don't have time to pay more attention to this at the moment so good luck from me.

Regards.

this explains a lot regarding new QoS - how and where
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=72736

Can someone please clarify this for me. I'm trialing ROS 6.x and got confused regarding QoS.

I was running double QoS on 5.x
- mangle prerouting + global-in to prioritise traffic
- mangle forwarding + global-out for PCQ to give each client equal bw
Just like found on many MT presentations and documents..

Now in 6.x there's no global-in/out but only 'global'.
The first post here suggests that double QoS can be achieved by combining simple queues and qtree.
That's fine, but isn't a packet in v6 now pulled though 'global' queue twice? Can't I reuse the principle from before v6 by using only 'global' for both prioritising and shaping?

If a packet gets marked differently before each pass through 'global', isn't that the same as if going first through 'global-in' and then 'global-out'?

I have the same problem with 6.7, I use global-in to prioritise traffic and global-out for PCQ to give each client equal bw
I upgraded my MT to 6.7 but the double qos doesn't work well and I had to reverted to 5.26
I had tried use dynamic simple queue + queue tree but it doesn't work well when clients are watching video

when can we expect that this will be improved?

In my experience such problems are due to performance limitations in the design but mostly configuration issues.

I believe RouterOS is quite the miracle already. "QoS" code have been recently improved.

You may post your specific configuration in a separate thread if you are comfortable with some configuration disclosure. Someone from the forums should be able to point out one or two things.

Regards.

Hello Guru,

You can give only one mangle exemple for the two tables (double WAN with QOS HTB) in version 6.7 ?

Interface Ether 1 = WAN-A ( IP-1 10.10.10.10 ) <-Default Route.
Interface Ether 2 = WAN-B ( IP-2 20.20.20.20 ) <-Second Link (With LOAD BALANCE WEB CONN PORT 80)
Interface Ether 3, 4 , 5 = (LAN Bridged and NATed).

I need after all mangle marked set those on QOS HTB with exemples to upload e download.

You can exemplify ?

Thank you very much.

You can give only one mangle exemple for the two tables (double WAN with QOS HTB) in version 6.7 ?

Interface Ether 1 = WAN-A ( IP-1 10.10.10.10 ) <-Default Route.
Interface Ether 2 = WAN-B ( IP-2 20.20.20.20 ) <-Second Link (With LOAD BALANCE WEB CONN PORT 80)
Interface Ether 3, 4 , 5 = (LAN Bridged and NATed).

I need after all mangle marked set those on QOS HTB with exemples to upload e download. You can exemplify?

Maybe my configuration can help you to resolve this problem:

ros code

#================================================
# For RB750GL and ROS v6.x
# WAN connect to Internet:
#  - eth1-ISP1 from ISP1 (FE:Down-100Mbps/Up-100Mbps/static IP)
#  - eth1-ISP2 from ISP2 (DOCSIS3.0>GE:Down-150Mbps/Up-5Mbps/dynamic IP)
# LAN switch:
# - eth3-LAN-master
# - eth4-LAN-slave
# - eth5-LAN-slave
# Address List:
# - LAN - define IP ranges for Local network
# - to-ISP1 - Addresses accessible through ISP1
# - to-ISP2 - Addresses accessible through ISP2
#================================================
/ip firewall mangle
add chain=prerouting action=jump jump-target=in-ISP1 in-interface=eth1-ISP1 \
    comment="Trafic incoming ISP1"
add chain=prerouting action=jump jump-target=in-ISP2 in-interface=eth2-ISP2 \
    comment="Trafic incoming ISP2"
add chain=prerouting action=jump jump-target=connect-new connection-state=new \
    comment="Call mark 'new-connection' for prerouting"
add chain=prerouting action=jump jump-target=connect-related connection-state=related \
    comment="Call mark 'related-connection' for prerouting"
add chain=output action=jump jump-target=connect-new connection-state=new \
    comment="Call mark 'new-connection' for output"
add chain=output action=jump jump-target=connect-related connection-state=related \
    comment="Call mark 'related-connection' for output"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:balans-ISP1 connection-mark=C:balans-ISP1 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing balanced ISP1"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:balans-ISP2 connection-mark=C:balans-ISP2 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing balanced ISP2"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:Admin \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing outgoing-Admin packets to ISP1"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:WebSurf \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing outgoing-WebSurf packets to ISP1"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:static-ISP1 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet statically outgoing ISP1"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP2 connection-mark=C:static-ISP2 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet statically outgoing ISP2"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing Admin-packet returning to ISP1 from LAN"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP2 connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing Admin-packet returning to ISP2 from LAN"
add chain=output action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing Admin-packet returning to ISP1 from ROS"
add chain=output action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP2 connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing Admin-packet returning to ISP2 from ROS"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:in-ISP1 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet returning to ISP1 from LAN"
add chain=prerouting action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP2 connection-mark=C:in-ISP2 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet returning to ISP2 from LAN"
add chain=output action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP1 connection-mark=C:in-ISP1 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet returning to ISP1 from ROS"
add chain=output action=mark-routing new-routing-mark=R:static-ISP2 connection-mark=C:in-ISP2 \
    passthrough=no comment="Routing packet returning to ISP2 from ROS"
add chain=in-ISP1 connection-mark=!no-mark comment="Accept marked connection incoming ISP1"
add chain=in-ISP1 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin connection-state=new \
    protocol=tcp dst-port=22,3389,8291 \
    passthrough=no comment="New Admin (SSH/RDP/WinBox) connection incoming ISP1" 
add chain=in-ISP1 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP1 connection-state=new \
    passthrough=no comment="New connection incoming ISP1" \
add chain=in-ISP1 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP1 connection-state=related \
    passthrough=no comment="Related connection incoming ISP1" \
add chain=in-ISP2 connection-mark=!no-mark comment="Accept marked connection incoming ISP2"
add chain=in-ISP2 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin connection-state=new \
    protocol=tcp dst-port=22,3389,8291 \
    passthrough=no comment="New Admin (SSH/RDP/WinBox) connection incoming ISP2" 
add chain=in-ISP2 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP2 connection-state=new \
    passthrough=no comment="New connection incoming ISP2"
add chain=in-ISP2 action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:in-ISP2 connection-state=related \
    passthrough=no comment="Related connection incoming ISP2"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:LAN-ROS src-address-list=LAN dst-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="New connection from LAN to ROS"
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:LAN-ROS src-address-list=LAN dst-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Related connection from LAN to ROS"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:ROS-LAN src-address-type=local dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="New connection from ROS to LAN"
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:ROS-LAN src-address-type=local dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Related connection from ROS to LAN"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:ROS-WAN src-address-type=local dst-address-list=!LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="New connection from ROS to WAN"
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:ROS-WAN src-address-type=local dst-address-list=!LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Related connection from ROS to WAN"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:Admin \
    src-address-list=LAN protocol=tcp dst-port=22,3389,8291 \
    comment="New connection Admin (SSH/RDP/WinBox) LAN>WAN"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:WebSurf \
    src-address-list=LAN protocol=tcp dst-port=80,443 \
    comment="New connection WebSurf (HTTP/HTTPS) LAN>WAN"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:static-ISP1 connection-mark=no-mark \
    dst-address-list=to-ISP1 src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="New connection LAN>AdrList:to-ISP1"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:static-ISP2 connection-mark=no-mark \
    dst-address-list=to-ISP2 src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="New connection LAN>AdrList:to-ISP2"
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:static-ISP1 connection-mark=no-mark \
    dst-address-list=to-ISP1 src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="Related connection LAN>AdrList:to-ISP1"
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:static-ISP2 connection-mark=no-mark \
    dst-address-list=to-ISP2 src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="Related connection LAN>AdrList:to-ISP2"
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:balans-ISP1 connection-mark=no-mark src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="New connection to WAN with balancing PCC-2/1" per-connection-classifier=both-addresses:2/0
add chain=connect-new action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:balans-ISP2 connection-mark=no-mark src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="New connection to WAN with balancing PCC-2/2" per-connection-classifier=both-addresses:2/1
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:balans-ISP1 connection-mark=no-mark src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="Related connection to WAN with balancing PCC-2/1" per-connection-classifier=both-addresses:2/0
add chain=connect-related action=mark-connection new-connection-mark=C:balans-ISP2 connection-mark=no-mark src-address-list=LAN \
    comment="Related connection to WAN with balancing PCC-2/2" per-connection-classifier=both-addresses:2/1
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:LAN-WAN-Admin_out connection-mark=C:Admin src-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out Admin LAN>WAN"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:LAN-WAN-Admin_in connection-mark=C:Admin dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in Admin LAN>WAN"
add chain=input action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP1-ROS-Admin_in connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin dst-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in Admin via ISP1>ROS"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP1-ROS-Admin_out connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin src-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out Admin via ISP1>ROS"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP1-LAN-Admin_in connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in Admin via ISP1>LAN"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP1-LAN-Admin_out connection-mark=C:in-ISP1-Admin src-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out Admin via ISP1>LAN"
add chain=input action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP2-ROS-Admin_in connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin dst-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in Admin via ISP2>ROS"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP2-ROS-Admin_out connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin src-address-type=local \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out Admin via ISP2>ROS"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP2-LAN-Admin_in connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in Admin via ISP2>LAN"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:ISP2-LAN-Admin_out connection-mark=C:in-ISP2-Admin src-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out Admin via ISP2>LAN"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:LAN-WAN-WebSurf_out connection-mark=C:WebSurf src-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-out WebSurf LAN>WAN"
add chain=postrouting action=mark-packet new-packet-mark=P:LAN-WAN-WebSurf_in connection-mark=C:WebSurf dst-address-list=LAN \
    passthrough=no comment="Packet-in WebSurf LAN>WAN"

Please add the parameter "address-list" for the simple queue in ROS v6 ! it is not a dificult, but very usefull for many users
thanks ;p

+1 for that!

Example of a hotspot configuration:
- Dual wan (ISP1, ISP2).
- PCC load balancing based on src-address. This means, I'm load balancing users, not the traffic.
- Traffic prioritization with mangle rules and queue tree.
- Per user limitation in Simple Queues.

With the dual wan + automated load balancing, the user limiting in IP-> Hotspot-> User profiles is useless. I can't use the parent option (Hotspot-> User Profile-> Queue-> Parent Queue). I don't know who will be the parent, because of the automated load balancing.
The mangle rules are also not an option. They are already reserved for traffic prioritization and PCC.

So, I configured the per user limitation with Simple Queues. The method is PCQ. The limitation is based on interfaces.
Example1:
All users going from LAN to ISP1 will be put in the Simple PCQ Queue1.
All users going from LAN to ISP2 will be put in the Simple PCQ Queue2.

I need to create 2 PCQ rules, because I have 2 ISPs. The PCQ will not function properly if I have not specified the total upload/download limit for each ISP.

With PCQ rules I can only specify 1 user limit for all my users. Let's say, this is 1M upload/5M download. PCQ will give each user maximum 1M upload / 5M download. All users are equal. I can't give some users 2M upload / 10M download.

The address-list option in Simple Queues would solve this problem. ROS gives me in IP-> Hotspot -> User profiles the option to assign users to a dynamic address list.

Example2:
I would create 2 hotspot user profiles. One profile for 1M/5M user limit, the other for 2M/10M user limit. I would not specify the limits in these profiles. They are for my configuration useless. I would create them, in order to create 2 dynamic address lists. For each profile 1 address list.

In the Simple Queues I would create 4 PCQ rules + 2 parent rules.
4 PCQ rules, because I have automated load balancing. I don't know to which ISP every user has been assigned. Remember, ROS reads the Simple Queue rules from top to bottom. Like the firewall rules.
In the previous example a PCQ rule was also the parent, because there was only 1 rule per interface. In this example there are 2 rules per interface. That is why we now need separate parent rules.

Parent rule1 - ISP1
1.a Give users from address-list1 and going to ISP1 1M/5M user limit.
1.b Give users from address-list2 and going to ISP1 2M/10M user limit.
Parent rule2 - ISP2
2.a Give users from address-list1 and going to ISP2 1M/5M user limit.
2.b Give users from address-list2 and going to ISP2 2M/10M user limit.

A user who pays for 2M upload / 10M download authenticates. His ip address would be put in the dynamic address-list2. Load balancing puts him to, let’s say, ISP1. ROS would read this information and put him in the appropriate rule.
When he logs off, his dynamic ip address would be removed from the address list. Next time he logs in, maybe the PCC will put him to ISP2. No problem. For that reason I created 4 PCQ rules.

With this option, limiting users in Simple Queues would be based on usernames, not on ip addresses. Usernames are always the same. Ip addresses change. When a user connects with laptop, username is the same. Ip address is, example, "192.168.20.1". When he connects with the smartphone, username is again the same, ip address is not (example: 192.168.20.42). The dynamic ip addresses of this user would be always put in the same address list, because the address list is directly connected with the hotspot user profile.