DDWRT per user bandwidth limiting

[mzaur]

I have a WHR HP G300N with latest version of Buffalo DDWRT. I'm tryinig to get the QoS per user bandwidth limiting working. It doesn't seem to. I can limit bandwidth for everyone by using the top settings in QoS, which works,  but when I try using per user limits at the bottom and run speedtests, I am getting full speed with no limiting. Does this feature not work?

[soggy]

Bummer.  I just ordered a WHR-HP-G300N hoping the preloaded DD-WRT would let me do just that.  I'm dismayed to see that you had no luck, and furthermore that you haven't been able to get any response here in seven weeks.  My kids saturate our DSL watching video and then it takes me forever just to check my email.  I was hoping I could give my IP, you know, god-like priority, and give their computers a priority setting of "Termite".  Is there a termite level?  There should be, just for my kids.  It should deliver one bit per second.

[osocoloso]

You can limit bandwith by mac address, that will allow you to specify actual bandwith limits for the individual devices.  I never tried limits per user, so I can't vouch for that, but I did try by mac address and it actually worked.

[soggy]

Thank you, Osocoloso!  I have a box of old wired routers.  I was thinking I might plug four of them into my G300N and name them Bulk, Standard, Express, and Premium (using ethernet jack level QoS to give each a priority corresponding to said names).  Then maybe I could prioritize from there in a very visual way that even I could understand, ie. wire everyone up to the box with the appropriate priority (of course I'd have to turn off the wifi to keep them from cheating my simple scheme).  And if this lame-brained idea of mine doesn't work so well, I'll do something reasonable like the bandwidth-by-MAC that you so kindly suggested.  (Almost certainly going to end up doing what you suggest, but it wouldn't be like me to do it the reasonable way first, not if I could run several hundred feet of cable through the house instead.  I like cables.  Makes my house feel manly.)

[mzaur]

I just tested QoS by MAC address, and it did work. I didn't do a thorough test with multiple computers, but at least it worked on mine. I'm not sure what I was doing last time and if I was using a previous firmware or not. It does look more promising now. 

[soggy]

Hi, Mzaur.  Sorry about hijacking your thread a bit there.  Glad to hear things have started working better, has me feeling more optimistic myself.  Little do the wee cretins know what Daddy has in store.  Your endless mindless videos are all pausing now?  You know what that is, Honey?  That's solar flares.

[soggy]

Well my G300N arrived Friday and I set it up over the weekend.  I actually have several routers, for absolutely no good reason, I just like setting them up, sort of like a model railroad, only with data packets and little blinky lights instead of locomotives.  So it took me a while just to get the new router to play well with the others.  Well that and gazing in geeky rapture at InsSider while I decided on the perfect wifi channel.  But eventually I got around to QoS.  Well, the first thing I noticed was that there was no ethernet-port-based control.  At about this point I decided to RTFM, and there, or rather here http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Quality_of_Service I discovered that there was no longer any such thing.  So after playing with the various service priorities, I finally settled on throttling IP ranges.  That works well for me because of my toy network, I just throttle a mask that covers that whole rodent branch of the network.  I haven't done any scientific testing of the result yet but so far it seems pretty good.  I can check my email now.