Too intricate QoS configurations on my modem/router setup
Too intricate QoS configurations on my modem/router setup
Typical service from most ISPs involves connecting your device at home and usually fixing basic issues like network name, password, and channel settings to reduce interference. Once those are resolved, advanced configurations depend on the customer’s choice. This isn’t always due to lack of support, but because ISPs face legal risks if they intervene incorrectly. These liabilities explain why some providers limit third-party support. It can be frustrating, but it’s a real concern. If you’re looking for more help, using DD-WRT with your own router is a solid step—consider routing all traffic through the DD-WRT device and setting QoS priorities there. That should improve performance without needing extra ISP assistance.
It seems QoS mainly affects throughput rather than latency. Consumer devices often struggle with this, but at such low speeds it could work if someone with deeper networking expertise intervenes. When you mention a 150-300ms ping, clarify whether you're checking in-game, through a command line, or another application. If it's in-game, start by using a command prompt to test latency directly from your router. From there, assess if a QoS solution would be beneficial. You appear to understand advanced networking settings and are eager to verify your approach. Just to be curious, what is the cost of your current internet plan? Where are you situated—general region or specific state?
I agree with @kirashi. Put their box in bridge mode and use your router with DDWRT installed. It might help somewhat, though I’m not sure it will fully resolve your problems. Based on the speeds you mentioned and having Frontier communications, it probably won’t significantly improve things. Frontier is currently facing financial challenges after taking on substantial debt from Verizon when acquiring areas with Verizon DSL and FIOS.
The issue you're facing relates to Quality of Service (QoS). It functions by examining packets, either checking for specific IP addresses or identifying the services in use. This process consumes CPU resources, which can restrict data transfer speeds and increase latency. Even high-end consumer routers may struggle with QoS at 500Mbps or higher. For instance, a powerful router like the WRT3200 with a dual-core processor might see its speed reduced to 300-350 Mbps when QoS is enabled on a gigabit connection. Running such devices won't improve performance and could worsen latency. In short, your current gateway isn’t suited for QoS and may cause slow speeds and delays. To achieve good performance with both speed and low latency, you’ll need a more robust router.
Smite and Crossout both show latency ticks for ping and frame time (around 10 ms due to 72Hz refresh). I’m in West Central Ohio, near a large lake inland, about 10 miles north of it. I know QoS can slow things down, but at my connection speed it shouldn’t matter much. I’m connecting from my PC to the ADSL modem and then to the PPPoE network Frontier uses (no fiber). I expect latencies under 1ms, especially with the 3-foot Ethernet cable I use. The monthly cost is $36.98. They offer a plan for $42 with speeds up to 6mbps, which matches what I’m getting now. I chose not to install their F-secure antivirus since I’ve never had a real virus and have kept my system clean—even after finding a Bitcoin miner script, I deleted it right away. After 16 years, I remain virus-free thanks to common sense internet use.
My internet performance hovers around 350 kilobytes per second, which shouldn’t significantly impact my connection since the Broadcom chip in my router or modem isn’t expected to struggle at such speeds. I understand it can lower peak performance, but it won’t be noticeable. The device supports gigabit LAN, and my non-essential router offers at least 100mbps—about 50 times faster than my current speed. These devices have much more capacity than the QoS overhead would demand. My main concern was whether anyone could apply the settings shown in the screenshots. I’ve used DD-WRT’s QoS, but it didn’t make a difference when many clients were connected. That’s why I’m linking my hardware directly to the gigabit router/modem combo, while others use the router via Ethernet on one of the modem slots. I’ve limited that router to about a third of its full speed. The QoS feature on the modem is designed to prioritize my packets over the router’s traffic to the gateway. This setup works well, but the firmware’s QoS controls are not very intuitive for me.
I attempted this before adjusting the QoS settings on the modem. The results were worse than my current configuration. It didn’t appear the DD-WRT changes made any impact, removing an entire networking layer by skipping the router. As mentioned, my priority is ensuring the QoS settings in those screenshots function correctly, even though I’m unfamiliar with the interface. I could test different options, but altering anything requires restarting the modem, which takes about three minutes.
I had to handle all the wiring myself since the installer placed the modem/router near the microwave in the cupboard. That wasn't a smart move. They declined to lay another line elsewhere due to insurance concerns. I went around with an outdoor Ethernet cable to the opposite side, connected the phone jack, and installed the modem myself because the contractor they brought wasn’t permitted. In my view, he was just too unmotivated to follow my instructions. The cable I used is much better quality than what they wanted. Living near trees and wheat fields means lots of rodents, especially those that chew wires. Essentially, the ISP just took my money and gave me a terrible service. I doubt they’d even notice if I tapped into their main node and added another conductor from their roadside box. I also had to connect the network interface to the box they attached to my house, since the one they sent used electrical tape and messed up the wiring instead of using proper self-stripping fittings. Honestly, the ISP keeps getting away with this when they have a monopoly—it’s really frustrating. And the FCC wants to make things worse!
I anticipate that too, unless the modem itself has issues (like queuing packets because the CPU is overwhelmed by the QoS settings). Given that the modem probably manages the QoS in software and the CPU is already limited, I’m curious if the QoS is adding extra pressure on it, leading to increased latency.
Not attempting to justify Frontier here, but DSL has limited reach—you're likely near the edge of coverage. If you're in a remote area, fiber isn't likely available nearby. They operate as businesses focused on profit. Though you mentioned no alternatives exist, satellite and LTE are common choices for rural users. Just be honest about what technology you're using and its constraints. Most ISPs follow this approach—they place infrastructure where it's most practical, often charging significant fees for internal installations.