LibreQoS VS uBlock

Sorry, I think you are thinking of something else. Maybe a railroad crossing (:-))

Joking aside, the https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat test looks to see if the networking software is working correctly by putting a large load on the network, and then seeing if other streams are affectec by the overload.

The example on the https://libreqos.io/ home page is of

fq_codel was successfully offloaded in a few products, however, no offload here, just a xeon with a ton of cores and a big L3. On the libreqos case we leveraged some ebpf to do packet steering in what we call the heimdal bridge, and also kathie nichol´s wonderful passive ping concept: https://github.com/thebracket/cpumap-pping

src here: https://github.com/LibreQoE/LibreQoS/

You can get a transparent high speed bridge with shaping capability up pretty rapidly with supported hardware.

I still long for an ethernet card that can do a trie lookup natively! The flamegraphs are mostly getting the right packet to the right cpu, still.

That's doable. The HOA doesn't sell internet. Just pays for a Wi-Fi network that happens to reach you.

I'd advice two high performance dishes (dishes are known to fail and support is an issue so one on standby while waiting) and a business connection. You'll need a third party router with fair queuing, protocol and service speed shaping etc etc. I'm sure both openwrt and opnsense will do. But check this out https://libreqos.io/

Still, ya know, a modernized kernel on the devices is a start, better wifi, also, and if they do get arround to adding at the very least driver support for the linux BQL or AQL subsystems, and apply fq_codel, or cake, they could certainly manage the uplink better. At the higher rates supplied by the link, the wifi becomes the bottleneck for which solutions appeared in the Linux kernel in 2016. There has been some good research on actively managing the link via the sqm-autorate project, and multiple middleboxes such as those from preseem (fq_codel), and my own libreqos.io (cake) , might be able to manage the downlink better with the addition of link level stats, at very minimal CAPEX per subscriber.

Also, people would notice starlink going to hell less often if starlink would just deploy libreqos.io.

With dual 2.5 Gb/s and Alder Lake single-thread perf, I was thinking high-end latency-optimized QoS/Firewall for gigabit internet. CAKE and LibreQoS would love this thing.

It is so wonderful to see so many happy SQM users all over the world. That said, do you think NBN might consider installing libreqos.io to benefit all their other users one day?

I am curious as to the availability and functionality these days of the fq_codel option on the eero 6 and eero 6 business? When I last paid attention about a year ago ( https://www.reddit.com/r/eero/comments/u7xm83/gen_2_sqm_vs_gen_3_sqm_stick_with_gen_2_if_you/ ) only the gen2 had cake, and a lot of folk struggled with correct behaviors at +500Mbit with the 6's implementation of fq_codel. (The +500Mbit problems kind of indirectly spawned the libreqos.io project, which pushes the inbound shaping to a middlebox at the ISP) Anyway, did it get better? Does RFC3168 style ecn work on the wifi?

You probably already know this, but the team behind Cake SQM are pushing to get ISPs to implement the free LibreQoS on their side, so that many more users could benefit from SQM: https://libreqos.io/

Check out uBlock Origin's per site switches [1]

[1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-...

If ads, in particular on YouTube, are the problem, anything Chromium-based is probably only going to get worse and worse (see [1] and [2]). So that basically leaves you with Firefox and Safari.

I work for Mozilla (speaking for myself, of course), so I'll leave you to guess which I'd recommend :P

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

[2] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/googles-widely-oppos...

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Or if on mobile, it is well worth it to look up adblock options for the browser you use.

What are the compelling advantages of Chrome nowadays?

Chrome is working to limit the capabilities of ad blockers:

https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2023/11/chrome-pushes...

Whereas a compelling advantage of Firefox is that uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

Advertising networks have often been vectors for malware. Using an ad blocker is an important security measure. Even the FBI recommends ad blockers:

https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising

https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...

https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221?=8324278624

> It allows for 30,000 dynamic rules

That is not what we mean by dynamic filters. From https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-fi...

> However, to support more frequent updates and user-defined rules, extensions can add rules dynamically too, without their developers having to upload a new version of the extension to the Chrome Web Store.

What Chrome is talking about is the ability to specify rules at runtime. What critics of Manifest V3 are talking about is not the ability to dynamically add rules (although that can be an issue), it is the ability to add dynamic rules -- ie rules that analyze and rewrite requests in the style of the blockingWebRequest permission.

It's a little deceptive to claim that the concerns here are outdated and to point to vague terminology that sounds like it's correcting the problem, but on actual inspection turns out to be entirely separate functionality from what the GP was talking about.

> Giving this ability to extensions can slow down the browser for the user. These ads can still be blocked through other means.

This is the debate; most of the adblocking community disagrees with this assertion. uBO maintains a list of some common features that are already not possible to support in Chrome ( https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... ) and has written about features that are not able to be supported via Chrome's current V3 API ( https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as... ). Of particular note are filtering for large media elements (I use this a lot on mobile Firefox, it's great for reducing page size), and top-level filtering of domains/fonts.

> "Its happened before"

> That's not an argument

It's a subheading to "2. Browser engine monopoly". The subsection's purpose is describing how bad things were during the IE monopoly to reinforce that it's something to be avoided.

> in fact you could counter-argue that IE left a lot of technical debt

That would be agreeing with the article, unless I understand what you mean.

> On top of that, the internet was very different back then.

In a way that now makes it harder for truly new competing engines to pop up due to increased complexity of the web.

> I'm still not convinced, why would I change my browser?

The points made in the article are:

* Increased privacy, opposed to willingly giving your data to an ad-tech company

* Helps avoid a browser engine monopoly which would effectively let Google dictate web standards

* It’s fast and has a nice user interface

Onto which I'd add:

* Content blockers work best on Firefox (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...), doubly so when Manifest V3 rolls out

* Allows more customization of interface and home page

* UX improvements, like the clutter-free reader mode, aren't vetoed to protect search revenue as with Chrome (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37675467)

Advertising networks are vectors for malware:

https://www.cisecurity.org/insights/blog/malvertising

https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising

https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...

So if you're concerned about security then you want the browser with the best ad blocker.

uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...