Given that core components of what we were trying to do (BQL and the codel and fq_codel qdiscs) have only just landed in the mainline linux kernels, doing comprehensive benchmarks would have been misleading.
Secondly - cerowrt's intent is a research project - everything that works we try to get into openwrt - so while the qos implementations differ, both are using fq_codel now.
It's my hope that tomato and gargoyle and dd-wrt - indeed as many router distros - adopt fq_codel or something like it as their underlying qdisc.
Given that core components of what we were trying to do (BQL and the codel and fq_codel qdiscs) have only just landed in the mainline linux kernels, doing comprehensive benchmarks would have been misleading.
Secondly - cerowrt's intent is a research project - everything that works we try to get into openwrt - so while the qos implementations differ, both are using fq_codel now.
It's my hope that tomato and gargoyle and dd-wrt - indeed as many router distros - adopt fq_codel or something like it as their underlying qdisc.
http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2209336
thirdly - for the kinds of things we are trying to fix (bufferbloat, mesh networks, dns, ipv6) not a lot of good benchmarks exist.