ROBIN -  Open Source Mesh Network Forum Index ROBIN - Open Source Mesh Network
users community forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Speeds on live network
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ROBIN - Open Source Mesh Network Forum Index -> beta-1.5 Release Candidates
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ads






Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:45 am    Post subject: Ads

Back to top
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:50 pm    Post subject: Speeds on live network Reply with quote

I have the following scenario...

A EOC-1650 as a gateway with a 20 meg backhaul (ubnt bridge). An mr3201a meshing to the EOC-1650.

Dashboard shows 4-5 meg between mr3201a and EOC-1650. When I connect with my iphone, the best speed is 700k-900k using the speedtest.net app.

Area is pretty interference free because of physical structure and the channel is clear except for us.

Why the crappy speed? Thoughts?

We have been verifying this at other mesh locations with similar results.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:01 am    Post subject: Re: Speeds on live network Reply with quote

Quote:
Dashboard shows 4-5 meg between mr3201a and EOC-1650

this the mesh transfer rate between one node and its (current) gateway

Quote:
with my iphone, the best speed is 700k-900k using the speedtest.net

this is the tranfer rate between you and a host in internet

Further, any client associated with a mesh is always "anoher 1-hop" far, ie a client associated with a (n)-hop node is (n+1) hops far from inet.
Eg:
node_A ----gateway----inet node_A is 1 hop far from inet
node_A ----node_I----gateway----inet node_A is 2 hops far from inet
BUT
you----node_A----gateway----inet you are 2 hops far from inet
you----node_A ----node_I----gateway----inet you are 3 hops far from inet
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Under this scenario, the node shows 4-5mb to gateway. If my client adds an additional hop, should it not show 2-2.5mb or so?

When I connect a laptop directly to the bridge I can get 15-18mb so backhaul and the internet portion is not the slowdown.

I also confirmed this by pulling a file down from my router on the other end of the bridge and get similar speeds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bconverse wrote:
Under this scenario, the node shows 4-5mb to gateway. If my client adds an additional hop, should it not show 2-2.5mb or so?.

that's correct!
final bandwidth = (band available at gateway)/(2 * total hops) (...about)
if you are associated with a 1 hop node and gateway has 8mb then your final bandwidth is about 2mb

(remember also that mesh bandwidth is computed on a 50KB file download)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess my point is that if I have a 20mb of usable backhaul in place and all that can be achieved connecting to a node 1 hop out (me being the second hop) is 700k, then that is just pitiful.

It really feels like I am having to put out so many gateways that I might as well have just built a layer 2 network with stock firmware.

Not trying to be bitchy. Maybe in our environment dual radio or layer 2 is a must.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ispyisail
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Sep 2008
Posts: 4604
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@bconverse

Your have 100's of nodes, why do you have a particular problem with this one node?

I suspect Anaptyx dual radio are also trying to get more speed

adhoc demo being limited to 11mbps is a bit of a limitation.

Why do you think you will get more speed out of batman advanced?

_________________
ROBIN-Mesh Wiki:

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!

Test Network:
Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



Please donate to ROBIN by paypal:

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!

!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regardless of layer two, batman, or whatever your probably at the max speed of the single radio eqiupment when using adhoc/ahdemo. I only know of one network at the moment showing all dual radio with hops. The problem is it's waiting to have antenna's swapped out and there is a lot of tree's and obstructions in the way of the nodes, but feedback indicates after two hops away the bandwidth is still very good with the small omni antenna's of the anaptyx outdoor unit. This is with like 40+ people connected to the gateway client radio, I'll just continue to monitor and see how it looks once antenna's are upgraded.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
black6spdz
Intermediate User
Intermediate User


Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 114

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

this thread has once again peaked my interests about the mesh concept as a whole.. I understand it is nice to not have to manually configure individual radios but the usefullness of any network after 2 hops is questionable at best.. why the 11mb/s adhoc for internode communication?.. at least with WDS we could hope for 54mb/s and IF N support ever makes it 4+ hops could be a possibility. I'm on the edge of considering airos+coovachilli on my P2HP radios with WDS.. at least this way I could make a 2-3 hop network instead of having to piggyback backhauls to make more available gateway nodes. where is robin-ng? it would still be more cost effective to piggyback two P2HPs or a P2HP and Loco than go the anaptyx solution
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see how WDS would get any more, it's just the nature of how a single radio works. Now WDS offering connections only between other radio's seems fine, but the moment that same radio is then having to retransmit data not only to the other node but to and from your laptop then it goes down or so it seems.

Quote:
where is robin-ng
Not sure what that matters unless it's designed for a new generation of radio's, olsr/batman both use adhoc, one might be slightly faster then the other, but don't see how it's magically going to increase the speed of the current gen radio beyond what it can already do. Not to mention these things with 100/200mhz cpu were probably not designed for large amounts of people connecting and then running all the other stuff going on inside there.

It's not like this is offical, but a quick search on google and results come up explaining things about adhoc/wds.

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!

(talks about adhoc)

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



"WDS may also be referred to as repeater mode because it appears to bridge and accept wireless clients at the same time (unlike traditional bridging). It should be noted, however, that throughput in this method is halved for all clients connected wirelessly"

I don't have hands on experiance with all these setups, so hopefully someone can expand on it alittle more. Meanwhile, I have plans underway for my own "tech".... muhahaha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ispyisail
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Sep 2008
Posts: 4604
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Two disadvantages to using WDS are:

* The maximum wireless effective throughput is halved after the first retransmission (hop) that is made. For example, in the case of two routers connected via WDS, and communication is made between a computer that is plugged into router A and a laptop that is connected wirelessly using router B's access point, the throughput is halved, because router B has to retransmit the information during the communication of the two sides. However, in the case of communications between a computer that is plugged into router A and a computer that is plugged into router B, the throughput is not halved since there is no need to retransmit the information.

* Dynamically assigned and rotated encryption keys are usually not supported in a WDS connection. This means that dynamic Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA) and other dynamic key assignment technology in most cases can not be used, though WPA using pre-shared keys is possible. This is due to the lack of standardization in this field, which may be resolved with the upcoming 802.11s standard. As a result only static WEP or WPA keys may be used in a WDS connection, including any STAs that associate to a WDS repeating AP.

_________________
ROBIN-Mesh Wiki:

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!

Test Network:
Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



Please donate to ROBIN by paypal:

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!

!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
black6spdz
Intermediate User
Intermediate User


Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 114

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand that any repeating radio has half the effective bandwidth.. I'm just stating that with a WDS connection it would be possible to acheive upwards of 54mb/s connection to cut in half instead of the adhoc limited 11mb.. and if or when N support comes around we could look forward to 130mb+ to split
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as "54" G

"operates at a maximum physical layer bit rate of 54 Mbit/s exclusive of forward error correction codes, or about 22 Mbit/s average throughput"

I have acheived around 22-25Mbits using the Anaptyx Dual Radio with Adhoc on the first hop, this was between the nodes themselves thus showing that the radio's are capable of exceeding the "standard" 11 assoicated with adhoc. I don't recall the exact speed I acheieved wireless connected to the first hop node, but it was around 11-12 if not more. It all depends on antenna's and interferance. The standard equipment, i.e OM1P/1650/etc.. atleast meet the adhoc standard which is good, the aftermarket radio's inside the anaptyx equipment exceed the standard which is good.

So, even if WDS started out with a slightly higer number to half it's probably still going to come out slightly less or around the same as the radio's using adhoc inside the anaptyx gear. Not to mention you lose all the self healing of adhoc, but you already mentioned it would be a manual setup. I'm going for an altogether differnet approach, wipe the slate clean, and hope to have something better (software) to take advantage of current/future anaptyx gear that technically be loaded with any firmware I want.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(I apologize for the loooooong post, maybe the contents will be obvious for the more experienced users but but will be useful for anyone who is at first approaches to the mesh wireless networking)

I do not say that this is your case or is related to your post, but I think that we should always indicate whether we are talking about bytes (properly denoted by "B") or bits (properly denoted by "b") in order to avoid erroneous assessments or gross oversights. If, for example, 700kbs were instead "700kBs" then the bandwidth would be 5.4mbs.

Further, sometimes I see in the posts the term "adhoc": well, this is a big mistake and I feel that a clarification is necessary.
Since adhoc mode is not compatible with the needed simultaneous AP mode we are forced to use the the less performant ahdemo ...hence packets loss and collisions come in the play. I do not want to bore with analysis of the two modes, but just warn that ahdemo doesn't provide "collision detection" and this causes:
- higher protocol overhead
- higher layer end-to-end protocols to frequent re-transmissions.

That said, it would be nice if everything had the linearity and the logic of mathematical tables: just apply the righ formula and ...voila'. Unfortunately, there are many other aspects that must be taken into account.

The most of them is related to "radio": interferences, current capacity of the physical channel, carrier power and modulation used, signal strenght, antennas, radio wave paths, full/half duplex r/tx, cpu clock and power ..., thousands of pages have been written on these topics.

Not forgetting "firmware related" evaluations such as mesh-protocol (packets transmitted, convergence, ...) number of concurrent users, type of traffic (streaming, one-shot), throttling (if enabled) and - last but not the least important - the number of the active nodes: they also contribute to "jam" the air also if no users are associated with them (sometimes we forget that there is always an underlying mesh-protocol traffic which is flooding the "media").

From my view, effort in optimizing the positioning of the nodes would lead to better performances of the network. May happens that in some scenarios a "sparse" network works better than a "dense" network traveled by strong signals: ie strong signal from (too close) neighbors does not always mean an equally good intelligibility of the information carried:
- because of RF saturation
- becuase of adhoc/ahdemo different ways

Agree, multi radio is the better solution: one radio for mesh, one radio for Tx and one radio for Rx is our dream... but it's more expensive. At the same time, I think that a layer2 WMN is not "the" solution to our concerns (or at least the only one).

Mind you, it is not my intention to demystify layer 2 mesh-protocols but just remember that the services-oriented traffic (the mesh protocol) provides the right routes to the applications-oriented traffic ...and this traffic is always carried by IP.
A mesh-protocol is like "the guy who deploys and plugs the cables"... try to stop olsrd in all your mesh nodes (/etc/init.d/olsrd stop): well, you will continue to browse internet and work with your email client, and maybe faster 'cos mesh-protocol traffic is no more flooding the network!
That is not so strange as it may appear, we leave in a semi-static mesh network, not a MANET, so routes are quite stable.
This is why I encourage you to test and experiment new olsrd configuration files in order to find a configuration that best fit your topology needs.


Stated that a lower protocol overhead will improve the overall throughput (and layer 2 WMN are definitely a very good step beyond) I think that a 802.11n + layer2 WMN firmware will be THE WAY, but "how" the adhoc/ahdemo mode is supported? mix adhoc/ahdemo/AP is allowed? which chipsets and Brands? how much stable is athk9 driver? ... many aspects are still un-tested.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good read and well said. I've mentioned adhoc myself sometimes, but indeed it's running ahdemo and differnet in nature. I have decided to target something outside of olsr/batman and believe I have a very unique solution that will take care of these issue's, now that there is hardware I can mess with it makes it more possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Antonio - just to clarify it is kb/s not kB/s.

Also, I don't want to sound like I am downing the hard work put in by everybody. I think as a proof of concept, what is achieved here is wonderful. I am just saying that, whatever the underlying performance issue with the current hardware, to stay relevant we need to move forward.

What I was saying is that if I have to limit my mesh to gateways and one hop nodes, well, this is just a star setup we are all familiar with and can be accomplished using standard hardware and drivers. Yes you would lose autoconfig and some mesh capabilities, but I do not think those issues are more than current issues.

On the "just plug it in and it works" and autoconfig parts, I feel this leads to a lazy approach to network building. I can say that because I too have been guilty of it. I hang a node out, dashboard says the node has 4-5 meg and I leave it at that.

Well, enough rambling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What madwifi says about ahdemo, probably help clarify some things,

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



Looks like maybe alittle more speed could be pulled using some complex chagnes in madwifi along with tony's olsr suggestions. I think most if anything will come from further madwifi tweaks, like those cwmin/cwmax settings mentioned on the link above. Even if this type of tweaks can't be applied to single radio, they could easily be tweaked on dual radio where madwifi settings could be differnet for mesh/client.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@bconverse
I do not criticize you, that was not my intention.
Quote:
we need to move forward

Agree.

Quote:
What I was saying is that if I have to limit my mesh to gateways and one hop nodes, well, this is just a star setup...

OLSR inherits the use of link state algorithm, using shortest path first forwarding, it always provides the best path in term of number of hops, hence the "star topology" that you see. Larger networks with sparse nodes do not have that behavior (http://map.berlin.freifunk.net/).

Quote:
I hang a node out, dashboard says the node has 4-5 meg and I leave it at that.
Well, enough rambling.

You mean that dashboard shows fake infor for that node?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I mean instead of hanging a node out, looking at the dash and thinking connectivity is good, and then just leaving it at that. More testing and diligence on the operator end of things needs to be done.

I believe the dash shows fairly accurate results, I just believe in my case the limits of the current setup are becoming evident.

And, no, I didn't think you were criticizing me. I just didn't want to come across that way to you or the community.

I think dual radio is a good step. I know that a lot of people start to hesitate because of the dollar cost of higher capacity units, but my time is valuable as is all of yours, and I will pay more for more performant systems. As an ad supported network, if users counts fall off due to network performance, revenues take an equal hit.

One thing performace wise I was thinking of is maybe a change to the speed test. If this is a 50kb file run every 5 min on 100 nodes, this is 2.4 gig of traffic per day just for this action. Check my math, 50kb*100nodes*20per hour*24 hours, I could be in error. Maybe have it run on demand like Meraki used to have or just more actual testing in the field - "Can you hear me now" like Verizon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
One thing performace wise I was thinking of is maybe a change to the speed test. If this is a 50kb file run every 5 min on 100 nodes, this is 2.4 gig of traffic per day just for this action

that test soudl be "dashboard-requested" indeed (I never loved it as is)... who start to press and convince dashboards teams?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am sending Mike an email right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mtlowes
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2009
Posts: 577
Location: Lakeshore Ontario Canada

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bconverse wrote:
I think dual radio is a good step. I know that a lot of people start to hesitate because of the dollar cost of higher capacity units, but my time is valuable as is all of yours, and I will pay more for more performant systems. As an ad supported network, if users counts fall off due to network performance, revenues take an equal hit.


I've taken to spreading the gateways around to limit the hops.. no more than 2 for anyone customer/repeater. I thread my 5.8ghz backbone throughout with NSM5's and hang Gateways off them to keep the throughput high for my customers... 99% of my repeaters continuously report in at 8.8 to 9.5mbps leaving 1/2 that available for any transient traffic that elects to connect with their laptops etc... so far working well..

But agree, Getting way from strictly "11B" would help and I'm not sure what prevents us from doing that exactly, but the 11mbps cap on 1 hop connections is the preventing factor.. Why can it be done for anaptyx 5.8 and not for 2.4?? or have I missed the jist of something here?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
But agree, Getting way from strictly "11B" would help and I'm not sure what prevents us from doing that exactly, but the 11mbps cap on 1 hop connections is the preventing factor.. Why can it be done for anaptyx 5.8 and not for 2.4?? or have I missed the jist of something here?


It's not running 11B, that would reflect in the wireless file as "option agmode/hwmode 11B, where it's set as 11G now. While I typically mentioned ahdemo, I also said adhoc. While they are differnet it still appears they are somewhat atleast similar in terms of expected speed. I would suspect that most manufactors are not worried about ahdemo/adhoc and so long as they meet the 11 standard then it's good. The anaptyx gear uses high performance mini pci radios inside that were built for high performance use, hence the better speed in all modes of operation regardless of what frequencey, plus the cpu helps as well.

I'm fine tuning my anaptyx, with some tweaks and proper antenna's it could easily push more. I have two new networks tabbed on my favorites now where someone is using 4 radios, each in a gateway/one hop fashion with diretional antenna on the mesh. The numbers while probably not accurate show an average of 57.9Mbps on the one network and 53.3 on the other, curious how the person is getting those numbers or why the dash shows so high.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

multiple-radio modules (obviously) makes the difference as well as a thinner plane irradiation. As I said, CPU is another big player in the game: I too reach 14-16 mbs even using a single radio module, but the uderlying device is a Soekris...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

By "thinner plane irradiation" are you referring to higher gain antennas?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
retromod
Intermediate User
Intermediate User


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 80

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:43 pm    Post subject: Ok.... Reply with quote

Since the CPU is a big player in the game , why don't we just contact Ubiquiti / Open Mesh / Engenius and tell them :

Their hardware is great , but its not fast enough for us

If you produce hardware that works for us , youll sell a lot of routers and make tons of money

We need 12MB flash instead of 4MB

We need a 400Mhz process instead of 180Mhz

We need at least 32MB RAM , instead of 16MB

Anything to add to this? Edit? Surely the cost of these upgrades to a typical loco / OM1P / Bullet will not make dramatic changes to their cost?

Antonio - what specs do we need to make Robin fly on a router?


Last edited by retromod on Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sronan
Skilled User
Skilled User


Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 211

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This article describes techniques that the Roofnet team (some of whom subsequently helped start Meraki) made to increase mesh speeds:


Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



How relevant might those techniques be to increasing multi-hop mesh speed with ROBIN?

Has anyone compared mesh speeds between Meraki and open mesh lately?

Perhaps also of interest: A Faster Wireless Web

Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!



- Stephen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was even penciling out the idea of taking two EOC-1650s and running mesh on unit A on channel 11 and disabling all of the ap's other than mesh. Then connect another 1650 with stock firmware to the eth0 port of unit A on channel 1.

This would give effective dual radio for $100US ($50 x 2)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
foxtroop11
Service Provider
Service Provider


Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 1168
Location: Ansbach, Germany and sometimes the States

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And the same speed across the mesh..... j/k, maybe alittle higher since it's only talking to another radio, but i doubt much more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bconverse
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 848
Location: Little Rock, AR (USA)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeh - just had it running around in my head. At the end of the day a solution such as Anaptyx is going to be called for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Antonio (isleman)
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2323
Location: Toscana, Italy

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This article describes techniques that the Roofnet team (some of whom subsequently helped start Meraki) made to increase mesh speeds:
Only registered users can see links on this forum!
Register or Login on forum!


How relevant might those techniques be to increasing multi-hop mesh speed with ROBIN?

thanks for the tip: it seems interesting and I will read it thoroughly... btw if "SrcRR improves the median bulk TCP throughput between pairs of nodes from 20 KB/s to 110 KB/s." that is not our limit.

Quote:
Has anyone compared mesh speeds between Meraki and open mesh lately?

that should be VERY interesting indeed !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ROBIN - Open Source Mesh Network Forum Index -> beta-1.5 Release Candidates All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
c d
e



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Abuse - Report Abuse - TOS & Privacy.
Powered by forumup.it free forum, create your free forum! Created by Hyarbor & Qooqoa
Confirmed

Page generation time: 0.201