And remember, anything we do in response to "congestion", we need to
describe in simple terms for our required FCC disclosure statement.
Or terms so complex it puts everyone to sleep and they ignore it. Like the
side effects warning in a drug commercial.
Do you have congestion? Talk to your ISP about network management. Note
that network management is not for everyone. Side effects may include
headache, dry mouth, swelling, palpitations, heart attack, stroke, zombie
apocalypse, anal leakage, and death.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Prince
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 11:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] LTE Speeds
What would be ideal would be to base the scheduling on air time, and
increment a counter if air time is insufficient to provide the CIR
(and/or the MIR for that matter).
If we could monitor the CIR/MIR starvation, then we would be able to get
a handle on which subscribers are hitting the starvation and (hopefully)
be able to do something about it.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 11/13/2015 8:04 AM, Aaron Schneider wrote:
The Canopy scheduler operates with a combined priority based scheme and a
round robin based scheme. As has been covered here in the past, the
scheduling priority is as follows: 1) High Priority CIR 2) Low Priority
CIR 3) Bcast/Mcast CIR 4) High Priority 5) Low Priority 6)
Bcast/Mcast.
If you don't oversubscribe your CIR, then things are fine. But, that is
very tricky when you assume CIR based on one data rate (say 8x), and the
actual link requiring that CIR is different (say 4x). Now, that SM is
requiring twice as much frame time to meet that CIR as you may have
planned. This goes to the concept of allocating capacity based on
throughput, and it is generally how Canopy works. The round robin comes
in so that one SM can't take everything on its own, it will try to be
fairer, but, it will still do everything it can to honor the CIRs of each
SM in every frame.
We do have a feature in the works where we flip that a bit where the CIR
becomes airtime based so generally speaking, you are guaranteeing air time
and not throughput. The idea is that you will assign a CIR based on a
given rate, say 8x, and if the SM drops (or can only ever achieve) 4x,
then they will get half the data rate because they are only allowed the
same amount of time as if they were 8x. The underlying concept is easy,
it is the external interface and making it easily understood and helping
you stay out of trouble with configurations that is difficult. If it is
OK to just say turn on the option, but then not be able to predict the
throughput, that's one thing, but if you have a customer that needs a
given throughput no matter what his data rate becomes, and other customers
that are OK with just having limited airtime access, then the overall
planning of CIR becomes tricky to not over-commit.
So what would you all prefer? An option per sector to enforce CIR in a
given way for all SMs? Or enforce CIR in a selectable way (throughput vs.
air time) per individual SMs on a given sector?
Regards,
-Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 8:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] LTE Speeds
Maybe it already does? They say capacity is allocated proportional to
sustained rate when there's contention....do they mean "capacity" in bps
or "capacity" in time slots. I'm thinking it's the latter because I have
observed that if you improve the data rate of an individual SM he'll get
more, which makes sense if the SM's capacity allotment is measured in
timeslots rather than bits.
Where's Aaron Schneider when you need him?
On 11/13/2015 9:14 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote:
Cambium if it is at all possible please please add this to the 450!!!!!
On Nov 12, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Dan Petermann <[email protected]> wrote:
LTE can be set for equal time or equal rate. Equal rate will drag down
the thruput of all users.
Equal time will only impact the user with a poor signal. If everyones
signal is great and one users radio signal is bad, that user only gets
the thruput that can be crammed into his timeslot because his modulation
is low. Everyone else continues as normal.
At least that is my understanding.
On Nov 12, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
....any system with 20mhz channels + two chains + 256QAM can claim
100mbps.
Getting past that is going to be carrier aggregation (bigger channels)
and MU-MIMO.
5x20mhz channels aggregated = 500mbps.
MU-MIMO can theoretically double capacity. So there's your 1gig.
I'm not clear on how far you can count on MU-MIMO. In theory it sounds
promising.
....and yes, one person at MIMO-A QPSK is going eat up many times the
capacity of a person at 256QAM MIMO-B no matter what wireless system
you're using. The best defense against that will be don't install bad
connections. Nothing new there.
If you're going to use 100mhz, you could of course install 5 AP's of
your choice and claim you have a 500mbps system.
On 11/12/2015 4:47 PM, Matt wrote:
Hear talk of these 50 - 100+ mbps speeds per user and eventually 1
gbps. How can LTE do that in 10 to 20 mhz of spectrum? I assume
if you are offering 50 mbps package in a sector its safe to assume
at prime time there are going to be at the very least 10 people
using it in that sector at the same time? Also assume some have
less then perfect connections to the tower using more air time.
