Hi, Josh is right.
2.5 msec frame also was created to provide much lower latency for fixed ratios: 75/25, 50/50, 30/70. The headline throughput will be a little less, because there is more frame overhead since double the amount of packets / frames, but overall latency is decreased which can help TCP and also increase TCP throughput. Throughput for 2.5 versus 5 msec should be compared for each case. Dan Sullivan ePMP Software Manager From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2015 12:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP 2.5ms frame Absolutely lower latency. Should be identical to pmp100 I think? Definitely a lot better than the 5ms. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Yeah, but I haven't had to colo it with a PMP100 so at the time I glossed over it. I was wondering if I was missing out on lower latency.....sounds like that's a yes. On 12/5/2015 10:22 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: wasnt 2.5 frames announced some time ago? On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Like 80% sure I'm right but ya latency is the most important. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340<tel:937-552-2340> Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:937-552-2343> 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 4, 2015 7:47 PM, "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Isn't throughput supposed to be slightly worse with 2.5ms, or am I remembering that wrong? There is definitely a big improvement in latency. Either way, I don't think the difference in throughput is enough to care about, I'd rather have the lower latency. On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: A bit more throughput. Not worth changing from 5ms to 2.5ms if all you're after is throughput. Any new APs I do 2.5ms instead of 5ms since there's no reason to do it "the old way". You do get better latency - 7.5ms improvement. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340<tel:937-552-2340> Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:937-552-2343> 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: It's a big day for ePMP threads. If I recall correctly, the 2.5ms frame size was introduced to aid in collocation with the PMP100. Is there any performance impact? My first thought was that a shorter frame would give me lower latency, but it's probably not that simple.
