On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Yeoh Chun Yeow <yeohchuny...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> - If you are planning on deploying a multi channel mesh, it will pay >> off very quickly to extend open80211s to support it and not do >> bridging. Bridging is intended for heterogeneous intefaces (e.g. mesh >> and AP, or mesh and ethernet). But it adds additional overhead (an >> additional address lookup per frame, larger mesh headers, etc.). > > Please point to the relevant document on how to implement the extension of > open80211s to support multi channel mesh.
I don't think there is one, if someone had the time to write one, then they might just have implemented it ;-) > Mesh A1 < ----- Channel 116 -------> Mesh A2 bridge Mesh B1 <----- Channel > 40 ------> Mesh B2 > TCP throughput from Mesh A1 to Mesh A2 is 17.8Mbps, no tx failed on Mesh A1, > but tx retries 795. > TCP throughput from Mesh A1 to Mesh B2 is 9.57Mbps, no tx failed on Mesh A1, > but tx retries 138. Interesting here is Mesh B1 records no tx failed, but tx > retries is 4932. This could be the root cause of the problem. Too many > retries in Mesh B1 to Mesh B2. But if you measure throughput from Mesh B1 to > Mesh B2, you manage to get 17.5Mbps, with no tx failed and tx retries 774. I am interested in pursuing this in my lab, did you do the same experiment multiple times? Thanks, Joel. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.open80211s.org http://open80211s.com/mailman/listinfo/devel
