When the error on the link is small, you will not notice a difference.
Snoop just like any other link layer solution was designed to enhance TCP
performance in wireless or random error environments.
In a lossless environment, the setup with or without snoop will yield very
similar, if not the same results.
So, to notice a difference you need to keep varying the packet loss rate on
the link where snoop is in charge. Then you do the same for an end to end
connection (i.e. without snoop) and compare the results.
The example MySnoop.tcl has an uniformly distributed random variable
error model that you can integrate into the example Snoopns2.tcl that
worked for you.
You'll notice that as the variable set loss_prob 10 grows, there'll be a
difference in performance when snoop is used, and when snoop is absent.
That should get you there.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:15 AM, shiny email@example.com wrote:
yes.am struggling to differentiate the performance with and without
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:19 AM, nicholas mbonimpa nmboni...@gmail.comwrote:
Unfortunately I don't.
But, just for the beginning, you can use xgraph to visualise the outputs
then have a rough idea on the throughput / bandwidth behaviour.
I guess you can now move on from here, and try out a couple of other
I'm glad I've been of help.
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM, shiny firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
thanks for ur help.snoopns2.tcl script is running sucessfully. while
executing awk script for throughput calculation am getting 0 as output. do
u have awk script for throughput calculation
Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:49 AM, shiny email@example.com wrote:
thanks a lot for ur help.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:12 AM, nicholas mbonimpa
I also forgot to mention that how you can tell there's a difference is
by running one protocol end to end (for example Reno), and then running
same setup but with snoop at an intermediate node. Then monitor some
statistics like throughput at the sink. One of the examples I sent you has
an error model for the channel, so you can vary that and see what happens.
The examples also have scripts to compute throughput and some other
parameters you may want to look at.
It's from such comparisons that you can ascertain whether there's a
difference or not.
I hope this will help.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:31 PM, nicholas mbonimpa
Apologies for failing to get back to you in time, I've been so caught
Please find attached two examples running snoop.
In example snoopns2.tcl, the slight difference in configuration for
snoop is explained in a comment.
Please pay attention to the source path at the beginning of the code.
I hope that will help.
P.S: I've run this code on my side and it works just fine.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:25 PM, shiny firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
i have added LL/LLSnoop to my tcl script for snoop agent deployment
base station.there is no difference with or without LL/LLSnoop. Is
any more code to add snoop agent in tcl script.plz help me frndz...