RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Hi Lonnie, Would be great to see your test results using smaller packet sizes of 100bytes which seems to be around the average packet size for the majority of the traffic on my network. This test always seems to have a massive impact on the available throughput and is currently the reason why we use StarOS for high speed dedicated private lines but Mikrotik w/nstreme for anything shared. Tom, can you confirm if your test RB532's had connection tracking disabled and cpu set at 330MHz? It has been said a few times that N/Streme2 uses too much CPU for the RB532 however I have seen much better results than your tests show using N/Streme and a single CM9. There is a company in the UK that mass produces outdoor grade Mikrotik solutions with 1GHz x86 CPU's so that the CPU is no longer the bottle neck. We are in the process of tested a few off the shelf x86 boards in outdoor enclosures using 56byte random TCP data in both directions at the same time on a single CM9 in turbo mode and have been able to get 37-38Mbps in both directions (about 75Mbps aggregate) which seems to be better than most other more expensive options. These results don't change if we then use larger packets of 1500bytes. Cheers, P. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 12 August 2006 06:48 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 If you are interested, here is the real world test results from my house to the office through a middle repeater, so it involves 4 Atheros radios and three of our WAR4 533 MHz systems. The middle repeater has 4 radios, two of which are used in this test. The end points are x86 servers, (a 600 MHz P3 and a 2.4 GHz P4 both running new V3 x86PC) so the test shows available throughput and does not load the radios with the speed test software. Our own speed test shows a bit higher but is in the right ballpark and also uses tcp. Lonnie war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.250.254 traceroute to 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.017 ms 0.593 ms 0.536 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.426 ms 1.519 ms 1.242 ms 3 10.10.226.254 (10.10.226.254) 2.176 ms 2.467 ms 2.256 ms 4 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254) 3.058 ms 2.852 ms 2.545 ms war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 8] local 192.168.250.1 port 4716 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 8] 0.0-10.0 sec 61.6 MBytes 51.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 -d Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 10] local 192.168.250.1 port 4717 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 9] local 192.168.250.1 port 5001 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 1340 [ 10] 0.0-10.0 sec 25.9 MBytes 21.7 Mbits/sec [ 9] 0.0-10.0 sec 42.6 MBytes 35.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.250.254 he1pm3 -rx rx rate: 5598 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ Next week I will upgrade our server 100 km away to V3 for x86PC and report the results for the following system that goes through 4 repeaters (radio in and radio out mid point) and a unit at each end, so 10 radios are involved. The remote server does not have iperf but I have shown the results of our own speedtest which the first test shows is pretty close to what iperf will show. war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.29.1 traceroute to 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.031 ms 0.683 ms 0.548 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.701 ms 1.253 ms 1.895 ms 3 10.10.227.254 (10.10.227.254) 2.737 ms 2.982 ms 2.267 ms 4 10.10.12.4 (10.10.12.4) 3.649 ms 2.653 ms 2.51 ms 5 10.10.47.253 (10.10.47.253) 4.644 ms 3.539 ms 3.661 ms 6 10.10.51.254 (10.10.51.254) 5.651 ms 4.832 ms 5.519 ms 7 10.14.99.254 (10.14.99.254) 7.248 ms 5.907 ms 5.803 ms 8 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1) 7.314 ms 6.75 ms 5.856 ms war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.29.1 password -rx rx rate: 2306 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ On 8/11/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1:
Re: [WISPA] Service near Orlando/Kissimmee, FL
Tom, I would like to think that Brian is setting the 'proper' expectations from the beginning. Only if I had done so... :-) On 8/11/06 5:30 PM, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you trying to get divorsed already? :-) I assume honeymoon, means you just got married. Congradulations. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] Service near Orlando/Kissimmee, FL Hey everyone, I will be on my honeymoon for a week in Kissimmee, FL. Anyone in the area? Hit me offlist and we can do lunch or something. Brian -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Welcome Alvarion to WISPA - Our Newest Vendor Member
I wish, just feeling warm and fuzzy because the net is working mostly right for a change. -Original Message-From: JohnnyO [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 01:25 AMTo: ''WISPA General List''Subject: RE: [WISPA] Welcome Alvarion to WISPA - Our Newest Vendor Member Ron - you been drinking ? Boy you sure are full of warm fuzzies tonight :) JohnnyO -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron WallaceSent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:19 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Welcome Alvarion to WISPA - Our Newest Vendor Member Yes, Welcome alvarion, And thank you and Patrick for the many papers and valuable information that you have made available to all of us in the past. I look forward to your input here in the future. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 02:04 AMTo: '', ''Subject: [WISPA] Welcome Alvarion to WISPA - Our Newest Vendor MemberWe are proud to announce that Alvarion has joined WISPA as our newest vendor member. Alvarion has been key in the development of the operations of many WISPs over the years. Alvarion is considered by many to be the premier solution for WISP operations and we welcome them to WISPA as a vendor member. I am sure I speak for all WISPA members when I say welcome to Alvarion.Scriv-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. TestMethod 1 (running test to/fromLaptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (addingtogether the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both directionsimultaneously Turbo Mode (addingtogether the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and(B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test resultswere at54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and-68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors to each other. Note:Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db), but itdid not improve results. Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using twocards on each end. Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and using 18V (.8amp) via POE. One thing that was really odd...Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RXrssi. The TXrssi was the exact RX rssi acheivedat the otehr radio in all cases in any slot, in any configuration. However,the CM9 inthe TOP Slot of the532board consistently showed an average of 10 db worse TX RSSI. (sometimes around -75 db). Swapping TX CM9s did not help. TX from the top slot oneither of the Mikrotik CPEs showed the same results.The only way I was able to make the TX rssis the same on both CPEs simultaneously was to set the BOTTOM port/CM9 on each Mikrotik to be the TX radio. This indicated that the 532 board possibly might have a powerproblem to the top slot. In this configuration, at 54mbps, RSSI was about -65TX and RX on bothCPEs. My conclusion of this experimentwas that the ideal configuration for a MIkrotik 532 board is with10Mhz channels in NStreme2 mode. Because Spectrum efficiency is maximized, Interference avoidance maximized, Cost low, and very little aggregate speed benefitacheived by using the larger channel sizes.
RE: [WISPA] ARC Wireless Cable Order
Our techs hate the non-gel cable Shireen sells, it's a solid metal core with a copper clad. Very rigid to work with... is the gel version the same ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 5:57 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] ARC Wireless Cable Order Shireen had/sold the outdoor cable in both a Gel filed and no-Gel version. The gel filled was definately the Arc Wireless, the non-gel he had, I do not believe was ARC brand. Shireen also said he'd be out for a month :-( However, can't speak for Brian, on his quote. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 10:03 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] ARC Wireless Cable Order Is this the same cable sold by Shereen ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 5:44 PM To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization; isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WISPA] ARC Wireless Cable Order Below is the info I promised about the cable. Now the only question is where will copper be at in 10-12 weeks? Up or down? This is a darn good price for cable as of today, but who knows about 3 months from now. The number is below if you need to order. They already have the 35k minimum order so they will be getting cable. Brian Original Message Subject: Cable Info Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:52:40 -0600 From: Gregory Friant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brian, Sorry for the delay. Part number is SWI-CAB-108190 Price is $.11 per foot Freight is FOB Denver. Estimated freight is $7 per thousand UPS ground. Lead time is 10-12 weeks Orders must be placed by Monday, August 14, 2006 Spec sheet attached. To order, please contact Tisha Lumabi at 303-421-4063x39 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] **Greg Friant** Regional Sales Manager /*/ARC/*/ Wireless 10601 West 48th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Office 303-421-4063 Cell 303-886-8588 Fax 303-424-5085 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.antennas.com http://www.antennas.com www.arcwireless.net http://www.arcwireless.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.8/415 - Release Date: 8/9/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Title: Message 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) Gino, Keep in mind -- if you check the Atheros "advanced feature" checkbox -- you are turning on "super-a/g" functionality Going back to your testing methodology (which you haven't elaborated on), the Lempel Ziv compression within super-a/g could be the reason why you're getting "screwy" TCP vs. UDP results -Charles ---WiNOG Wireless RoadshowsComing to a City Near Youhttp://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Title: Message Charles: For test we are using the Mikrotik BW test tool client on the PC, and the built in the Router.. I completely understand your point, but why on 40 mhz channel size, its 45 mbps TCP and 72 mbps UDP ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 3:22 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) Gino, Keep in mind -- if you check the Atheros advanced feature checkbox -- you are turning on super-a/g functionality Going back to your testing methodology (which you haven't elaborated on), the Lempel Ziv compression within super-a/g could be the reason why you're getting screwy TCP vs. UDP results -Charles --- WiNOG Wireless Roadshows Coming to a City Near You http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
