I'm having a hard time tracking down why my copy tests keep failing.
The Ralink based hardware I ordered has shown up and it is failing in
exactly the same way as the Zd1211b hardware.
The failure seems to be aggravated by another task using the link. For
example I have a copy test running and IM
Jon Smirl wrote:
> I have no proof but I starting to suspect that the problem may be in
> the 80211 stack and not the drivers.
I'm pretty sure that none of the ralink drivers use the same stack.
> Could the fragmented urb not have gotten reassembled correctly?
Unlikely. This is also zd1211-speci
On 07-01-04 12:36 Jon Smirl wrote:
> I'm having a hard time tracking down why my copy tests keep failing.
> The Ralink based hardware I ordered has shown up and it is failing in
> exactly the same way as the Zd1211b hardware.
>
> The failure seems to be aggravated by another task using the link.
On 1/4/07, Ulrich Kunitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It looks like it is the SMB implementation in the kernel that is
dropping the connections. I've got a copy test running on CIFS and it
has done 5GB so far without out dropping the connection. From now on I
will remove SMB from my kernel and rely
I just did a 15GB copy test and averaged 13Mb/sec, Windows can copy
the same files at 19Mb/sec. It appears that CIFS has higher throughput
than SMBFS (10Mb).
I have the AP set to channel 1 and in 11g only mode. The vendor driver
has a way of setting 11g only mode on the client, does zd1211rw have
Jon Smirl wrote:
> I just did a 15GB copy test and averaged 13Mb/sec, Windows can copy
> the same files at 19Mb/sec. It appears that CIFS has higher throughput
> than SMBFS (10Mb).
I think using such a high level protocol for speed tests is a mistake
and has certainly wasted some of your time so
On 1/4/07, Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
> > I just did a 15GB copy test and averaged 13Mb/sec, Windows can copy
> > the same files at 19Mb/sec. It appears that CIFS has higher throughput
> > than SMBFS (10Mb).
>
> I think using such a high level protocol for speed test
Jon Smirl wrote:
> I'll have to rearrange my hardware to do netcat type of testing. Is
> there any way to get two zd1211rw devices talking to each other?
If you do that then the "percentage error" doubles and you also can't
really draw any reliable conclusions. You want to be using one zd1211rw
