APPO -> APPO? What kinda antenna config u using? Nice distance on that run eh? :)
Chris
"Wireless APPO -> APPO like george's... Lot's cheaper than running cables :)"
-----Original Message-----
From: George M. Walden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 2:01 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentlemen,
Brendan is right on target with his assessment. However, we have a sB APPO
in a PTP link (no WEP) used as a back haul (17.9 miles) that constantly
provides 6 Mbps (plus or minus 0.5 Mbps); clear LOS. My $0.02 worth.
Best to You,
George M. Walden
Vice President
GC3/InterLink L.C.
319-524-2895 office
319-524-3175 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
member: Wireless Communications Association International
"@anywhere... when it absolutely, positively has to be deployed overnight"
> Hi,
> In a word - No. I've been doing this for 2+ years and I've yet to see
> 802.11b go any faster than 4-5 Mbps with WEP turned on (and not much
> more than that with it turned off), even under
> the most optimal operating conditions. 11Mbps is marketing hype. The
> only higher performance I've ever seen with 802.11b radios (but not the
> protocol) is with the Lucent COR/ROR, which doesn consistently over
> 5Mbps over long distances (miles, point-point). It's the nature of the
> beast. If you need more speed, You might consider Western Multiplex or
> one of the other high end vendors.
>
> Good Luck,
>>> Brendan
>
> Oliver Leamy wrote:
>
>> I d thought about half duplex but the throughput would be halved only
>> if there was equal traffic in each direction, but that is not the
>> case. The acknowledgement package is much shorted than the data
>> traffic - or have I missed something?
>>
>> The fact that it is wireless half duplex will introduce an additional
>> delay to allow the wireless systems synchronise when flow direction
>> changes. But even accepting all of that, as a designer I would be very
>> disappointed if my protocol and hardware scheme caused a 50% loss of
>> throughput and so I am loathe to accept that the 4 Mbps is an accurate
>> reflection of what is attainable on a 11Mbps wireless link.
>>
>> But I ask thew question again, what throughput are other people
>> getting? I would dearly like to know? IS anyone getting more than
>> 4Mbps on a point to point link (ad-hoc or Infrastructure)?
>>
>> *Oliver Leamy*
>>
>> Ogenek Teoranta, Ballingeary, Macroom County Cork
>>
>> *+353 (26) 47808 ; +353 (86) 8337664*
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] *On Behalf Of *Dan Petermann
>> *Sent:* 23 May 2003 16:08
>> *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> *Subject:* Re: [smartBridges] Disappointing Throughput AirNic to AirPoint
>>
>> Actually that isn't too bad. 802.11b is half duplex. Max. thru put
>> under perfect conditions would
>> only be 5.5MB/s (disreguarding overhead) and that gets cut in half
>> again when going to another
>> wireless client like in example 1.
>>
>> Overall I'd say your thruput is more than acceptable.
>>
>> Dan Petermann
>> Wyoming.com
>>
>> At 01:19 AM 5/23/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Bought some AirNic and AirPoint recently but still having
>> disappointing throughput figures. I ran two basic tests.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. AirNic to AirPoint to AirNic and the throughput was about 2 Mbps
>>
>> 2. AirNic to AirPoint to PC via 100 Mbps LAN and the throughput was
>> about 4 Mbps.
>>
>>
>>
>> What have other people measured in terms of throughput? Are my figures
>> representative of what can be achieved? Should I change from factory
>> defaults to get better throughput?
>>
>>
>>
>> All tests were on an island MANY MANY miles from radio interference,
>> The CPE and APs were in the same room and no other WiFi equipment was
>> switched on at the same time.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Oliver Leamy
>> *
>>
>>
>> Ogenek Teoranta, Ballingeary, Macroom County Cork
>>
>> *+353 (26) 47808 ; +353 (86) 8337664
>> *
>>
>
>
>
> The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges
> <yournickname>
> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> smartBridges)
> Archives: http://198.63.203.6
>
The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname>
To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges)
Archives: http://198.63.203.6
