I concur with Travis, on what we'd like to see happen, but... I'd add that what he asks for may not be realistic or meaningful for MT.
First, remember Testing on Trango is bit different because it is a TDD based system. Its linktest gets run without ARQ utilized in the test. It also has the ability to have the test traffic override user data. So it truly shows the loss/quality/capabilty of the link. Latency is ALWAYS consistent for each packet sent. Its a total different game with CSMA/CA type protocol systems. An 802.11 link shouldn't ever show packetloss (unless severally degrated) because of the re-transmission built into the 802.11 protocol, but has side effects of skyrocketing latency. As well, the test should not be "TCP" based. Having error correction/retransmission at layer3 also defeats the purpose of the test, and would not show the true packet loss of a link. Ultimately, it would be ideal for the test to be a layer2, but might be adequate if it was UDP or ICMP based. Having retransmissions functionality in the test of any type, would always result in no packet loss, and not show the impact of sporatic latency that would be a side effect of a poor quality link. Its very tough to do an accurate packetloss test, with other data on the link at the same time. And very hard to prevent other data from passing on a router type system that can be customized many different ways. linkquality in Time based systems, show by packetloss. linkquality in Wifi based systems, show by varying speed. So what can be done about it? One possibilty is in additional to overall packetloss, show percentage of 802.11 packets (layer2) from test data that were retransmitted at layer2 (underlying packetloss). When we do tests, we do not jsut want to know whether a link is losing packets, we want to know if the ,link is performing optimal and if action should be taken to cure it. For example, THis weekend we had a case where a link that normally works at 54mb modulation, got misaligned and dropped down to 6mb modulation. The link tested out NO packetloss and high link quality, but it was only running at 6mbps!!! If one has adaptive modulation, one needs to consider how to deal with that in the tests. One requirement is to be able to set in the test parameters, what modulation/speed to test at. So the modulation stays fixed during the test. Another option is to have more advanced "latency" figures. For example, pings just shows average latency and peak latency. But what percentage of the pings were severally above the average latency? So after the 1000 packets sent, it could report... average latency, peak latency, but also percentage of packets above 20% above the average, and percentage of packets 100% above average latency, percentage of packets above 200% average latency. Or something to that nature. The idea being, what percentage of packets are not being sent optimally. The only true way to solve this, is to write a test that breaks the native 802.11 mode, and runs the test at the driver level. I guess what I'm saying is... It would nice to see it in the results output listed by Travis. But it may require insight from the MT programmers on what exactly is possible, and what method would be realistic to perform the test. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT tools Hi, I thought I had already posted what I would like to see: 100 packets passed each direction, 10 times (1600 byte packets). Report back: Distance of link Error rate going from AP to CPE (in % as well as actual packet counts) Error rate going from CPE to AP (in % as well as actual packet counts) Throughput of the link Here is a sample test of a Trango AP to SU linktest: 0 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 98 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 1 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 98 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 2 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 100 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 3 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 98 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 4 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 99 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 5 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 99 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 6 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 100 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 7 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 99 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 8 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 99 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps 9 [AP Tx] 100 [AP Rx] 100 [AP RxErr] 0 [SU Tx] 100 [SU Rx] 98 [SU RxErr] 0 504 ms 5079 Kbps [AP Total nTx] 1000 pkts [AP Total nRx] 1000 pkts [AP Total nRxErr] 0 pkts [SU Total nTx] 1000 pkts [SU Total nRx] 988 pkts [SU Total nRxErr] 0 pkts [AP to SU Error Rate] 1.20 % [SU to AP Error Rate] 0.00 % [Avg of Throughput] 5079 Kbps Something like this (but in a graphical table inside of winbox) would be perfect. :) Travis Microserv Dennis Burgess - Link Techs Inc wrote: I work very closely with Mikrotik and I do understand what you are saying. Lets do this... What is the exact feature and results that we are looking for. The reason why I ask, is they will ask! This is what I got so far: 10 second test Test reliability of link Overall throughput of the link Packet loss, if any, on the link Overall link quality All of this calculated into ? a Percent? A number? Dennis M. Burgess Mikrotik Certified Consultant Link Technologies, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri --WISP/Network Support Services-- +1 314-686-1302 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT tools I guess the idea is that MT might be monitoring these lists. But you are right, the best approach might be to Email MT directly. But the truth is, Emailing support by an individual will likely not get results. Manufacturers tend to want to see numerous individuals interested in the command or feature to jsutify the effort doing it. By discussing these flaws on a list, is to get all the members familiar with why these tools are needed, and possibly more members will add additional support inquiriies to request these improvements. For one, I'd like to see the Mikrotik Consultants get involved in asking for these features. If the consultants that specialize in the product don't understand what we need, its not that likely that the manufacurer would either. Consultants that represent the manufacturer have much more pull with them, and a better relationship to discuss these things, and most importantly credabilty, to effect change. With Trango, we effect change, and the reason is that we deal direct with the manufacturer and they hear us. With channel support models, like Microtik offers, the manufacturer can lose touch with the end customer. It becomes an even worse problem when the manufacturer sells super cheap (which we like), and the volume grows and each end user's opinion becomes less relevent. One thing I'm very happy about was Mikrotik's support joining as a WISPA vendor member. (Butch, possibly you one also ?) I believe this gets WISP and Manufacturer closer in touch. I'm hoping that these threads are not misinterpretted as manufacturer bashing, but interpretted as communication, that will effect product improvements. The truth is MT probably offers better testing tools than most WIFI product out there. But there is still room for improvements. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT tools On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Travis Johnson wrote: What I really want is a way to right-click on an entry in the Registration table and have an option that says "Linktest". It would test sending 100 packets each direction, 10 times. It would then report: have you emailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] with this suggestion? I see what you are wanting. I suggested a way to get the data. If that isn't enough, then send an email to the folks that can do something about it. I hate these threads where the only thing that is accomplished is a dead horse is mauled. -- ******************************************************************** *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation * *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS * *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks * ******************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
