And that is a problem. Al
------ At 05:56 PM 10/16/2009 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: ------- >Its not a question of manufacturer, its a question of model and/or rev of >model. >Near impossible to have time to test them all, there are so many.. > >Tom DeReggi >RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Al Stewart" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]>; "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 3:09 PM >Subject: Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections > > > > How do D-Link products rate in your experience? > > > > Al > > > > ------ At 02:48 PM 10/15/2009 -0400, Nick Olsen wrote: ------- > > > >>This could be a very touchy topic. > >>Routers, are everywhere. Someone can't blame a router for all there > >>problems because at some point your internet goes through a router. At > >>your > >>location or your ISP's its inevitable. > >>But why have routers gotten such a bad name? I believe this is the fact > >>that most SOHO routers are trash. Generally your average home user isn't > >>doing much to notice a router. But then you get your users that are heavy > >>on the P2P or something they find the router gets slow.. Most SOHO routers > >>don't handle P2P very well because the number of connections. So they > >>remove the router and it all works great suddenly. > >> > >>As for the actual question. No, most routers are not the cause of > >>speed/bandwidth issues. As today most of them are decently equipped. I > >>know > >>back in the day I saw many a netgear 614 have about a 14Mb/s ceiling on > >>wan > >>to lan throughput. Add in lots of P2P connections and that could come down > >>under the 10Mb/s mark. > >>I really like the idea of the new RB750, I have one running right now and > >>its capable of doing 98Mb/s TCP at about 60% cpu load. This is in the > >>standard soho config (1 wan, 4 lan, nat, no queues) > >> > >>Nick Olsen > >>Brevard Wireless > >>(321) 205-1100 x106 > >> > >> > >>---------------------------------------- > >> > >>From: "Al Stewart" <[email protected]> > >>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:31 PM > >>To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > >>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections > >> > >>Thanks ... this helps. > >> > >>One more question. Do routers being used by the subscribers (wired or > >>wireless) ever affect the speed/bandwidth. I don't see how that can > >>be as they are designed to pass 10 Meg to the WAN, which is six times > >>at least what the > >>nominal bandwidth would be. One tech guy is trying to blame routers > >>for all problems. But I have yet to see the logic in that. Unless of > >>course one is malfunctioning or dying or something. But that can't be > >>ALL the routers in the system. > >> > >>Al > >> > >>------ At 02:15 PM 10/15/2009 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: ------- > >> > >> >Everything goes to crap, unless you've put in bandwdith management to > >> >address those conditions. > >> >The problem gets worse when Traffic becomes... Lots of small packets > >>and/or > >> >lots of uploads. > >> >Obviously Peer-to-Peer can have those characteristics. > >> >The bigger problem is NOT fairly sharing bandwidith per sub, but instead > >> >managing based on what percentage of bandwidth is going up versus down. > >> >This can be a problem when Bandwdith mangement is Full Duplex, and > >> >Radios > >> >are Half Duplex, and its never certain whether end user traffic is > >> >gfoing > >>to > >> >be up or down during the congestion time. > >> >Generally congestion will happen in teh upload direction more, because > >>its > >> >common practice to assume majority of bandwidth use is in teh download > >> >direction, so most providers allocate more bandwdith for download. > >>Therfore > >> >when there is an unsuspecting surge in upload bandwdith, the limited > >>amount > >> >of upload capacity gets saturated sooner. > >> > > >> >We took a two prong approach to fix. > >> > > >> >1) We used Trango 900Mhz internal bandwidth management, to help. MIRs > >> >set > >>to > >> >end user sold full speed, and CIR set really low (maybe 5% of MIR > >> >speed). > >> >Primary purpose was to reserve ENOUGH minimal capacity for end users to > >>have > >> >a time slice for uploading. > >> > > >> >2) At our first hop router, we setup Fair Weighted Queuing, so every > >>users > >> >gets fair weight to available bandwdith. > >> > > >> >With 5.8Ghz, we did not use Bandwdith management on the trango itself. > >> > > >> >If you have good queuing, customers rarely ever notice when there is > >> >congestion. They might slow down to 100kbps now and then, but end uses > >> >really dont realize it for most applications, becaue the degragation of > >> >service rarely lasts long because oversubscription is low comparatively > >>to > >> >most ISPs. Usually end use bandwidth tests will still reach in the > >> >1-1.5 > >> >mbps level ranges. We run about 40-50 users per AP, selling 1mb and 2mb > >> >plans. > >> > > >> > But the key is Queuing.... If you dont have it, when congestion is > >>reached > >> >packet loss occurs, and degregation is much more noticeable by the end > >>user, > >> >because TCP will become way more sporatic in its self-tunning. We also > >> >learned faster speeds w/ Queuing worked much better than Limiting to > >>slower > >> >speeds. We also learned avoid having speed plans higher than 60-70% of > >>the > >> >radio speed, to minmiize the damage one person can do. > >> > > >> >VIDEO can quickly harm that model for the individual end user doing > >>video, > >> >it prevents the video guy from harming all the other subs. Therefore if > >> >someone complains about speeds, its jsut teh one person that gets > >> >discruntled, not the whole subscriber base.. > >> > > >> >Tom DeReggi > >> >RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > >> >IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > >> > > >> > > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Al Stewart" > >> >To: "WISPA General List" > >> >Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:45 AM > >> >Subject: Re: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections > >> > > >> > > >> > > Okay, that's the ideal ratio. Which under normal casual usage > >> > > probably works great most of the time. But what happens if, say, 15 > >> > > or 20 of them are all connected and using for downloads/uploads etc > >> > > at the same time? > >> > > > >> > > Al > >> > > > >> > > ------ At 11:34 AM 10/15/2009 -0400, chris cooper wrote: ------- > >> > > > >> > >>At 500k per user I would cap users at 50 on that single AP. 35 would > >>be > >> > >>better. > >> > >> > >> > >>Chris Cooper > >> > >>Intelliwave > >> > >> > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >> > >>From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > >>On > >> > >>Behalf Of Al Stewart > >> > >>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:21 AM > >> > >>To: WISPA General List > >> > >>Subject: [WISPA] Simultaneous connections > >> > >> > >> > >>Using a 900 AP (like Trango) theoretically allows up to 3000 (3.0 > >> > >>meg) bandwidth. But there has to be a limit on how many simultaneous > >> > >>connections can go through the AP and maintain bandwidth. At what > >> > >>point -- how many using/downloading etc at the same time -- would the > >> > >>bandwidth be reduced by usage to below 500 (.5 meg) or lower? There > >> > >>has to, logically, be some kind of limit to what the pipe will hande. > >> > >> > >> > >>We're trying to evaluate our user to AP ratio in real life. > >> > >> > >> > >>Al > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>-------------- END QUOTE --------------------- > > > > --------------------- > > Al Stewart > > [email protected] > > --------------------- > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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/ -------------- END QUOTE --------------------- --------------------- Al Stewart [email protected] --------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
