Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
dcam
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:06 am

NV2 seems to have solved my networking woes in comparison with nstreme

Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:12 am

I'd been having trouble with big dropouts on a non-line-of-sight wireless link using a 917Mhz transciever board with a pair of RB411s.

I switched the protocol from nstreme to NV2 protocol and the problems just went away! Remarkable! Got close to no packet loss now.

802.11 was even worse than nstreme.

802.11 wireless CSMA packet pings across the link

Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=502ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=433ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=376ms TTL=63
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=761ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=470ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=450ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=553ms TTL=63
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=515ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=574ms TTL=63
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=640ms TTL=63
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=392ms TTL=63

NV2 packet pings across the link

Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=442ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=430ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=336ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=1420ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=317ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=500ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=335ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=538ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=701ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=285ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=323ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=398ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=403ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=287ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=525ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=235ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=404ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=281ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=749ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=315ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=374ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=446ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=984ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=618ms TTL=63
Reply from 192.168.17.201: bytes=64000 time=403ms TTL=63

What could the basis for this?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests