Hello, the radios are r52nwhat radios you using?
and whta antennas you got set up? with this config
can you post your configeration here for up please
int wi pri advanced
Flags: X - disabled, R - running
0 name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:61:71:1D arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N radio-name="000C4261711D"
mode=ap-bridge ssid="ntest-km" area="" frequency-mode=superchannel country=no_country_set antenna-gain=0 frequency=5180 band=5ghz-onlyn
scan-list=default rate-set=configured supported-rates-b="" supported-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" basic-rates-a/g="" max-station-count=2007
ack-timeout=dynamic tx-power=17 tx-power-mode=all-rates-fixed periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none
wds-mode=disabled wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-ignore-ssid=no update-stats-interval=disabled
default-authentication=no default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0 proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25
wmm-support=disabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=default disconnect-timeout=3s on-fail-retry-time=100ms preamble-mode=short compression=no
allow-sharedkey=no station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=long
ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-10,mcs-11,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 ht-txchains=0,1
ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=15 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0
int wi nstreme pri
0 name="wlan1" enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes disable-csma=no framer-policy=best-fit framer-limit=3998
int wi manual-tx-power-table pri
0 name="wlan1" manual-tx-powers=1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0
no that not suported ,wds is working fine on N ?
with nstreme ?no that not suported ,wds is working fine on N ?
i hawe link ower ~2km
routerboards is rb433 (300mhz) and r52n cards , use 17 dbi patch antenas 1X
signal -70... -68 and signal to noise ~40db , i use vpls
tcp traffic over 30-40mb half duplex .
no , config is (AP-->station)with nstreme ?
5ghz5Ghz or 2,4Ghz ???
I'm trying 802.11n on rb800 with r52n radio card, and ROS 4.5 . The results are excellent.
The same configuration on alix 2d2 (WDS bridge or MPLS + VPLS , as described on the wiki) does not work at all.
The machines are connected, but no data output when I do the BT and sometimes they suddenly reboot. Someone has already solved this situation?
My config ( in WDS mode ) is :
-bridge interface with ether1 and wlan1
-wireless mode : station-wds (or bridge)
-band : 5GHz only n
-freq. : 5500
-HT chains : Tx 0 1 / Rx 0 1
-HT AMPDU : 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-wds mode : dynamic
-wds def. bridge : bridge_name
-nstreme : enabled (on bridge machine frame policy : "best fit")
On rb800 it work fine but if i try with alix ... nothing .
We have seen something similar with R52n. In our case the TX rate falls to 1Mbps-SP and CCQ to ~20%. Signals are very good. I have been searching for these symptoms in the forum. I can't believe that only I have problems with these cards. I think there is something wrong with them.2) The N radios seem to "gather" errors or something. If the radio is running max throughput for a period of time it will all the sudden stop and only move a few kbps for 10-15 minutes or until disabled and re-enabled, then back to normal operation. During the problem periods the rate, ccq and signal looks perfectly normal.
nstreame wich 1x antena is a senselessness , in my opinion nstreame justified when use 2X antena in order duplex speed success .
Hello,
Could you please share us the result of a tcp test with rb800 on 802.11n?
I'm interested in the numbers, is it enough good as a PC
Thanks
I'm trying 802.11n on rb800 with r52n radio card, and ROS 4.5 . The results are excellent.
The same configuration on alix 2d2 (WDS bridge or MPLS + VPLS , as described on the wiki) does not work at all.
The machines are connected, but no data output when I do the BT and sometimes they suddenly reboot. Someone has already solved this situation?
My config ( in WDS mode ) is :
-bridge interface with ether1 and wlan1
-wireless mode : station-wds (or bridge)
-band : 5GHz only n
-freq. : 5500
-HT chains : Tx 0 1 / Rx 0 1
-HT AMPDU : 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-wds mode : dynamic
-wds def. bridge : bridge_name
-nstreme : enabled (on bridge machine frame policy : "best fit")
On rb800 it work fine but if i try with alix ... nothing .
We have seen something similar with R52n. In our case the TX rate falls to 1Mbps-SP and CCQ to ~20%. Signals are very good. I have been searching for these symptoms in the forum. I can't believe that only I have problems with these cards. I think there is something wrong with them.2) The N radios seem to "gather" errors or something. If the radio is running max throughput for a period of time it will all the sudden stop and only move a few kbps for 10-15 minutes or until disabled and re-enabled, then back to normal operation. During the problem periods the rate, ccq and signal looks perfectly normal.
@pampi
Do the test in both direction UDP frame size set 200b & measure the ping latency.
Or just run this link productively.
I have a link to the production set static 216/216 Mbps CCQ always 99/99%, TX / RX Signal 50dB, 100Mbit possible with UDP packets 1500b ethernet is limit.
But the ping latency in the 30/10 traffic Mbitsis not acceptable 20-50ms (802.11a Turbo Link is 5-10 ms MAX!!!!!) jitter is weak, Nstreme not work.
The same experience here!I put the test config back, couse I see your post, that for a period of time, it stops.
Now its running 1day 15 hour, one bandwidth test with maximal throughput till now, at the moment I change the direction. No disconnections, no speed dropdowns, I monitored the interface with snmp. I see the interface statistic and there are no errors, but lots of data transmited
We have seen something similar with R52n. In our case the TX rate falls to 1Mbps-SP and CCQ to ~20%. Signals are very good. I have been searching for these symptoms in the forum. I can't believe that only I have problems with these cards. I think there is something wrong with them.2) The N radios seem to "gather" errors or something. If the radio is running max throughput for a period of time it will all the sudden stop and only move a few kbps for 10-15 minutes or until disabled and re-enabled, then back to normal operation. During the problem periods the rate, ccq and signal looks perfectly normal.
The same experience here!
Here's what I did:
The testbed:
5Ghz, N-Only mode, ROS version 4.5
Laptop-----RB800 + R52N + DualPol Ant <-----20meters (a few walls in between)-----> DualPol Ant + R52N + RB800-----Laptop
Everything seemed fine. I was getting stable 270/270Mbps Tx/Rx rate and a 95/95% CCQ. The bandwidth test in the RouterOS run fine, and gave me mind-blowing results:
- one way TCP :120-140Mbps
- both ways TCP: ~ 82/87 Mbps
I left this - one way - test running for 3 days!! Not a single glitch, no disconnection, perfect! Just like pampi, I was very happy!
BUT!
The tests between the two laptops (with gigabit eth ports) weren't so great at all... The one way test (copying file from one laptop to another) gave me some 25-30Mbps max.
Then I took the whole setup outside and put it to the test under real-world circumstances :
Very noisy environment @ 5.4GHz!
Corporate Net---RB800 + R52N + DualPol Ant <-----1300m-----> DualPol Ant + R52N + RB800---Corporate Net
And then, the problems began to emerge...
First of all, I've got a very good signal strength -48~51 / -48~50 dBm ... but just like merlinthemagic and congo said... everything was fine for some time, and then, under 50-60 Mbps of traffic and 10-11kpps, suddenly, everything seemed to collapse! The RX-rate fell from 216-270Mbps to 6-12Mbps, and the CCQ did the same... from 90% ---> down to 5-7%. If I left it this way... sometimes it recovered itself after an hour, or so... but if I wanted a quick recovery, I had to reboot one of the RouterBoards...
The ping was somewhere between 4-6ms with 5GHz-Turbo mode (Compex AG card), but with this 5GHz-N-only link it looked like it was multiplied by a factor of 8... somewhere around 30-40ms
... had to put back the old miniPCI cards and the 5GHz-Turbo mode to regain the stability we were accustomed to...
Conclusion: a lot of work (coding) is required by MikroTik to make these N-links stable and ready for the "Real World" circumstances
I wish they (MikroTik engineers) could be here to see with their own eyes the behavior of these N-links... or would it be helpful if I send a supout.rif file to them for analysis ...?
Regards
Is that with a 20mhz or 40mhz channel?After months of playing with N this is what works for me. Removed all a and b data rates and just use one ht-mcs rate that your link preferes. I have 18km link running single chain using only mcs=4 basic and supported. On btest i get 64Mb throughput and production data 58Mb one way. Also have 2km link set on mcs6 supported and basic and on btest get 100Mb and real data 94Mb. Also have a 40Km link set msc4 single chain doing 50Mb real data and lastly an 8km link running dual pol dishes msc10 doing 120Mb real data. The key was with the hw retries and data rates. Also all the link from 10Km up is running nstreme as it doesn't like to work on the short links.
All in all am extremely happy with me links. They all performing very well.
@professorAfter months of playing with N this is what works for me. Removed all a and b data rates and just use one ht-mcs rate that your link preferes. I have 18km link running single chain using only mcs=4 basic and supported. On btest i get 64Mb throughput and production data 58Mb one way. Also have 2km link set on mcs6 supported and basic and on btest get 100Mb and real data 94Mb. Also have a 40Km link set msc4 single chain doing 50Mb real data and lastly an 8km link running dual pol dishes msc10 doing 120Mb real data. The key was with the hw retries and data rates. Also all the link from 10Km up is running nstreme as it doesn't like to work on the short links.
All in all am extremely happy with me links. They all performing very well.
Check out this dual pol antenna for 802.11n. http://www.antennas.com/DATA-SHEETS/ARC ... 113009.pdfdoes 802.11n works on the 5ghz band
I thought so, thank you for your confirmation. These two channels are very close in frequency, so it's easy to get intererference.I didn't get many answers on my thread, so...
How about 2 chains on an AP and one chain on the CPE? Would that increase the download speed, upload speed or the same as a single chain?
On a small AP, has anyone run a high gain omni along with a lower gain omni? I'm looking at a Hyperlink 15dBi with a 8 or 10dBi for the second chain. Wider beamwidth for closer customers and cheaper as well.
I agree with separating the pigtails as far as possible, however, outside of an N connection, I am hesitant to run 2 cards of the same frequency in the same box. I've got a 433 running a 3 sector 2.4GHz setup, works quite well. I've got several 600 with 2.4 AP and 5GHz ptp in and out. I am catching tons of self interference in the 5GHz band with careful location of the pigtails.DO not cross Pigtails on outdoor boxes, put them on left and right, so they could not be connected. I have a link on 433ah 2x5ghz-turbo link, all work fine. I think, this could make good interference (pigtails together)
Hello,
Happy new year (norouz) .
about wireless link 802.11n !?
for about 3 meter , routerboard 411AH , R52N , 16dBi dual Polar antenna , with eoip bridge ; test with btest on wlan we have about 222Mbps RX or TX and TX:103Mbps and RX:85Mbps ; and test with btest on ethernet 95.5Mbps
for about 2.001 KM with routerboard 800 , R52N , 2 * 29dBi parabolic antenna , with eoip bridge ; test with btest on wlan about 127Mbps and test with btest on ethernet 117 Mbps ; i send file with 524MG from 4 windows computer to 4 windows computer about 5,5 minutes for all computer , and copy file to 2 windows with IDM(internet download manager) from 2 RB411U(USB2 Flash) with ftp by 79Mbps . cpu usage is 8%
for about 3.7 km with routerboard 411AH , R52N , 28dBi dual polar Dish antenna ......... ; test ................................................. about 127Mbps RX or TX on WLAN and 95.5 Mbps on Ethernet .
Yes. Try it on small packets, like 100 bytes.UDP tests are not relevant...
9 months and still no progress 802.11n does not work correctly with production traffic. Ping is a high latency is not acceptable for 30-50ms for 40/10mbit traffic. Nstreme still does not work correctly with production traffic, falls CCQ miserably when Nstreme is enabled.
RouterOS v4 works fine. What the problem? See above thread, most issues have been solved with proper configuration. 802.11n is very hard to configure, lots of new options that need adjusting. You have to ask for help if you have issues.And new alpha version of ROS v5 when ROS 4 is in beta state. :/
Why release ROS v5 when v4 is very beta version?
Uuups. You're happy with your 11n implementation? Expect that there will be others who manageRouterOS v4 works fine. What the problem? See above thread, most issues have been solved with proper configuration. 802.11n is very hard to configure, lots of new options that need adjusting. You have to ask for help if you have issues.And new alpha version of ROS v5 when ROS 4 is in beta state. :/
Why release ROS v5 when v4 is very beta version?
Thank you. Can you tell us some release dates prediction for these two features I mentioned? Are you already working on that?It's already added
Well you should make wiki for this. I tried several weeks to get your N solution to work - no success. Tried 3 different locations, all the time same result - high ping, low throughtput.Do you have an issue with 802.11n ? Please, give us your configuration, and tell us what's wrong. We will try to help.
Do you have an issue with 802.11n ? Please, give us your configuration, and tell us what's wrong. We will try to help.
this only means that you don't know about the hw-retries setting, which affects latency, and can decrease it. As I said, configuration issuePing is a high latency is not acceptable
I try hw-retries setting 15, 5, 0 on AP & APC no change but if I set 0 some ping lost no stable.this only means that you don't know about the hw-retries setting, which affects latency, and can decrease it. As I said, configuration issuePing is a high latency is not acceptable
I think bigger hw-retries means worse latency not true for point too point link.small hw-retries means good latency, lower link stability
bigger hw-retries means worse latency, higher link stability
choose your target and experiment accordingly, to balance latency and stability
Normis;small hw-retries means good latency, lower link stability
bigger hw-retries means worse latency, higher link stability
choose your target and experiment accordingly, to balance latency and stability
ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no \
antenna-gain=0 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn \
basic-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" comment="" compression=no country=\
poland default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes \
default-client-tx-limit=0 default-forwarding=yes dfs-mode=none \
disable-running-check=no disabled=no disconnect-timeout=3s \
frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5180 frequency-mode=manual-txpower hide-ssid=\
no ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 \
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 ht-extension-channel=disabled \
ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=\
mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-txchains=0,1 \
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none \
hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 \
max-station-count=2 mode=bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=\
100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 \
preamble-mode=short \
rate-set=configured scan-list=5180,5760,5320,5825 \
security-profile=default ssid=awmn-2315-3665 station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b="" \
update-stats-interval=disabled \
wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 \
wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=disabled wmm-support=enabled
mt client config:/interface wireless security-profiles
set default authentication-types="" eap-methods=passthrough group-ciphers="" \
group-key-update=5m interim-update=0s management-protection=disabled \
management-protection-key="" mode=none name=default \
radius-eap-accounting=no radius-mac-accounting=no \
radius-mac-authentication=no radius-mac-caching=disabled \
radius-mac-format=XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX radius-mac-mode=as-username \
static-algo-0=none static-algo-1=none static-algo-2=none static-algo-3=\
none static-key-0="" static-key-1="" static-key-2="" static-key-3="" \
static-sta-private-algo=none static-sta-private-key="" \
static-transmit-key=key-0 supplicant-identity=MikroTik tls-certificate=\
none tls-mode=no-certificates unicast-ciphers="" wpa-pre-shared-key="" \
wpa2-pre-shared-key=""
/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no \
antenna-gain=0 area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b="" comment="" compression=no country=poland \
default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=\
0 default-forwarding=yes dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=\
no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5180 frequency-mode=\
manual-txpower hide-ssid=no ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 \
ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 \
ht-extension-channel=disabled ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 \
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-txchains=0,1 \
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none \
hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=\
00:0C:42:61:72:04 max-station-count=2 mode=bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 \
on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled \
periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=short \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C42617204 rate-set=\
configured scan-list=5180,5760,5320,5825 security-profile=default ssid=n \
station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" \
supported-rates-b="" tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled \
wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 \
wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=disabled wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,\
6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps\
:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:\
0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=no enable-polling=no \
framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none
/interface wireless security-profiles
set default authentication-types="" eap-methods=passthrough group-ciphers="" \
group-key-update=5m interim-update=0s management-protection=disabled \
management-protection-key="" mode=none name=default \
radius-eap-accounting=no radius-mac-accounting=no \
radius-mac-authentication=no radius-mac-caching=disabled \
radius-mac-format=XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX radius-mac-mode=as-username \
static-algo-0=none static-algo-1=none static-algo-2=none static-algo-3=\
none static-key-0="" static-key-1="" static-key-2="" static-key-3="" \
static-sta-private-algo=none static-sta-private-key="" \
static-transmit-key=key-0 supplicant-identity=MikroTik tls-certificate=\
none tls-mode=no-certificates unicast-ciphers="" wpa-pre-shared-key="" \
wpa2-pre-shared-key=""
/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no \
antenna-gain=0 area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b="" comment="" compression=no country=poland \
default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=\
0 default-forwarding=yes dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=\
no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5180 frequency-mode=\
manual-txpower hide-ssid=no ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 \
ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 \
ht-extension-channel=disabled ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 \
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-txchains=0,1 \
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none \
hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=\
00:0C:42:61:72:01 max-station-count=2 mode=station mtu=1500 name=wlan1 \
on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled \
periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=short \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C42617201 rate-set=\
configured scan-list=5180,5760,5320,5825 security-profile=default ssid=n \
station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" \
supported-rates-b="" tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled \
wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 \
wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=disabled wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,\
6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps\
:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:\
0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=no enable-polling=yes \
framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none
i add ip 10.10.10.1 to mt-ap, and 10.10.10.2 to mt-client to ether1 at mt's:eeh ..
1. Run test over vpls (test to ether ip - not transport/remote/wlan ip )
2. Test run on ROS not on pc with winshit
eeh ..
1. Run test over vpls (test to ether ip - not transport/remote/wlan ip )
2. Test run on ROS not on pc with winshit
You mean...I have a 5km link with 2 r52n cards on which I only use single chain and Signal-77. After have tried many different settings
on this link I found the following....
1. Increasing the "hw retries" to 10
2. Setting the "Ack Timeout" to 75us
- In the default setting the link established with a "Ack Timeout" of 45us
- This made the greatest difference. The link went from an avg of CCQ70 to CCQ 95
3. Removed all rates in "Data Rates"
4. Only marked MSC0 and MSC4 under "supported" and MCS0 under "basic"
- Here I removed all except MCS0 and added one by one as long as the link kept good CCQ
I total I went from a TP of 20mb to 65mb
I applied similar changes to a 1km link and went from 70mb to 90mb with a single chain.
I don't know if this could be applied for dual chains, but I hope this can help someone
RGDS
please show us pings at tcp 65mbI have a 5km link with 2 r52n cards on which I only use single chain and Signal-77.
I total I went from a TP of 20mb to 65mb
please show us pings at tcp 70mbI applied similar changes to a 1km link and went from 70mb to 90mb with a single chain.
@ jcem TCP, TCP, TCP...................
1 or 2 chain? Please show us pings at this traffic...Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
Concratulations! But;Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
doubtfulConcratulations! But;Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
- Configs please (´n´ specific as well as other wireless. nstreme? WDS? MPLS?)
- Link data (distance, freq's, power, signal level CCQ etc. etc. etc.
- Environment; Noise levels, other ´legacy´ a/b/g radio's around?
If we know all this maybe we can learn from it and achieve the same....
Did you checked the HT AMPDU priority and AMSDU Limit/Threshold values? Did not help to use this parameters?why bother with this n links ? when you can get same results with turbo g ? even better,
N is horrible on small packets.
we have a nstream dual link performing on 80mb tcp full duplex.
No metter small packets , big packets , tcp , udp.
Link is in production. It’s used as a backup of fiber optic connection.
3 weeks link was in production as primary link for 1000 users.
Voip, data …… everything works perfectly.
We lost 3 weeks configuring N wireless for this link without any success, bandwidth test for udp traffic showed 200m WOOOW that’s cool, but in real life 10 voip calls was killing this link.
I will wait 1 year before I will try N again.
name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:x arp=enabled
interface-type=Atheros 11N mode=station ssid="test" frequency=5180
band=5ghz-a/n scan-list=default wds-mode=disabled
wds-default-bridge=none wds-ignore-ssid=no default-authentication=yes
default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
hide-ssid=no security-profile=WPA compression=no
name="5GHz AP" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:x arp=enabled
interface-type=Atheros 11N mode=ap-bridge ssid="test" frequency=5785
band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=default wds-mode=disabled
wds-default-bridge=none wds-ignore-ssid=no default-authentication=yes
default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
hide-ssid=yes security-profile=WPA compression=no
Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
I'm not sure you tried this.......AP is a 433 with R52NH and two 6dBi omni, one client is a 19dBi rootenna, 411 and R52N, other is a dual band rootenna with 411 and R52N.
I've tried two different cards, two different RB433, two different CPE, different sets of pigtails.
I've connected to an AP on the tower with the CPE's and done site surveys with one of them. I don't remember which connector, I think J4, using chain 0. Just for giggles, I checked it and swapped to the other chain, lost 30dB signal.I'm not sure you tried this.......
When looking on the front of the R52n card antenna connectors up:
- I only "check" chain0 when the antenna is connected to the left connector on the card
- I only "check" chain1 when the antenna is connected to the right connector on the card
Only "check" the appropriate chain# when using single chain and single antenna
RGDS
Scanning with the chain not connected You shouldn't see anything further away than ~50 meters.I've connected to an AP on the tower with the CPE's and done site surveys with one of them. I don't remember which connector, I think J4, using chain 0. Just for giggles, I checked it and swapped to the other chain, lost 30dB signal.I'm not sure you tried this.......
When looking on the front of the R52n card antenna connectors up:
- I only "check" chain0 when the antenna is connected to the left connector on the card
- I only "check" chain1 when the antenna is connected to the right connector on the card
Only "check" the appropriate chain# when using single chain and single antenna
RGDS
That's not true. I had a radio that had a pigtail disconnected and still picked up two or three radio's from more then a km away that were aiming that same tower. Off course these used high gain antenna's with concentrated energy beam toward that tower.Scanning with the chain not connected You shouldn't see anything further away than ~50 meters.
For example other AP's in the same tower or an AP real close.....
RGDS
I love this, normis drops into this thread after months of people having headaches to tell us that everything is perfect and it's just that nobody can properly configure their 802.11n settings. Please oh please normis share with us the magic of this 802.11n voodoo that nobody seems to be able to figure out. I can tell you that hardware retires does not fix the issues. I've played with every setting imaginable and I'm unable to get anything to work with any reliability. I can however pop out the n card, drop an XR5 in the same place, same pig tail, same antenna, same ROS and link up with 40+ mbits throughput.
Why is it that so few people have having success with 802.11n and it appears that the cries from the masses have fallen on deaf ears for the past several months and now it's all just a "configuration issue"? I would think that someone out of all of those who are trying would have stumbled upon the magic combination of settings that makes a link work well. There are here and there results where someone gets a nice production link but those seem to be over short distances and with astronomically high signal levels. We're used to taking a 5 GHz link and going 30+ km to a -60's signal and getting 40 mbits. I have yet to see anyone do anything similar with 802.11n products from Mikrotik. I can however buy M5 solutions left and right and slap them up with relative ease and count on them to work correctly (or at least usually).
I love the "do you have a problem with N?" "Give us your configuration and we'll help". There has been at least 20 people post their full configuration in this thread who are getting poor results on a production link and I have yet to see one of them solved. Most of us don't have the luxury of leaving a broken link in place for weeks at a time while you feed us this and that tid bit of information on how to massage the link into functionality. If MT is unwilling to put serious effort into fixing the 802.11n issues and supporting those of us who have forked over the money to try to jump on the MT n bandwagon just let us know now so we can plan accordingly. I'm sure this will draw the ban hammer down upon me but someone really needs to say what everyone is thinking.
we have new drivers in v5, all work that we put into wireless goes into v5 now, there should be lots of improvements coming shortly. We have many test links here, each with different conditions, we are trying to simulate all environments and improve in them.
May you can consider to attend china MUM and talk face to face with the Mikrotik management people.If bandwidth tests don't show the limitation of N for you, you are several steps ahead of me.
I've been reading on 802.11n, been reading the posts, forum, wiki, etc. I can't even get a 411 to work with a bandwidth test, not even 2 433's with R52nH, two 5GHz antenna per system, single chain, dual chain, extension channel, no extension channel, v4.3 through v5B1, reset to defaults, WPA, no encryption, just about every variable I can think of.
I am about two steps from calling MT 802.11n complete BS. I have tested single antenna, dual, single chain, dual, single channel, dual, encrypted vs not, different channels, different bands, etc... reset after every firmware update, manually configured rather than use my CPE config, tried actually using the link rather than running btest.
Every single time I use N, it fails. The only thing more reliable than N's failure is A or G working. The most I've gotten out of it was 23mbps.
My entire network is based on MT hardware and software. I am beginning to wonder if my business plan may not have a huge hole in it limiting myself to a single supplier. The only things I don't buy from MT is cases, antennas and 900MHz radios. Every piece of hardware with any intelligence is MT, right down to the wireless cards, aside from the 900MHz band.
I have posted many questions about 4.x and N networking in general and gotten some info that I already knew from some forum users and no answers from MT themselves. I have been completely thrilled with MT until this point. Now I am beginning to wonder.
If MT is having trouble with 802.11n, keep us in the loop. Denying there is a problem when many of us are actually having problems is causing loyal customers to doubt your integrity and/or capability. What you are capable of can change drastically and quickly, I've been there myself. What you are honest about is something different entirely.
Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
100mbt tcp or udp traffic ?
1 or 2 chain? Please show us pings at this traffic...Real 100mbit half duplex is arrived! This is real customer traffic not any type of b-test. I try replace RB600 at station side and I am sure i can get more then 100mbit in one direction!
Normis...We are testing a lot, we have a multitude of testing links with real traffic, but most of them work perfectly fine. We have found some issues in some cases, and are trying to improve the situation. We are also working on new wireless drivers.
But ...
don't expect the 802.11n to be some magic speed boost switch. You have to learn to understand it, and properly configure it.
I really am beginning to tire of reading this particular line.But ...
don't expect the 802.11n to be some magic speed boost switch. You have to learn to understand it, and properly configure it.
this means that your link is WORST then common nstream dual in 802.11a turbo link. i had 7-10 times smaller pings at mt 3.30...Two chains, ping not exceed 20-30ms. I can try make sreen shot but I am not always on internet connection.
My experience is the same.....this means that your link is WORST then common nstream dual in 802.11a turbo link. i had 7-10 times smaller pings at mt 3.30...Two chains, ping not exceed 20-30ms. I can try make sreen shot but I am not always on internet connection.
show us pings at 60/60 mbit or higher tcp traffic...
this means that your link is WORST then common nstream dual in 802.11a turbo link. i had 7-10 times smaller pings at mt 3.30...Two chains, ping not exceed 20-30ms. I can try make sreen shot but I am not always on internet connection.
show us pings at 60/60 mbit or higher tcp traffic...
Uldis..when enabling the encryption use only AES. Do not use the TKIP as it will be slow on the N.
That was the source of my troubles.when enabling the encryption use only AES. Do not use the TKIP as it will be slow on the N.
We are watching this "working fine" product and testing it.OK But why ubiquiti "N" working fine with simple configuration ?
Maybe MT add wizard to simple configure 802.11n ?
yeap its impossible with latency like nstreme dual turbo link. i try everythink (1/2 chain, mpls/bridge/wds, 802.11/nstreme and other...) at rb433/600 and p3 1.2GHz tualatin. and... 15/15 mbit both tcp with ACCEPTED latency at level of nstreme dual or 25 mbit receive/send tcp. that is all that mikrotik can achieve with "n" card sending real traffic.... with low latency.Next Test:
Notebook -- RB600 --11n-- RB600 -- LAN (with servers and MTS)
2 x RB600 on Desktop like told above, 270/270MBit stable n11 link. Ping delay through the routing RB600 1ms to the LAN behind. very good - BUT !
so i dont understand that anyone is able to transport TCP traffic of above 50MBit via the 11n link... This seems not to be possible... The above limit at my test is 50MBit... And i can see that the problem is _not_ the WLAN setting. I think the speed of something inside the box ?!?
Dieter
could you make a bandwidth test tcp and smal udp packets 100b parallel ?Next Test:
Notebook -- RB600 --11n-- RB600 -- LAN (with servers and MTS)
2 x RB600 on Desktop like told above, 270/270MBit stable n11 link. Ping delay through the routing RB600 1ms to the LAN behind. very good - BUT !
Starting Bandwidht Test TCP "both directions", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 23MBit/17MBit, app. 6Kpps, delay: 8-20ms (ping through link to other side)
Starting a second, prarallel Bandwith Text TCP "both directions", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 24MBit/24MBit, app. 7Kpps, delay: 15-30ms
Starting Bandwidht Test TCP "receive only", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 1MBit/32MBit, app. 4Kpps, delay: 7-11ms
Starting a second, prarallel Bandwith Text TCP "receive only", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 1MBit/40MBit, app. 5Kpps, delay: 9-19ms
Load on both RB600 app. 45%
The UDP Test (RB600_to_RB600) brings unidirect 180MBit, 15Kpps, at delay time of 82ms (limit reached = OK)
The UDP Test (RB600_to_RB600) limited at 100MBit, 8-9Kpps, at delay time of 1-9ms (middle 5ms)
... it seems there is a bottleneck inside OS, which lets the RB600 to queue packets ??? and if the deley increases, TCP throughput limit is reached quickly ...
... because the packet transport within the WLAN seems to have more capacity than the boards/SW is able to push via the WLAN ...
so i dont understand that anyone is able to transport TCP traffic of above 50MBit via the 11n link... This seems not to be possible... The above limit at my test is 50MBit... And i can see that the problem is _not_ the WLAN setting. I think the speed of something inside the box ?!?
Am i wrong ??? please give input if i have an error in my conclusion .... there is no 11n understanding problem, i think...
Please an statement from MT. Thanks !
Dieter
try mixed tcp and udp 100b packetsHi OpiumDream !
UDP packets with 700bytes = 18Kpps, ping delay = 6-17ms (sometimes 2-3ms ?!?), cpu load 15%
UDP packets with 400bytes = 32Kpps, ping delay = 11-22ms (sometimes 2-3ms ?!?), cpu load 19%
UDP packets with 200bytes = 44Kpps, but "only" 60MBit throughput (air-limit reached), ping delay = 11-22ms
(some packet loss), cpu load 57%
the RB600 boards can do the UDP speed-test, push 44Kpps packets with 200bytes over the air at load 57% and route with a delay of 11ms all together .....
so the WLAN works very fine and the OS works very hard but is able to process the requested stress ...
the only question is: where is the valve to get the speed which the 11n can do easily
it should be in packet processing to the wlan card and produces a delay which levels tcp communication to a slow speed. the boards and wlan cards have the ressources to do a good work, but something inside the OS stopps speed with queueing.
This is my mind for this problem ?!? i cannot see another explanation ..
Dieter
I have to say that your experience pushed me to play with queue and changin the interface-queue of the wireless N, but i don't see any particular benefit shorting the queue on the wireless interface, I noted a little lower jitter but with some more packet loss on have charged N link. As i was expecting but this change.Next Test:
Notebook -- RB600 --11n-- RB600 -- LAN (with servers and MTS)
2 x RB600 on Desktop like told above, 270/270MBit stable n11 link. Ping delay through the routing RB600 1ms to the LAN behind. very good - BUT !
Starting Bandwidht Test TCP "both directions", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 23MBit/17MBit, app. 6Kpps, delay: 8-20ms (ping through link to other side)
Starting a second, prarallel Bandwith Text TCP "both directions", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 24MBit/24MBit, app. 7Kpps, delay: 15-30ms
Starting Bandwidht Test TCP "receive only", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 1MBit/32MBit, app. 4Kpps, delay: 7-11ms
Starting a second, prarallel Bandwith Text TCP "receive only", random data from Notebook to another (!) MT on LAN.
Throughput on the RB600: 1MBit/40MBit, app. 5Kpps, delay: 9-19ms
Load on both RB600 app. 45%
The UDP Test (RB600_to_RB600) brings unidirect 180MBit, 15Kpps, at delay time of 82ms (limit reached = OK)
The UDP Test (RB600_to_RB600) limited at 100MBit, 8-9Kpps, at delay time of 1-9ms (middle 5ms)
... it seems there is a bottleneck inside OS, which lets the RB600 to queue packets ??? and if the deley increases, TCP throughput limit is reached quickly ...
... because the packet transport within the WLAN seems to have more capacity than the boards/SW is able to push via the WLAN ...
so i dont understand that anyone is able to transport TCP traffic of above 50MBit via the 11n link... This seems not to be possible... The above limit at my test is 50MBit... And i can see that the problem is _not_ the WLAN setting. I think the speed of something inside the box ?!?
Am i wrong ??? please give input if i have an error in my conclusion .... there is no 11n understanding problem, i think...
Please an statement from MT. Thanks !
Dieter
please show screenshot with pings/lattency at 50mbit tcp bOTHI see that many of you complain on 802.11n latency and bandwidth.
When you say that latency is not better in 802.11n then 802.11a, you are very very wrong. Our experience is different. 802.11n link can handle more than dual nstreme at 802.11a with better latency: 1-3ms max.
We cannot dismantle some live production links to show you bandwidth test like you want. So here is example with other link:
50/30 about 6km:
We cannot dismantle some live production links to show you bandwidth test like you want.
This is screenshot of other part of link with station wds.where is wds at screenshot in interface list?
did you try r52n mpci?
No.did you try r52n mpci?
There is no problem with any kind of traffic with our setup.Ok, internal traffic (wlan,wlan) with bandwidth test is not really relevant...
real traffic or small packets via the _whole_ devices (lan-wlan-wlan-lan) show the problems.
With our stability is very good... No issues. Don't enable anything which is not by default. Just use default settings and our setup.nstreme has better delay time (better packet handling?) but is very unstable at 11n and not really supported. i can only get "stable" links on nstreme and 11n with fixed ack-times, data-rate-settings and noise-immuity. but on limits the nstreme link drops quickly...
No problem with 433ah and 411ah, we tried this also.. works perfect... But RB800 is the best.maybe RB800 is fast enough to keep the delay time low if there is the bottleneck on OS ... because of faster cpu and therefore better packet processing...
Because Nstreme only works with WDS in 4.5 ... If you disable nstreme, link is not working. I do not know why, ask mikrotik: )According MT WDS doesn't work well on ´n´. It is been repeated several times here. Why should in now do on yours?
As I mention, our setup will not work if you disable nstreme. Performance is great. Just try it and test it. Then come here and tell me is it the best setup for now? ) Also when you test it, make sure to test stability, you will see that it is better then dual nstreme 802.11a...Have you tried difference between ´nstreme´ on your ´live´ link enabled and disabled under idle conditions? I am still worried that under idle conditions ´nstreme´ is degreasing performance of link.
SparkLAN WMIA-198N and WPEA-110N. Default in mikrotik: 30-63mW.Which power settings on cards (which cards?)
No.receiving signal strengths (and are they fluctuating?)
MCS's are stable, but you need to find the best combination for each link depending on distance.Connection rates. Do they stay stable under high and low data load?
Well, tried exactly your settings on 800mtr link. Signal is only -70 - -75!!! (With 21dB dish! Put normal 802.11 card and signals are around -45!!) and had the link running.You have so many other questions... Please try our setup and then report. You will be surprised.
I think your wireless card is damaged.Well, tried exactly your settings on 800mtr link. Signal is only -70 - -75!!! (With 21dB dish! Put normal 802.11 card and signals are around -45!!) and had the link running.You have so many other questions... Please try our setup and then report. You will be surprised.
Started bandwidth test with 1/1Mb running
Then started to push up.
Reaching 15Mb was maximum while latency stayed < 7ms.
The moment I tried to push a bit more traffic one end router 433 (no AH) collapsed.
Router crashed, takes about 10 mins to recover. During this it is shown in wired connected neighbour with same network IP but not able to reach. Not even with mac. No ping, nothing.
Have to wait 10 mins and then router comes back up.
Look at log, is telling me nothing more that the router shut down due power outage.
But in looking at the other end during the 10 mins out of reach I do see the radio trying to make contact after 5 mins. Only after several attempts and 5 mins later link is established again...
MT reading this will ask supout.rif but it is not generated by watchdog.
Great! You see now how 802.11n works!!!ok, exe !
you are right ! this was the valve to speed the link to that what it can do ...
i can do a tcp-test with 65MBit/25MBit via the whole config (lan-wlan-wlan-lan) and have pings with 1-3ms
i can copy files nearly as fast as on LAN !
i can run tcp-BT and file copy parallel and have 82MBit/30MBit with ping delay of 1-5ms !!
Unbelivable!!!!!!ok, exe !
you are right ! this was the valve to speed the link to that what it can do ...
i can do a tcp-test with 65MBit/25MBit via the whole config (lan-wlan-wlan-lan) and have pings with 1-3ms
i can copy files nearly as fast as on LAN !
i can run tcp-BT and file copy parallel and have 82MBit/30MBit with ping delay of 1-5ms !!
OK But why ubiquiti "N" working fine with simple configuration ?
Maybe MT add wizard to simple configure 802.11n ?
Dieter, you mean you put the vpls interface in the bridge on the AP-Bridge side?yeah!!!
it also works fine on my production link with MPLS if i put the communications IPs for MPLS into the WDS bridge !!!
how was the signal on that link?? and have you tried to push to max tcp speed??ok, exe !
you are right ! this was the valve to speed the link to that what it can do ...
i can do a tcp-test with 65MBit/25MBit via the whole config (lan-wlan-wlan-lan) and have pings with 1-3ms
i can copy files nearly as fast as on LAN !
i can run tcp-BT and file copy parallel and have 82MBit/30MBit with ping delay of 1-5ms !!
this was the only config i did not test, because earlier versions did not work like this and everyone says that WDS is not possible to work
-- i use RB600 and R52N now --
in my routed-test-config on desktop, i have switched now simply to nstreme and WDS, did put my ips from wlan interface to bridge interface and had best performance i have ever seen ...
MT, the miracle is solved ! please check packet processing on _not_ WDS and _not_ nstreme ! everything else than WDS with nstreme doesn't work speedy and produces delay - it depends not on wlan drivers and special settings and 11n understanding problems ...
Dieter
in routed mode just use the bridge interface instead the wlan1.so in plain routed mode the issue persist, but without wds it doesnt? what about CCQ, is this affected by this setting? Seems unrelated, but curious.
Hi Rudy, you have to do this on Both sides !!Dieter, you mean you put the vpls interface in the bridge on the AP-Bridge side?yeah!!!
it also works fine on my production link with MPLS if i put the communications IPs for MPLS into the WDS bridge !!!
Do you also have the wlan port in the bridge?
On the station nothing changes apart from "station mode" >>> "station-wds" mode?
Rudy
Well... the Wiki ( http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transpare ... using_MPLS ) clearly states that the WDS approach has some issues with 802.11n links> "802.11n speed is limited over WDS bridges" furthermore --> "this [MPLS/VPLS] method doesn't have such limitations"I read these new posts and though to my self - am I awake or still dreaming So, very cool that you found a working scenario. We will continue to work on the rest of the modes. Thanks for sharing, exe!
That lesson is learned long ago.So... I learned my lesson... Do not believe everything that is written in the Wiki...
i tried your config, i can't set signal worst than -56, you suggest not higher than -65:We cannot dismantle some live production links to show you bandwidth test like you want. So here is example with other link:
50/30 about 6km:
60/30 about 6km:
hiWe got a guy that does our dual polarity feeders. Still testing configs but we are satisfied with a certain design that we are going to run a few batches.May I ask your antenna configuration? Spacings and such
We tested those with 80 and 100cm sat dishes. I guess a dual polarity Pac can do the job as well.
Hi exeI see that many of you complain on 802.11n latency and bandwidth.
When you say that latency is not better in 802.11n then 802.11a, you are very very wrong. Our experience is different. 802.11n link can handle more than dual nstreme at 802.11a with better latency: 1-3ms max.
In order to make ease for you, here is what we test successfully for live links with real internet traffic, without issues:
Let's imagine we have points A and B... A >10km> B
You need to configure like this (we are using ROS 4.5, Sparklan Wmia 198N MinIPCI and RB800):
Point A: Enable nstreme, put 5G only N, mode: ap bridge, remove all data rates, HW Retries 15, HT Chains: 0,1 both, HT Guard: any, HT Ext. channel: for example above control, HT Ampdu 0, HT Supported MCS: 0,1,2,3,4 .. HT Basic MCS: 0 .. WDS mode static, Nstreme: Enable Nstreme>Enable Pooling>Disable CSMA, Framer policy: Dynamic, framer limit: any from 2400-3000 ...
Create WDS interface for point B
Point B: All the same, just put mode: station WDS, enable nstreme and you are ready to go!!!
Try this, if you have good results it is okay, if you have poor result, choose better frequency.
If you have good signal you can enable mcs 5,6,7 .. try it...
This link can give 50M/50M without no problems with latency like in 802.11a dual nstreme .. If you have enough signal margin you can achieve more bandwidth. Latency will be very low: 1-3ms with real internet traffic of 30-35M ...
Signal must not be higher than -65 ...
Note: If you disable nstreme, link will not work.. If your distance between A and B is under 10km, then you can use MCS 5,6,7,8,9,10 and more but you need to determine this on both parts of the link. Just see what works stable with more bandwidth.
Optimization of 802.11n in ROS is not perfect and need more work, but this setup can work without issues. Just try it.
im affraid, the signal level is not the most important thing at all. what about ccq @ existing linkHi There,
Please excuse me but I am a total newbie here.
Has anyone used Dual Polarity Pac Wireless 32dB parabolic? Will they work as well as Jirous 29dB Dual Polarity?
I would like to replace an existing 5Ghz link that currently has Pac Wireless 32dB dishes in place, the distance is 30KM and i can achive -55
signal strength using Turbo mode.
I would like to use the Pac Wireless Dishes as they're in place but I've been told the polarity seperation is very bad,
any help would be very much appreciated.
Kind regards,
nikki
We use those dishes on a 19mile link. -55 at either end with 80's-90's CCQ. Noise around -105 on both ends. Throughput is a little less than 80mbit (tested one way, hdx). The collapsed dual-pol design on one dish won't give you the best performance but they're space efficient, cost effective and easy to install. So, how much speed do you need? If ~50meg give or take, will do, the dual-pol radome is convenient. If you need more speed then you'll want to use seperate dishes with spacial separation.Has anyone used Dual Polarity Pac Wireless 32dB parabolic? Will they work as well as Jirous 29dB Dual Polarity?
I would like to replace an existing 5Ghz link that currently has Pac Wireless 32dB dishes in place, the distance is 30KM and i can achive -55
I would like to use the Pac Wireless Dishes as they're in place but I've been told the polarity seperation is very bad,
Hi There,
Please excuse me but I am a total newbie here.
Has anyone used Dual Polarity Pac Wireless 32dB parabolic? Will they work as well as Jirous 29dB Dual Polarity?
I would like to replace an existing 5Ghz link that currently has Pac Wireless 32dB dishes in place, the distance is 30KM and i can achive -55
signal strength using Turbo mode.
I would like to use the Pac Wireless Dishes as they're in place but I've been told the polarity seperation is very bad,
any help would be very much appreciated.
Kind regards,
nikki
You should stay anonym with this signal valuesI tested today the "Exe-Config.
2 x RB411AH, 2 x R52hN, 2 x Mars 24,5 db Dual Polarity, Distance 25 km, LoS, very noisy enviroment, bridge mode, Btest over both RB411AH, Antenna on one side "off beam" due to lack of "second" man. I think it will bring 6 db more, if the antennas are correct justated.
Results:
20 Mhz Bandwith, 25-30 MB TCP, MCS4 stable Connection, Signal -69 to 72 db.
40 Mhz Bandwith, 45-55 MB TCP, MCS4 stable Connection -70 to 74 db.
Do not use WEP or WPA/TKIP. It slows downt he speed . WPA/TKIP 50 % slower and WEP 25 % slower. I used WPA/TKIP and there was no speed loss.
It works. Thanks to Exe.
I will go "hot" next week....
Regards
Wolff
http://www.funknetz-hg.de
I tested today the "Exe-Config.
2 x RB411AH, 2 x R52hN, 2 x Mars 24,5 db Dual Polarity, Distance 25 km, LoS, very noisy enviroment, bridge mode, Btest over both RB411AH, Antenna on one side "off beam" due to lack of "second" man. I think it will bring 6 db more, if the antennas are correct justated.
Results:
20 Mhz Bandwith, 25-30 MB TCP, MCS4 stable Connection, Signal -69 to 72 db.
40 Mhz Bandwith, 45-55 MB TCP, MCS4 stable Connection -70 to 74 db.
Do not use WEP or WPA/TKIP. It slows downt he speed . WPA/TKIP 50 % slower and WEP 25 % slower. I used WPA/TKIP and there was no speed loss.
It works. Thanks to Exe.
I will go "hot" next week....
Regards
Wolff
http://www.funknetz-hg.de
We use those dishes on a 19mile link. -55 at either end with 80's-90's CCQ. Noise around -105 on both ends. Throughput is a little less than 80mbit (tested one way, hdx). The collapsed dual-pol design on one dish won't give you the best performance but they're space efficient, cost effective and easy to install. So, how much speed do you need? If ~50meg give or take, will do, the dual-pol radome is convenient. If you need more speed then you'll want to use seperate dishes with spacial separation.Has anyone used Dual Polarity Pac Wireless 32dB parabolic? Will they work as well as Jirous 29dB Dual Polarity?
I would like to replace an existing 5Ghz link that currently has Pac Wireless 32dB dishes in place, the distance is 30KM and i can achive -55
I would like to use the Pac Wireless Dishes as they're in place but I've been told the polarity seperation is very bad,
But as was previously stated, the most important element is environment. Do you have low noise and available channels? If yes, you should be fine with whatever antenna system you select. If not, the best antenna won't be much help.
-Nelson-
how much cost that converter? could you show how it looks like?I have ready transvertors for 10 and UP GHz working
It has exactly same shape like this one (a bit other guts inside), except that this one is for full duplex radiolink like Ceragon, Dragonwave and Carriercom are with speed up to 350mbits full duplex.how much cost that converter? could you show how it looks like?I have ready transvertors for 10 and UP GHz working
please pm your email. i would like to start negotiations on the pricePrice is negotiable, depends on band and output power.
Would you mind to share with us how it's work?It has exactly same shape like this one (a bit other guts inside), except that this one is for full duplex radiolink like Ceragon, Dragonwave and Carriercom are with speed up to 350mbits full duplex.how much cost that converter? could you show how it looks like?I have ready transvertors for 10 and UP GHz working
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2 ... 0085712801
Price is negotiable, depends on band and output power. But know that this should be like expansion box for ROS, once guys fro MT will improve Nstreme Dual
Simply said, it is top notch technology up converter for transmitter with amplifier and down converter for reception with purity to pass thru cca 512QAM signal if needed. Then there is separator of transmitter from receiver to not jam the receiver (something like diplexer). Than it has detector to transmit exact power out (not estimated) and tuners to make transmitting within bound of cca 1GHz bandwith - lets say 1O -11GHz (the case you can see). Nice thing is that you loose about 1/2dB at all on input, because there is amplifier directly on receiving dipol. This feeder can be part of parabolic antenna which works like amplifier. With approx 60cm antennas you can do 20km link with Pout 2mW.
Would you mind to share with us how it's work?
and how is the connection for this?
me too pleaseplease pm your email. i would like to start negotiations on the pricePrice is negotiable, depends on band and output power.
My own experience is that water surfaces are really big big big problem for radiolinks. On all frequencies.. Especially on long links..30 km 5 Ghz link over water: lake St-Jean, Qc, Canada
I will give a try on 5beta1 as 4.7 package is broken...
Canada Mirror package 4.7 is OK !I will give a try on 5beta1 as 4.7 package is broken...
20/20 Mbps TCP in a both BT test when i use supported MCS 0-3 (disable MCS 4) !Now is -80 but i'm still doing 10/10 Mbps TCP in a both BT test...
We've had better luck with R52n's than the SR71's. We tried the 71's...excited about the 3-chain ability. But in our testing, while the 71's work "fine", throughput and CCQ is consistantly better on the R52n's. Our testing has not been exhaustive and we don't have enough hours on the 71's to make a conclusive call (and there's a lot of new variables with MIMO testing...in our application we were running 3 chains at the AP, 2 on the clients [happy to accept advice on MIMO configurations btw]) but first impressions...R52n's a better card. If it's easy to do I'd be curious to see your results on that same shot with a card swap.30 km 5 Ghz link over water: lake St-Jean, Qc, Canada
- SR71-15 on each side;
It works, but we experienced some issues with x86 and RB800 wrong temp value and some kernel problem if minipci-e slot is used, so we use v4.5 for now...does exe's config work on v4.6? I'm using it successfully on v4.5 but cannot bring down the link to test
Tested it today on RB411AH/R52N/4.7 seems to look much better now.we tested 4.7 on RB800 and it is shoing high latency on high load using plain station mode without bridge;
At the moment the best config for us is 5.0beta1 and EXE's config (station-wds).
regards
Ros
cpu at laptop1 - btest server 60-80% - (ibm thinkpad x40, lan intel 1gbe switched to 100 mbit full duplex, winxp)please take a look to the cpu utilization of notebook...
i think windows BT cannot give more on tcp speed test ...
check speed with an other MT (i have tested e.g. with an 750G) from the LAN side ...
hiI see that many of you complain on 802.11n latency and bandwidth.
When you say that latency is not better in 802.11n then 802.11a, you are very very wrong. Our experience is different. 802.11n link can handle more than dual nstreme at 802.11a with better latency: 1-3ms max.
In order to make ease for you, here is what we test successfully for live links with real internet traffic, without issues:
Let's imagine we have points A and B... A >10km> B
You need to configure like this (we are using ROS 4.5, Sparklan Wmia 198N MinIPCI and RB800):
Point A: Enable nstreme, put 5G only N, mode: ap bridge, remove all data rates, HW Retries 15, HT Chains: 0,1 both, HT Guard: any, HT Ext. channel: for example above control, HT Ampdu 0, HT Supported MCS: 0,1,2,3,4 .. HT Basic MCS: 0 .. WDS mode static, Nstreme: Enable Nstreme>Enable Pooling>Disable CSMA, Framer policy: Dynamic, framer limit: any from 2400-3000 ...
Create WDS interface for point B
Point B: All the same, just put mode: station WDS, enable nstreme and you are ready to go!!!
Try this, if you have good results it is okay, if you have poor result, choose better frequency.
If you have good signal you can enable mcs 5,6,7 .. try it...
This link can give 50M/50M without no problems with latency like in 802.11a dual nstreme .. If you have enough signal margin you can achieve more bandwidth. Latency will be very low: 1-3ms with real internet traffic of 30-35M ...
Signal must not be higher than -65 ...
Note: If you disable nstreme, link will not work.. If your distance between A and B is under 10km, then you can use MCS 5,6,7,8,9,10 and more but you need to determine this on both parts of the link. Just see what works stable with more bandwidth.
Optimization of 802.11n in ROS is not perfect and need more work, but this setup can work without issues. Just try it.
enable chain 0 and disable chain 1 then align
hi
we have a n link and i hope you can help me to set it up
we have a r52hn card at both ends with 2 grids 1 horizontal and 1 vertical at both ends
we used your settings but only get up to 117m on 1 side and the ccq is only about 60/60
the problem is we can not figure out how to line up the grids as when we move them there is no difference in the ccq
is there a special way to line up the grids and check the ccq when doing the alignment for the hn card
any help would be welcome
thanks
hmmm then I might be doing things wrong aswell then...lets see what others sayThanks for the reply
That is what we did but still no joy. Moving the grid does not change the signal at all.
Do you have to plug the grids in the same connector in both sides?
Ours is horizontal grid to middle connector (chain0) and vertical grid to side connector (chain1).
Thanks
Edit: I see you are from South Africa as well. Is there any way to get in touch with you, as I'm not having any luck with the alignment.
Change frequency and try then. Use dual polarization antennas. 117M is very good with current optimization in mikrotik.we used your settings but only get up to 117m on 1 side and the ccq is only about 60/60
the problem is we can not figure out how to line up the grids as when we move them there is no difference in the ccq
is there a special way to line up the grids and check the ccq when doing the alignment for the hn card
thanks
Yes - 2km link RB411 - RB532A using R52ns in Pacwireless 18dB Rootennas:Is someone try to test speed using only one chain, single polarity antenna ? If someone try please post result.
Thanks.
The thing is that the nstream and the pooling policy runs much more greater but it is still behind airmax
Hope that routeros will squeeze much more (in near future) from the 802.11n standard that in this moment .
Greets all!
The thing is that the nstream and the pooling policy runs much more greater but it is still behind airmax
Hope that routeros will squeeze much more (in near future) from the 802.11n standard that in this moment .
Greets all!
I am surprised to hear this. In all my testing (long distance PtP links) Airmax is obviously the inferior protocol vs nstreme. No doubt.
Does Airmax just work at 40mhz on a 25 mile link?The thing is that the nstream and the pooling policy runs much more greater but it is still behind airmax
Hope that routeros will squeeze much more (in near future) from the 802.11n standard that in this moment .
Greets all!
I am surprised to hear this. In all my testing (long distance PtP links) Airmax is obviously the inferior protocol vs nstreme. No doubt.
Care to Explain how so? In my testing it's been the opposite way around, Aurmax just "works"
I'm Back on this topic, since long time.
I tried once again a live link (lab links aint interesting )
It's a short link, 5KMs, exe's configuration (thanks exe) but with dynamic wds and hw-retries=4
Looks good even today, in a rainy day. It supports max 50mbit FD, then the ping rate raises a little.
Looking forward to make a 100mbit FD
Hey colebert,
Does Airmax just work at 40mhz on a 25 mile link?
Does Airmax just work at 20mhz on a 40 mile link?
Does Airmax have better latency and jitter than nstreme?
No, No, No is the answer at this time. Don't believe me? Stop by the ubnt forum and see the complaints for yourself. The new beta firmware has helped some with jitter but wake me up when Airmax works as well for long distance ptp links as nstreme. Can I get airmax to work? Yes. It's "working" right now in a degraded capacity on about half of my links but it's pretty obvious for my links that airmax is the inferior solution.
I have all kinds of problems with Airmax on the majority of my PtP links with one or two notable exceptions. But when I replace my balky Airmax links with with Mikrotik/nstreme solutions they work just fine. Mikrotik has it's own issues and is not perfect when it comes to their form factor and design of their units, but when it comes to running a smooth PTP link there is no contest in my experience. I am counting down the days, hours, minutes, and seconds until I can get my links all moved over to nstreme.
I will give you just one example. 26 mile PTP link. Put a Bullet M5s on each of my dishes. Airmax on, no ack, 40mhz channel, mcs7, etc. Terrible CCQ (40s, 50s mostly), 17% airmax capacity, 30 something % airmax quality, jitter and packet loss all over the place. Have to bust the link down to 20mhz, turn off no ack, set the ack time out manually, just to get a stable link with jitter on it. Keep in mind this is out in the country, way up in the air, on a professional microwave tower, giant Andrew dishes, clear fresnel, etc. Airmax should "just work" here but doesn't. I can squeeze out about 17mbps of TCP traffic if I'm lucky. Bring in Mikrotik with RB411AH/SR71-15 and nstreme, keep everything else the same. Perfect 40mhz channel, 99%+ CCQ under load, 60 to 70 megs of aggregate TCP traffic. We have a winner.
Obviously this is just one link but I can provide more examples that follow this same sequence. In fairness I do have one Airmax link at is about 36 miles and working solidly with 40mhz and no ack. I get 30 megs EACH WAY (60 megs aggregate). But this is the exception and not the rule for Ubiquiti products on my PTPs which is why they are being retired before I ever really started using them.
how can i open the attachment??Here is the homework for wireless. Link is at 2km, using rb800 and sparklan wpea-110n and our config posted on this forum. Link is stable using 2 chains under v4.5 ... UDP test at 200.1M ... Real internet traffic achieved is between 180 and 190M downloading from rapidshare... Check picture:
no, 4.9 fixes the issue and wds should no longer be required. this was true for earlier versions. check the changelog.nstreme with WDS
same Q !!how can i open the attachment??Here is the homework for wireless. Link is at 2km, using rb800 and sparklan wpea-110n and our config posted on this forum. Link is stable using 2 chains under v4.5 ... UDP test at 200.1M ... Real internet traffic achieved is between 180 and 190M downloading from rapidshare... Check picture:
what kind of antennas do you use??
tnx
bye
Try out the latest 5.2 beta firmware and check latency when passing traffic. With AIRMAX-on I get under 10ms latency sending 90Mbps TCP traffic on a 6 mile link. With AIRMAX-off its about 35ms but the thoughput is 15 megs lower.I noticed that PtP link works best without airmax.
yesHere is the homework for wireless. Link is at 2km, using rb800 and sparklan wpea-110n and our config posted on this forum. Link is stable using 2 chains under v4.5 ... UDP test at 200.1M ... Real internet traffic achieved is between 180 and 190M downloading from rapidshare... Check picture:
Here it is again:Normis is on vacation.
I guess the problem is with exe post on 11.05.2010.
It seems the attachment was deleted (it is not possible to find on server), so we should ask exe to upload it one more time.
I am testing two RB411 now in bridge and can't get 200 Mbit UDP which I achieved about year ago with bridge with RB600A and RB433AH maybe at that time routeros 4.2.
Current setting and condition:
- indoor test
- Two RB411 with R52N, routeros 4.9
- bridge, WDS, 5 GHz-n, hw. retries 3
- signal is good, CCQ is good and stable over 90%
- link speed is i 270 Mbit HT and estimated P throughput is 150 Mbit
- 300 MHz CPU is not overloaded, usage about 30 % caused partly by test itself
- routeros UDP test goes up to 47 Mbit, speedtest.net mini measured 37 Mbit TCP
Why max. real UDP throughput is only 50 Mbit then it should be 200 Mbit?
Is this some limit of RB411 even CPU is not loaded too much?
Weird thing is that link speed can't get to 300 Mbit HT, only 270 HT even with good signal.
5GHz a mode real UDP throughput is 29 Mbit with good CCQ and 54/54 Mbit link speed, real TCP test using speedtest.net mini measure about 23 Mbit TCP
There should be some magic setting somewhere.
I have to buy another RB600A or other more powerfull board to repeat earlier tests and compare results.
Something is not OK.. My own experience is that 65mbit HW makes 60mbit thruput, 121mbit HW makes 95mbit thruput, as count as counting 270mbit has to make at least 210mbit thruput in layer2.. There is inter chain problem.. I will work this out next monthI have same issue with 270HT mbps. My link also never connect at 300HT/300HT. All time is connected on 270HT/270HT. Can anyone tell me what's wrong in my config?
Very Thanks.
I am testing two RB411 now in bridge and can't get 200 Mbit UDP which I achieved about year ago with bridge with RB600A and RB433AH maybe at that time routeros 4.2.
Current setting and condition:
- indoor test
- Two RB411 with R52N, routeros 4.9
- bridge, WDS, 5 GHz-n, hw. retries 3
- signal is good, CCQ is good and stable over 90%
- link speed is i 270 Mbit HT and estimated P throughput is 150 Mbit
- 300 MHz CPU is not overloaded, usage about 30 % caused partly by test itself
- routeros UDP test goes up to 47 Mbit, speedtest.net mini measured 37 Mbit TCP
Why max. real UDP throughput is only 50 Mbit then it should be 200 Mbit?
Is this some limit of RB411 even CPU is not loaded too much?
Weird thing is that link speed can't get to 300 Mbit HT, only 270 HT even with good signal.
5GHz a mode real UDP throughput is 29 Mbit with good CCQ and 54/54 Mbit link speed, real TCP test using speedtest.net mini measure about 23 Mbit TCP
There should be some magic setting somewhere.
I have to buy another RB600A or other more powerfull board to repeat earlier tests and compare results.
hi does anybody know what the distance between 2 grids must be to use 2 chains 0n each side
thanks
culd you more recently introduce situation - antennas, distance and what system you use (routerboard, pc)...I also tested 802.11n this mooning.
On production link simple replace UB5 on both side with R5nH and pigtail cable use some setting like before nstreme enabled, WDS static other side station WDS, adaptive noise immunity ap and client mode all like before on 5Ghz turbo link. Both side 4.9
Mode 5Ghz-a/n and change one new thing HT extension channel above control.
Noting special to configure.
And here is results.
Compare to 5GHz turbo link much better speed simple replace only minipci card. Before TCP test one side usually 60-65Mbps now is 80-95Mbps.
I like 802.11n is work good with only one chain (antena).
I will try to replace some others link and try 2,4Ghz-n.
What is MS? And MK....
AM I correct that you work from MS to MS
...
Would be nice if MK will increase the power to +/- 400 mW so that the loss could be compensated for. Call it a R52H+n card.
0 R name=wlan1 mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:64:2C:2C arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N radio-name=000C42642C2C mode=ap-bridge ssid=NG-HH area="" frequency-mode=superchannel country=canada antenna-gain=0 frequency=5700 band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=default rate-set=configured supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps basic-rates-b=1Mbps basic-rates-a/g=6Mbps max-station-count=2007 ack-timeout=dynamic tx-power-mode=default periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none wds-mode dynamic wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-ignore-ssid=no update-stats-interval=disabled default-authentication=yes default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0 proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=disabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=default disconnect-timeout=3s on-fail-retry-time=100ms preamble-mode=both compression=no allow-sharedkey=no station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 ht-ampdu-priorities=0 ht-guard-interval=any ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-supported-mcs=mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-9,mcs-10,mcs-11,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-4,mcs
-5,mcs-6,mcs-7 ht-txchains=0 ht-rxchains=0 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=15 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 frequency-offset=0
Check very first pages of this topic, there was something mentioned about your problem. After upgrade to 4.10 I don't see any of those.i found posts which mentioned that N and nstream is not compatible but i had same 'not polled for to long' on pure A links.
maybe MT ppl can tell us how to solve this ?
on pure data links it's not a big problem if 1 ping will be lost but on links carrying call center voice traffic its catastrophe