Backhaul and non-satisfactory results

RouterOS Wireless Networking
1

Version: 2.9.45
TX CCQ: 60
Noise Floor: -96
Distance: 17.8 Miles
Default TX Power: Default
Average RSSI: -71 to -75
Average throughput: ~2.2MBs asymmetrical
Setup: WDS Bridge w/o nstreme

Now that you have some of the information here is the problem. The RSSI was -71 awhile back and the throughput was about 1.1MB-1.5MB Asymmetrical. The issue was the throughput and the RSSI. So what we did was replace the wireless cards on both sides with SR5 instead of R52’s we had in them. We didn’t notice any improvements at all with the new cards.

Things I’ve tried:

  1. Turn one of the sides to station-wds and enabled nstreme on both side = Wouldn’t maintain stable connection.
  2. Tried MULTIPLE channels = Same Results.
  3. I have tried multiple versions of MT RouterOS = Same Results.
  4. Changed Preamble-mode to long like MT suggested = Same Results.
  5. Changed the band = Same Results.

What am I doing wrong? Is this the expected results for this type of setup? Will a XR5 be the solution for better RSSI and more throughput? What other options do I have? I have no problem going OSPF, but I need to get a higher throughput before I want to spend the money and time doing that.

Execpted: A very stable wireless connection with => 10MB…

2

What is the gain of your antennae? You would be better going for higher gain antennae than higher output Wireless cards. Higher gain antennae boost the power of both the transmitted and received signal, whereas higher output wireless cards only boosts the transmitted signal.

3

Why are you using WDS for a backhaul link? While WDS is very effective in certain situations its not designed to be used in long range links.

Have you tried a PTP setup instead and measured the results?

4

When you say PTP setup you talking router or what?

Matt

5

PtP measn Point to Point, the issue here is that u are using WDS for a backhaul link, WDS as name implies Wireless Distirbution System.

6

This is not huge bad but not very good “Noise Floor: -96”

“Wouldn’t maintain stable connection.” looks like noise to me, nstream is fussy with noise.

7

So i gather going to a routed wireless backhaul system using EoIP tunnels to allow pppoe traffic to pass-through is the best way to go for me?

8

EoIP is to slow.

Can you terminate PPOE sessions on all your AP’s (back to radius) and then route back to NOC?

9

That would require a MT PPPoE Concentrator at all tower locations correct? If that was the best solution that i know that works well, then i wouldn’t have a problem doing that…

Matt

10

Matt

Having a PPPOE concentrator at each highsite is pretty much the WISP standard in my part of the world. Most wireless operators eventually end up with this config after trying many others.

11

Ok so I put a pppoe concentrator at each site. What kind of config can i use for the backhauls to get the maximum protential bandwidth from my current setup?

  1. AP: AP-Bridge and SU: station and then just bridge the ethernet ports and wireless ports on each side, then setup routes?
  2. Keep the WDS transparent bridge?

Sorry for all the questions, i’m just trying to get this right the first time instead of wasting a bunch of time.

Matt

12

Do you have line of sight? Have you done a path calculation? Is the fresnel zone clear? I have a wds backhaul w/nstreme, 13 miles, 2 foot 29db dish, and it works perfect. Maxes out the rb500 - bandwidth tests show: 25mbit tcp and 33mbit udp one way.

13

Hello

First, I think that you should try some different frequencies. Your noise floor is too high. I think, that your link will improve a lot if you find a spot where the noise is better than -100. Interference can kill any link.

Secondly - the various comments to your wds-mode: They may not know, that wds-mode is the only way to do bridging. I assume, that this is what you are doing :wink:

14

After a few hours playing, today we launched a new tower and i setup the backhaul to the new tower without using WDS at all. I used routing, nstreme, and eoip that way pppoe traffic can pass through. The new backhaul can pass 25MB one way. I love this setup and its working great! Thanks for all the advice everyone. I’m going to try this setup on one of the existing towers and see if it improves my links.

Matt

15

mneumark,

may i have your setup configuration please?
i’m doing WDS now, and i wanted to try your setup.
thank you

16

To make everyone’s life easier, i started putting this setup the WIKI… http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transparently_Bridge_two_Networks_without_using_WDS_(EoIP)

Its not pretty and all yet, but all the settings are there if you look. This setup will also allow all pppoe traffic to pass through the bridge making this a good setup if you can’t put a pppoe concentrator at every location.

Matt

17

Sweet tutorial :slight_smile:

Did you achieve any significant result on your non WDS link with latency? I’m suffering of high and unstable ping times (you can check my thread here), and I was thinking of giving a non WDS link a try

18

I do know that going with non-wds helped my link out and made it 200% more stable. I now have a stable connection that hasn’t dropped out once and the latency and overall link quality improved dramatically.

Matt

19

Thank you very much! I’m definitely going to check the non-wds link then :wink: One last thing… is your ping stable? Has it any high peak? Also, what’s your throughput?

20

Well the ping latency are average ~5ms. I really don’t notice any high peaks, but once in a great while i will see a 15ms ping when the link is in higher usage. With my current setup, i’m lucky the noise floor is really clean and the data rate is 54MB solid. So the throughput on the motherboards i have in the backhauls get about 20-25MB’s one way.

Matt