Hi,
This is my setup:
CCR1009- LHG5AC-XL<----->LHG5AC-XL - Powerbox Pro

Both LHG5AC-XL's are setup in bridge mode, running nv2 AC only. I have a /29 setup across the 4 devices.

Problem is we getting poor performance on single TCP connections over the link. Below all tested are on a single TCP connection using bandwidth test on the router both direction tested seperately.

From CCR1009 to the 1st LHG5= full speeds ( 250Mbps+ total incl normal net traffic, 500Mbps+ on 20 connection count) ( I only let it run for a few seconds to prevent impact on my clients)
From CCR1009 to the 2nd LHG5 over the wireless link= full speeds ( 50-60Mbps above current traffic load, 120-140Mbps total) ( I only let it run for a few seconds to prevent impact on my clients)
From CCR1009 to the Powerbox Pro= 30Mbps max, average 10-15Mbps. Then any further down from the Powerbox Pro to the other routers connected to it I get less than 10Mbps average.
From 2nd LHGXL to powerbox via network cable = 100-120Mbps single, connection count at 20 I still only get max 250Mbps

We have replaced the Powerbox already but have not replaced the LHG yet. LHG running latest firmware, powerbox running 6.46.6( to be upgraded this evening.)

Is this a bridging issue on the LHGXL on the powerbox side or problem on the network cable maybe?

Firmware upgrade on the Powerbox Pro did not resolve the issue.

What I do pick up is that the max port traffic hits 100Mbps when doing a single TCP connection bandwidth test. This is regular traffic of 60-70Mbps, and the bandwidth test limits at 30Mbps. Though if I run anything about 5 connections on the BWT then I get over 100Mbps( Usually 120-140Mbps)

Bandwidth test through the device, not on the device, or you only test how slow the CPU is at generating traffic. Use iperf3 and your own endpoints.

The network structure is not well understood to me.
What is the IP of each device in each end of the setup?
From what I remember both RB2011 and Powerbox Pro has the same CPU and they cannot perform better then 200Mbps ~ without RouteCache +FastTrack and FastPath.

In any case a PtP it is preferable to have a routed setup on the wireless connection.
I am not sure if the Wireless connection can support FastTrack or FastPath however limiting the the broadcast domain to only PtP
can improve some aspects of the connection and with this you can remove any looping prevention protocols such as STP/RSTP/MRSTP which might affect
the over all performance of the device and connections.

Just an update for all, We replaced most the cables with new CAT6 shielded cable( previously shielded CAT5) that resolved the issues between the Powerbox Pros & PtP devices.

We were still having a bottleneck on the remain powerbox though. I get full 100Mbps from the Node router to it, however anything connecting to the powerbox I was getting max 20Mbps. I have since put the powerbox in bridge mode and letting the PPPoe's terminate on the Node router instead, full speeds for all clients.

Node(Powerbox Pro)------> Powerbox ----->Sectors(3 in total)-------->clients

So it seems like the powerbox I have there has a TCP bottleneck limiting single tcp connections to 1-2Mbps. Will be replacing it once my new shipment arrives.

Instead of starting a new post, I am having this issue again on another link. To explain again:

I have my core router( CCR1009) cabled to a LHG5AC, from there PtP link to another LHG5AC and that plugs into a Powerbox Pro. Both LHG5AC's are bridged with two interfaces ports on the bridge. I have full connectivity etc between the CCR1009 and the powerbox Pro.

Here is the issue running bandwidth test with a signal TCP connection from the CCR1009 to( sending):
LHG5AC plugged into it : 280-300Mbps( completely normal)
Remote LHG5AC : 95-100Mbps ( on par with the what the link can do)
Remote Powerbox Pro: 4-8Mbps

I replaced the remote LHG5AC unit today and replace the network cable with brand new cat6. Also changed ports on the Powerbox Pro, no difference.

I have the same config and setup on 2 other links coming from the CCR1009, those are 100%, I get 20-25Mbps on a single TCP connection which I can work with.

Any input from someone?