Yesssss !!!!Exact same test just changing to UDP:
tool bandwidth-test XX.XX.XX.XX protocol=udp local-tx-size=64 remote-tx-size=64 direction=transmit random-data=yes user=admin duration=5s
status: done testing
RB532s and one 1GHz router are running 2.9.31 and the other 1 GHz router is 2.9.30.
this command is not correct for testing.tool bandwidth-test XX.XX.XX.XX protocol=udp local-tx-size=64 remote-tx-size=64 direction=transmit random-data=yes user=admin duration=5s
Uhm, well, i never thought to wireless as a fiber optics substitution, else no one would spend so much money to lay fibers..This issue with small packets surprises you? LoL, did you think it was fiberoptics?
I get 1ms latency on a 54mbps connection with Alvarion VL gear. It has packet concatenation (like nstreme framer policy), 10/20mhz channels, full snmp programming and monitoring, leds for alignment, solid firmware, and of course higher cost. Aside from the cost, it is very service provider friendly (easy to setup and maintain). It's really sort of understated.But cuccio point is not at all wrong.. he doesn't understand why he gets poor performance on the link when using MT and not with an Alvarion stuff (and i do not see either, i have yet to see an Alvarion device perform better than a MT one, not to mention the costs).This issue with small packets surprises you? LoL, did you think it was fiberoptics?