Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
nabuk
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: Italy

Latency on multipoint nstreme with routerboard and with a pc

Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:09 pm

Hi all,
we are testing a rb532 in ap-bridge mode, with wpa2, nstreme, polling. Framer policy was exact-size.
Clients are some rb112. Latency between the devices is about 20-24ms.
Will putting a pc insted of a rb532 bring the latency to 4-5ms ?
If we disable the nstreme obtain 2-3ms ping.
I think that the cause is the small cpu of rb532.

Someone with a simil configuration can post its ping ?


Thansk to all
 
nabuk
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: Italy

Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:46 am

anyone ?
 
ejansson
Member
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:11 pm

There doesn't seem to bee to many people with this set up out there yet. My self and several other are working on rolling out some stuff this spring. From my bench testing results and other things I have heard the best way seem to be to go with a PC P4M at 1.5ghz or better. The 532 just don't really have the power to do a proper ap with nstreme polling. Can't tell you what the latency will be but in theory it should be a more stable then with out nstreme all though it is likely to be higher then a lightly load non nstreme AP. The systems should also scales much better then a non nstreme system

We have a small 8 use 802.11b network which we will slowly be moving to all rb112 boards. When that is complete we will be moving to nstreme for testing. How ever the AP is a 532. We will be over clocking it to boost its power when the time comes. I'll post our results in a few months as things get ramped up.


Erik

Erik
 
nabuk
newbie
Topic Author
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: Italy

Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:55 pm

Here we have a lot of motorola canopy system that causes packet loss also with very good signal (-62dbm).
Enabling nstreme with polling or using something like osbridge polling protocol will solve this issue.
But on a 40 metres antenna tower is very difficult to have a celeron :), and rb532 have very poor performance !!
 
User avatar
nickb
Member
Member
Posts: 407
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:24 pm
Location: Southeast Kansas
Contact:

Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:04 pm

I'm actually setting up a backhaul network utilizing an SR5 as the primary AP and remote nodes with RB532/SR5 combos. The network configuration is 5Ghz-Turbo/WPA2/nstream polling best-fit 3200.

Latency IN THE LAB is less than 10ms. This system has not yet been deployed.
But on a 40 metres antenna tower is very difficult to have a celeron Smile, and rb532 have very poor performance !!
Actually, it's not that hard. Just find yourself a micro ATX board which should fit in this case and use a DC-DC power supply, a few RB11 boards and put whatever miniPCI's in you need. Voila!
 
believewireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:30 pm

Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:08 pm

We just upgraded from an RB532 to a Via 600MHz motherboard using Nstreme w/WDS and polling. Ping times still suck and can go from 20ms to 140ms with 32 clients registered. The problem occurs with both CM9, R52 and SR5 cards. Different frequencies don't help either and we have >90% CCQ.

So it appears this is an Nstreme or WDS issue. We'll try turning off Nstreme to see if it fixes the problem.
 
bushy
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:56 pm
Location: Ireland

Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:24 am

Here are a few pings to a PC based 5ghz AP running Nstreme1 (the link is bad atm SNR of 13 , storms lately moved antennas slightly )

Same old flash module since v2.7
its just an AMD1200 w/256 ram

[admin@A] >ping 10.99.99.1
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=2 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=3 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=4 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=3 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=6 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=4 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=8 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=6 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=4 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=5 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=6 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=6 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=6 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=5 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=3 ms
10.99.99.1 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=2 ms
 
believewireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:30 pm

Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:28 am

How many clients do you have associated to it? The problem occurs after three or more associations.
 
ejansson
Member
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:09 pm
Location: Manitoba, Canada

Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:47 am

Anyone played with Nstreme polling on 3.0? On a desk top trial using just 2 112 boards and the new bridge mode and a pair of SR9's I was seeing around 23-25mbps with no tweaking, and only a 6mbps return channel, one pc was also just a p3. The cool part was the processors were not maxed out. They ran in the 60-80% range! I'm going to put on a real antenna so I have a solid 54/54 and do some tweaking.... but results look very good. We hope to be testing a 8 users (live) network with in the next week or two (532ap and all 112 clients) just have to clean up some of the installs and up grade 4 more senao b boxes. We'll start with 2.9.x 9 (nstreme) and then try 3.0, using the new bridge nstreme and turn off the collision detect (CDMA) There is a few issues loading 3.0 on the 112 right now so we will probably wait until 3.0beta6 for a fix to make life simpler. I'll post when done.
 
believewireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:30 pm

Fri Feb 02, 2007 7:21 am

TURN OFF NSTREME!

Ping times were absolutely horrible with NStreme turned on. This was with a 600MHz Via board and 32 associated clients.

Tonight we turned off NStreme and ping times are back to what we would expect. Nearly a constant 2ms.

So, something is seriously wrong with NStreme.

The Via board was running V3 Beta 5. We made the same change to an RB532 and the pings times returned to normal as well.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], luisfmolina and 26 guests