Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
SXMU
just joined
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:08 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:24 am

hi guys!
We have reached ~95/100 Mpbs full duplex wireless speed on r52n+rb433ah (udp test, data rate fixed, MCS 1,7,8,14,15), 270HT/270HT radio speed, anyone interested - i can post screenshots or settings for this mode, but have some troubles:
iperf test (or direct download) from one side to other topped max by 31-33 Mbps through next scheme: ETH(RB433AH-1)-----R52n<----->R52n------ ETH1(RB433AH-2) same as bridging mode and routing mode; but at the same time tcp test from one r52n to other rated by 40~90Mbps. is it routerboard issue(at downloading - cpu av.15-45%)? anyone can test similar configuration for max throughput??

routerOS v.4b3, nstreme disabled,wds disabled, periodic calibration disabled, ap+pseudobridge mode.
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:37 am

can you port the information on the antennas you used to do this as i have done many tests with tcp but the antennas made a big diffrence


and some screen shots would be nice to have
 
SXMU
just joined
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:08 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:52 am

this test was performed "on the table" by sticking up on 1-5mm pigtails from both r52n cards, screenshots i can post some time later. other question - why bypass speed of radio at 100Mbps real wlan---eth throughput value top ONLY 30-32 Mbps. At the same time iperf test from one eth to other in bridge rates connection at 50-54 Mpbs. Is it RB433AH max perfomance?!
 
nasioedoek
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:16 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:27 pm

hello guys, after reading all the posting in this thread, i decide to test 802.11n.
my r52n had just arrive yesterday, so today i want to configure my RB411 and RB433.
i will post the result after i finish configuring the board.
:)
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:18 pm

Encouraged by this thread, i purchased 2 R52N and 2 RB411AH to make a 802.11n link and see his throughput.
The antennas are 2 flat panel 10° 23dbi with different polarization (H and V).
I established a working and 100% stable link with those parameters
/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 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" comment="" compression=no country=\
    italy 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=5520 \
    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,mcs-2 ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-guard-interval=any \
    ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-2 ht-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CF:42 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=wlanN rate-set=\
    configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=SagittarioVinci station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b="" tx-power=4 tx-power-mode=all-rates-fixed \
    update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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,HT20-1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-\
    7:0,HT20-8:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0,HT40-8:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3998 framer-policy=best-fit
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no streaming-max-rate=0 streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
This is live traffic, not bwtest.
n1.jpg
If i enable other HT MCS, the link goes instable and CCQ drops to 3%. Can anyone explain me why it happens? I just don't get it..
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
fly
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:01 pm

Encouraged by this thread, i purchased 2 R52N and 2 RB411AH to make a 802.11n link and see his throughput.
The antennas are 2 flat panel 10° 23dbi with different polarization (H and V).
I established a working and 100% stable link with those parameters
/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 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" comment="" compression=no country=\
    italy 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=5520 \
    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,mcs-2 ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-guard-interval=any \
    ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-2 ht-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CF:42 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=wlanN rate-set=\
    configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=SagittarioVinci station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b="" tx-power=4 tx-power-mode=all-rates-fixed \
    update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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,HT20-1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-\
    7:0,HT20-8:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0,HT40-8:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3998 framer-policy=best-fit
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no streaming-max-rate=0 streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
This is live traffic, not bwtest.
n1.jpg
If i enable other HT MCS, the link goes instable and CCQ drops to 3%. Can anyone explain me why it happens? I just don't get it..
Hi Rena!
Your tx-power is set to 4, is it a real link or a lab one? I had good performances only in default.
Try starting with ht-extension-channel=none. Nstreme framer policy = dynamic-size, too. Best-fit 3998 maybe is too high.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:51 pm

Ciao Alessandro,
It's real link, but they are really close so i had to lower a little the tx power.. anyway today i set up another link with the same configuration, but with default power.
it's the same...
Maybe should i aim for a dual pol dish antenna? or the 2 parallel antennas are good enough?
 
RK
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada and Central America

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:34 am

With RB411AH and R52N connected to a dual polarized 5GHz 23dbi antenna we are getting 85 Mbps real combined TCP traffic across 600m without Nstreme and using 40 MHz.

This IS better than turbo mode with 802.11a.
 
samcarney
just joined
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:30 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:08 pm

Hello,

I have 2 RB600's with R52N set up about .5 miles (.8 km) apart. Using a set of Dual Pol Poynting antennas http://www.poynting.co.za/productdispla ... 8&cat_id=3 I've read and tried different wireless configurations, I just can't seem to get the throughput others have in this post. Any help is appreciated.

Here is the config on one end:
/interface wireless
set 0 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=6Mbps \
    basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no 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=5500 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,mcs-2 ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-guard-interval=any \
    ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-2 ht-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 \
    mac-address=00:0C:42:XX:XX:XX max-station-count=2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=default \
    periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423AE7C2 rate-set=default scan-list=default security-profile=\
    default ssid=tb2chope-n station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=\
    1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps 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=disabled
Here is the wireless monitor while running bandwidth test
[admin@XX] /interface wireless> monitor 0
                 status: running-ap
                   band: 5ghz-11n
              frequency: 5500MHz
            noise-floor: -118dBm
         overall-tx-ccq: 94%
     registered-clients: 1
  authenticated-clients: 1
    current-ack-timeout: 31
                nstreme: no
            wmm-enabled: yes
      current-tx-powers: 6Mbps:18(18),9Mbps:18(18),12Mbps:18(18),18Mbps:18(18),24Mbps:18(18),36Mbps:17(17),48Mbps:16(16),54Mbps:13(13),HT20-1:17(17),HT20-2:17(17),
                         HT20-3:17(17),HT20-4:17(17),HT20-5:17(17),HT20-6:17(17),HT20-7:16(16),HT20-8:11(11),HT40-1:15(15),HT40-2:15(15),HT40-3:15(15),HT40-4:15(15),
                         HT40-5:15(15),HT40-6:15(15),HT40-7:15(15),HT40-8:10(10)
Here is the config on the other end:
/interface wireless
set 0 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=6Mbps \
    basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no 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=5500 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,mcs-2 ht-extension-channel=above-control ht-guard-interval=any \
    ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-2 ht-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 \
    mac-address=00:0C:42:00:00:00 max-station-count=2007 mode=station-pseudobridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=default \
    periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C42000000 rate-set=default scan-list=default security-profile=\
    default ssid=tb2chope-n station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=\
    1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps 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=disabled
Here is the wireless monitor on this end while running bandwidth test:
[admin@XX] /interface wireless> monitor 0
                 status: connected-to-ess
                   band: 5ghz-11n
              frequency: 5500MHz
                tx-rate: "270.0Mbps-HT"
                rx-rate: "243.0Mbps-HT"
                   ssid: "xxxxx-n"
                  bssid: 00:0C:42:00:00:00
             radio-name: "000C00000000"
        signal-strength: -49dBm
     tx-signal-strength: -50dBm
            noise-floor: -119dBm
        signal-to-noise: 70dB
                 tx-ccq: 93%
                 rx-ccq: 87%
           p-throughput: 150544
         overall-tx-ccq: 93%
  authenticated-clients: 1
    current-ack-timeout: 30
               wds-link: no
                nstreme: no
           framing-mode: none
       routeros-version: "4.0beta3"
                last-ip: XX.XX.XX.
    802.1x-port-enabled: yes
            compression: no
            wmm-enabled: yes
      current-tx-powers: 6Mbps:18(18),9Mbps:18(18),12Mbps:18(18),18Mbps:18(18),24Mbps:18(18),36Mbps:17(17),48Mbps:16(16),54Mbps:13(13),HT20-1:17(17),HT20-2:17(17),HT20-3:17(17),
                         HT20-4:17(17),HT20-5:17(17),HT20-6:17(17),HT20-7:16(16),HT20-8:11(11),HT40-1:15(15),HT40-2:15(15),HT40-3:15(15),HT40-4:15(15),HT40-5:15(15),
                         HT40-6:15(15),HT40-7:15(15),HT40-8:10(10)
Bandwidth test Screenshot
Image
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 20, 2009 10:04 am

RK

can you post a link to the dual polarized 5GHz 23dbi antenna
thant you used thanks man
 
RK
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada and Central America

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:28 pm

RK

can you post a link to the dual polarized 5GHz 23dbi antenna
thant you used thanks man
http://antennas.com/products.php?id=217&cat=169
 
spectrasurf
just joined
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:43 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:38 am

If using as an AP is it best to use one antenna V-pol and the other H-pol, or both the same side-by-side?
What about if in a backhaul configuration (i.e. point-to-point); use dual-pol dishes, or 2 of same pol side-by-side?
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:47 am

samcarney, try using UDP, the RB600 isn't too powerfull to generate so much TCP traffic. Or put some x86 boxes or RB1000 to RB600 ethernet to generate the TCP traffic and test again.

About encryption, try using only AES, do not use TKIP as it isn't working good at full speed.
 
Stepper3
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:34 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:57 pm

I would be great if the first people to test the new 802.11n support in RouterOS v4 beta 3 would post their experiences here in this thread.

Anyone who will post some 802.11n wiki tutorial with images and setup configurations that work with good speeds, will get a Level6 license from me


RouterOS 4.0Beta3 on Intel Dual Core 2.2Ggz + 1 GB DDR2 800 Mhz + R52N card (with 2 antennas, 1 horizontally polarized and 1 vertically polarized )tested on 2.4 Ghz with Amd X2 Dual Core 5000+ 2 GB DDR2 800 Mhz + Trend Net TEW 624UB Wireless N USB card on Win Xp.

Result 20 Mbs for one way transfer and 10Mbs + 10 Mbs in full duplex. Theese are real speeds, as testing was done copying some video files in the same network.

Same RouterOS configuration tested with Acer Dual Core Notebook + Intel 5100 WiFi Mini PCI Card. When RouterOS transmited in 2.4Ghz b/g/n the laptop could not connect (Tested with a Sony Vaio laptop, can't remember the wifi card, it saw the wireless but as it had no signal, even if equipments were in the same room). After deactivating N, so transmiting with B/g, Acer SOMETIMES managed to connect (Sony Managed to prompt that it had signal but didn't connected). I tryed with WPA encription and also without any encription.
untitled.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:43 am

Anyone who will post some 802.11n wiki tutorial with images and setup configurations that work with good speeds, will get a Level6 license from me ;)
Give away some hardware! All I buy comes with the licenses already. No fun in getting a L6 key if I already have.....
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:17 pm

RouterOS v4.0beta4 has a new wireless driver which should be working better for 802.11n.
Periodical calibration should be working now.
Please share your updates/results on your N links after upgrade to new version.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1924
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:33 pm

RouterOS v4.0beta4 has a new wireless driver which should be working better for 802.11n.
Periodical calibration should be working now.
Please share your updates/results on your N links after upgrade to new version.
TX-Power readings are improved now. But I do not understand them :D
11N,2 Chains,Antenna Gain 13,Country=germany: TX-Power=8, Real TX-Power=8, Total TX-Power=11
11N,1 Chains,Antenna Gain 13,Country=germany: TX-Power=14, Real TX-Power=14, Total TX-Power=14

So when Total TX-Power is the sum of both channels why is Total TX-Power only 11 when using
2 Channels? I would expect:
11N,2 Chains,Antenna Gain 13,Country=germany: TX-Power=11, Real TX-Power=11, Total TX-Power=14

What is the difference between TX-Power and Real-TX-Power?

Stefan
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:47 pm

have you specified frequency-mode=regulatory-domain?
when you use 2 chains together you can add 3db and you will get the total output power.
TX-Power and Real-TX-Power is different if the wireless card uses some offset of tx-power (like some ubiquity wireless cards).
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1924
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:06 pm

have you specified frequency-mode=regulatory-domain?
when you use 2 chains together you can add 3db and you will get the total output power.
TX-Power and Real-TX-Power is different if the wireless card uses some offset of tx-power (like some ubiquity wireless cards).
Yes:
[admin@ct1] > interface wireless print advanced
Flags: X - disabled, R - running
0 name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:D1:AD arp=enabled
disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
radio-name="ct1-wlan1" mode=ap-bridge ssid="test" area=""
frequency-mode=regulatory-domain country=germany antenna-gain=13
frequency=5600 band=5ghz scan-list=5500,5600 rate-set=default
supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps
supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,
54Mbps
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 antenna-mode=ant-a
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=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=test
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=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=any
ht-extension-channel=disabled
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7
ht-txchains=0 ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=4 frame-lifetime=0
adaptive-noise-immunity=none hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled
hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:06 pm

the new wireless driver uses the Band Edge Power from the cards EEPROM and that is why the output power could be lower.
We will check if everything is working correctly or not.
 
Stanislav Hrncir
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 7:35 pm
Location: CZ
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:14 pm

My results on the test bed, ros 4b4, tested on RB-600A, cpu +- 30%, generating packet from rb, not from other machines in ethernet port, i dont know that is rb 600 bug or my ethernet card bug, but if i testing from my pc to the rb600 or throught rb600 then i dont chieve speed higer than +- 230 mbit/s
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
teixeiragv
just joined
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:16 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:39 am

Got another test from mine as well, first one had some spare antennas of different gain db, now changed to all the same.

Updated the wiki guide to include this image.

Image
Omega-00,

If you reduce your Signal strength to values around -40 ~ -50dBm, you will get better CCQs profiles.

Cheers
Guilly
 
User avatar
sdischer
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:58 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:09 am

I have a 4.5 mile link I set up for testing. I have -69 signal strength and tried all the settings in the wiki but am only able to get about 18 megs throughput UDP. I suspect noise but I have 2 adjacent clear channels I am using. I am using dual polarized antennas on each end. Any ideas?
 
User avatar
infowest
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:46 am

4.0B4

Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:34 pm

Be careful upgrading to 4.0b4. I lost a link doing this. Appears to be something to do with noise immunity. Others have had similar problems. When I can get the far side and shut that off, I'll post whether that fixed it. Link comes up for only a second or so then gets lost.
 
User avatar
infowest
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:46 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jul 31, 2009 11:56 pm

Shutting off Adaptive Noise Immunity on both ends helped get things back up.
 
custonnetworkstechnologie
just joined
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 6:39 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:03 am

We have a working configuration up to 5-7Miles using dual pol antenna - we are offering a PTP Kit solution all ready assembled if anybody is interested - dan@hiflywireless.com
 
User avatar
promind
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:26 am
Location: Rousse, Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:50 am

11.3km link 2x2 connection with r52n and rb600a.

Here is config of AP:
/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 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-a/n \
basic-rates-a/g=6Mbps basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="delta_glodjevo AP" compression=no country="south africa" 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=\
5240 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7 ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=\
mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled \
hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:D6:12 max-station-count=2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 \
name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 \
radio-name=000C423AD612 rate-set=default scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=delta_glodjevo station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 \
supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps 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=static wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="delta_glodjevo AP" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbp\
s: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="delta_glodjevo AP" disable-csma=yes enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3998 framer-policy=best-fit
/interface wireless wds
add arp=enabled comment="" disabled=no l2mtu=2290 master-interface=wlan1 mtu=1500 name=glodjevo-wds wds-address=00:0C:42:3A:D4:99
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 \
receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no \
streaming-max-rate=0 streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
[marian@GL0] /interface wireless> wds
[marian@GL0] /interface wireless wds> export
# jan/04/1970 20:01:49 by RouterOS 4.0beta4
# software id = YHQT-I1PV
#
/interface wireless wds
add arp=enabled comment="" disabled=no l2mtu=2290 master-interface=wlan1 mtu=1500 name=glodjevo-wds wds-address=00:0C:42:3A:D4:99
Here is config of client:
/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 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-a/n \
basic-rates-a/g=6Mbps basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="delta_glodjevo cl" compression=no country="south africa" 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=\
5240 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7 ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=\
mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled \
hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:D4:99 max-station-count=2007 mode=station-wds mtu=1500 \
name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 \
radio-name=000C423AD499 rate-set=default scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=delta_glodjevo station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 \
supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps 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="delta_glodjevo cl" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbp\
s: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="delta_glodjevo cl" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 \
receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no \
streaming-max-rate=0 streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
UDP traffic is ~150/160Mbps
TCP real traffic is ~100/120Mbps
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
kabelfrei
just joined
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:35 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:43 pm

11.3km link 2x2 connection with r52n and rb600a.
Could you give us the antenna model and manufacturer ?


thanks,

kabelfrei
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:14 pm

promind!


GOOD QUESTION ID THINK WHAT BETA VERSION DID YOU USE TO GET THIS

AS MANY PEOPLE THNIK THERE ARE MANY BUGS IN THE NEW BETA VERSION


:lol:
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:03 pm

Hello, just to share my experiences of 802.11n MT flavour:

I setup a 17 mile link between an island and mainland using dual pol 29db dishes.

So far I have managed to get 80mbps real world traffic with around -61db signals , but I think I can improve soon but having so many association and privacy errors it's almost impossible to get a stable connection to test.

I feel that there is alot of problems (which simply do not exist on 11a mode) with the drivers and software right now preventing it's useage and proper testing on anything else than a lab test.

1/ loads of WPA2 errors often means it just wont associate even with good signals without rebooting remote units

2/ Problems with auto rate seem to be really bad over distance. Fixing rates and disabling every feature of the card helps and I need to play more in this area.

I feel good and quite exited about its possibilities though and am looking forward to further releases.
 
angboontiong
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:59 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 5:42 pm

Hello, just to share my experiences of 802.11n MT flavour:

I setup a 17 mile link between an island and mainland using dual pol 29db dishes.

So far I have managed to get 80mbps real world traffic with around -61db signals , but I think I can improve soon but having so many association and privacy errors it's almost impossible to get a stable connection to test.

I feel that there is alot of problems (which simply do not exist on 11a mode) with the drivers and software right now preventing it's useage and proper testing on anything else than a lab test.

1/ loads of WPA2 errors often means it just wont associate even with good signals without rebooting remote units

2/ Problems with auto rate seem to be really bad over distance. Fixing rates and disabling every feature of the card helps and I need to play more in this area.

I feel good and quite exited about its possibilities though and am looking forward to further releases.
would you mind to share where you got that antenna?
It's sound interesting..
 
complete2006
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:18 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:55 pm

O.k. I tested N with Beta4 (extension channel without nstream) in the lab. BW test with UDP is looking as it should. Air rates and quality are looking fine. If I test TCP (Traffic generator ist RB1000 and PC) I see only 29 MBit HDX. Who has the same problem? Who has an solution or a workaround for that?
 
avantwireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:54 pm

Hello, just to share my experiences of 802.11n MT flavour:

1/ loads of WPA2 errors often means it just wont associate even with good signals without rebooting remote units

It's sound interesting..

Why not go to aes, as it's built into the card?
 
User avatar
promind
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:26 am
Location: Rousse, Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:06 pm

promind!


GOOD QUESTION ID THINK WHAT BETA VERSION DID YOU USE TO GET THIS

AS MANY PEOPLE THNIK THERE ARE MANY BUGS IN THE NEW BETA VERSION


:lol:
4.0b3(first) 4.0b4 now
Antenas are from VOM - Varna, Bulgaria 120sm.
 
User avatar
fibrewire
just joined
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:49 pm
Location: Coachella Valley
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Sat Aug 08, 2009 4:47 am

any ideas on dual polarized dish vs dual polarized panel?
Last edited by fibrewire on Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:32 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
Erastus
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 802.11n

Sun Aug 09, 2009 3:18 pm

I would be great if the first people to test the new 802.11n support in RouterOS v4 beta 3 would post their experiences here in this thread.

Anyone who will post some 802.11n wiki tutorial with images and setup configurations that work with good speeds, will get a Level6 license from me

Normis I am very keen on this. I need more speed as the normal stuff is getting to slow. You let me know and I have no prob in testing it ( grassie)
 
demopro
just joined
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 12:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:41 pm

here is my setup without nstreme and periodic calibration disabled.With nstreme enabled, link is disconnecting all the time.
hardware used: 2xRB433AH , 2xR52N , 23dBi dual panel, on other side 28dBi dual dish.
RouterOS:4.0beta4
link distance: 9km
802.11n.JPG
802reg.JPG
I getting only 25 Mbps HDX and 12Mbps FDX (TCP test) in best case.I am very disappointed, for now.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
Erastus
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 4.0B4

Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:44 pm

Be careful upgrading to 4.0b4. I lost a link doing this. Appears to be something to do with noise immunity. Others have had similar problems. When I can get the far side and shut that off, I'll post whether that fixed it. Link comes up for only a second or so then gets lost.

MANY THANKS !
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

demopro, try using default rate-set configuration, looks like the links isn't working so well in the highest data-rates.
what is your antenna configuration?
 
demopro
just joined
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 12:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:12 pm

I tried all combinations of ht-basic-mcs / ht-supported-mcs and rate-set=default, but without results.
One side is antenna 28,5 dual polarized parabolic, on other side is 24dBi Dual Polarity Panel Antenna (MARS).
Configuration on both sides is antenna-mode=ant-a ,antenna-gain=0.
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:05 pm

contact the support@mikrotik.com and include the support output files from both routers.
 
Erastus
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 802.11n

Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:25 pm

Is it worth wile trying the upgrades. The problem I am having is the normal support levels. I don't want to upgrade running systems to a beta system as I can not afford down time.

The R52n is that supported at all on the ver 3 platform?

I tried on ver 3.28 but it does not detect the radio. So other than playing with it at home is it worth while upgrading?
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:26 pm

only v4.0beta versions supports N cards
 
Erastus
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 802.11n

Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:13 pm

only v4.0beta versions supports N cards

:shock:
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:20 am

We have a working configuration up to 5-7Miles using dual pol antenna - we are offering a PTP Kit solution all ready assembled if anybody is interested - dan@hiflywireless.com
Can you please share us with your settings? That's more appropriate hen giving your sales contact.
You learn from this forum, let the forum learn from you. :)
 
csallor
just joined
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:16 am

only v4.0beta versions supports N cards
but not supported DNS :)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:23 pm

check if you can open the www.mikrotik.com from the Internet Explorer.
 
csallor
just joined
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:53 pm

check if you can open the http://www.mikrotik.com from the Internet Explorer.
working..
 
User avatar
infowest
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:46 am

Confirming current status of 802.11n

Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:46 pm

Can we get a confirmation from Mikrotik on a few things on 4.0b4?

1. Is nstreme polling working with N?

2. Adaptive noise immunity - that is not working, correct?

3. WDS / non-wds - what works and what doesn't? Workarounds?

Thanks!

Randy
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Confirming current status of 802.11n

Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:44 pm

Can we get a confirmation from Mikrotik on a few things on 4.0b4?

1. Is nstreme polling working with N?

2. Adaptive noise immunity - that is not working, correct?

3. WDS / non-wds - what works and what doesn't? Workarounds?

Thanks!

Randy
my experience:
1. Nstreme is not working good, very low speed
2. ANI is not working on b4
3. WDS / non WDS works fine

regards
Ros
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:09 pm

Nstreme is not so optimized for the N links yet.
ANI will be fixed in the next release of the v4.beta
WDS is also working with N cards, but you will not get the full speed as some packet combining features of the N isn't working with WDS. So if you want the full speed, use EOIP or MPLS instead of WDS.
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:13 pm

when the new beta will be released?

regards
Ros
 
mp3turbo
newbie
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:39 am

screw that, we'll see it.

I'm mostly interested in any approximates when nstreme will be fully working with N mode and Uldis, if you can share some details about problems caused by new N mode... it might be interesting technical insight for us, your customers. I don't think you will reveal anything to your competitors because they either have their own protocols (and they are fighting already with the similar problems you have) or they don't have anything and that info will not help them us at all.

just curious what is the complication for nstreme... it must be PainInTheAss, my understanding is that you're probably going to rewrite it basically from scratch.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:17 pm

Guys, I see a lot of great 802.11n links here with good performance, maybe somebody here wishes to do a 802.11n workshop/presentation at the MUM in USA in 2 weeks? Probably some of you are coming anyway. You could just show how you configured your routers, what equipment you used, what were the circumstances etc.
 
dalejoyce
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:40 pm

Hi Guys!

I am in need of some help.

I have previously setup a test link with a 2 x R52 Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards with a TCP throughput of 70mb/s TCP with FTP file transfer between 2 laptops. I recently received 2 x R52N card and was very exited about the the possible thoughput.

I have setup a link using 2 x dipoles, 2 x R52N Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards. After some testing i got the link throughput upto 63mb/s TCP using the onboard bandwith test. The CPU was running at 100% so i then moved to a FTP file transfer between 2 Laptops.

The results fluctuated between 20mb/s and 33mb/s. Could anyone shed some light on possible problem?

I have checked that antivirus and firewall are turned off.

Cheers
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

ht-ampdu priorties

Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:54 am

Can anybody tell me if these should be used in increasing order, or every setting has its own working?

For instance, will selection only "1" or only "7" have the same effect or are they different?
Can I use setting at random (like 2,4,5,7) or do you need to build up in order (like first 1 then 1,2 then 1,2,3 etc.) when fine tuning?

Not that I notice any difference so far but I don`t see differences on some other "n" config settings neither where others definitely claim they have.
Please some input in this...
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:14 am

Does anyone have experience with two R52N cards in one routerboard?

I have two setups.

One 10 mtr test link with 2 rb433AH, one r52n card each on a dual polarized 23dBi antenna (power tuned down) and apart from some finetuning I already got over 200Mb (udp, board to board) speeds and 30-50Mb tcp.

I made one real live link (600 meters) with exactly the same hardware in same area (rougly the same noise environment around, but noise levels are around -100) and power brought back to 6dBm on both ends. Signals both ends still in the -50, -55dBm range (not very stable though) and CCQ around 80%. S/N ratios in the 60's)
But both boards show the TX rate around 250-300Mbps-HT after some 5-10 mins while at the same time BOTH boards show Rx rates rarely higher then 6Mbps!

There are some other 5Ghz radio's in the area but freq. scan showed my used freq. is actual free on both ends.
I don't understand why both ends take lots of time to build up the TX Rate while the Rx Rate hardly ever goes higher then 6Mbps!

I tried sort of all possible settings in the wireless config but I can't get the link to work. Traffic won't even run over it. Try to run a bandwidth test and the link even breaks.
The only difference with this ´real world´ link compared to my test setting is that both ends have a second R52N card in a slot for later use to extend the backhaul. But these cards are disabled so should basically not have any influence.

Any suggestions are desperately needed. I spend now 5 days trouble shooting, reading this forum and the wiki but don't seem to be able to get a normal working ´n´ link working. It's driving me crazy and although I have all confidence in the possibility of the "n" cards I feel at times like throwing the whole lot out of my window! :(
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:34 am

WirelessRudy, what do you see in the log files when the link disconnects?
Why are you lowering the power so much?
Are you using nstreme?
Have you tried to run only A band to test before using N band?
Contact the support with the support output file attached.
About the rate selection, it is like with the regular band.

dalejoyce, what configuration you had on the boards?
Contact the support with the support files attached of your links? also try to use the regular band first to check if you can get the same speed like with the regular cards.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:36 am

don't forget to enable Debug Logs and see the detailed reasons in the log
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 20, 2009 11:50 am

WirelessRudy, what do you see in the log files when the link disconnects?
Why are you lowering the power so much?
Are you using nstreme?
Have you tried to run only A band to test before using N band?
Contact the support with the support output file attached.
About the rate selection, it is like with the regular band.

dalejoyce, what configuration you had on the boards?
Contact the support with the support files attached of your links? also try to use the regular band first to check if you can get the same speed like with the regular cards.
Some quick answers, later today the rest follows, I hope..

- Log: don't know yet, just enable debug mode.
- lowering the power: with these 23dBm antennas with default setting I get -16dBm! I have been reading elsewhere the advice to try to get signal levels in area around -50 - -60. To stay with reg. domain later I have to go to minimal setting anyway.
- nstreme: No. Nstreme is not be best solution for low use but ´live traffic´links. Plus its been said in this forum and elsewhere Nstreme is not ready with "N" protocol
- A-band. With these "N" cards? Tried to use one of the ends to connect to a same distance A-band running device. Although signal was -60 link was also very unstable. I got better result with same link between two antenna's that both only have -80dBm signal from the eachother ends.... So dropped the A-band option since it looks like the "N" cards don't work very well with it.
But I can try again.
- Probably am I forced to change all "N"-cards today for normal cards anyway to see if at least a normal link can be set up. Have to climb the towers though and after all, when that works, I am only back to START regarding the "N" card. Isn't it?
- supout.rif: Will try to do that today. But on this moment I can't even reach my n-station anymore. Only by mac through the wireless link and how do I get the supout.rif in my Pc this way?

Give you guys more info later today.
 
CarulloS
Member
Member
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:52 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:30 pm

I have been testing wireless N over a link between two rb411's with R52N cards. I have found that with btest running from computer to computer through the N link I can ever only get 27MB throughput. I looked at settings (like max connections) in btest and no matter what I changed differing results...

Then for fun I transferred a file via file share between the two and was able to see almost 70MB for the file. Does btest have a problem or do I have something setup incorrectly?

Scott
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:49 am

I have been testing wireless N over a link between two rb411's with R52N cards. I have found that with btest running from computer to computer through the N link I can ever only get 27MB throughput. I looked at settings (like max connections) in btest and no matter what I changed differing results...

Then for fun I transferred a file via file share between the two and was able to see almost 70MB for the file. Does btest have a problem or do I have something setup incorrectly?

Scott
Most likely you were doing TCP Bandwidth test which generates a lot of CPU usage and RB can't generate so much traffic, that is why you need to make the bandwidth test through the boards and generate the TCP from a PC or RB1000.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:57 am

I have been testing wireless N over a link between two rb411's with R52N cards. I have found that with btest running from computer to computer through the N link I can ever only get 27MB throughput. I looked at settings (like max connections) in btest and no matter what I changed differing results...

Then for fun I transferred a file via file share between the two and was able to see almost 70MB for the file. Does btest have a problem or do I have something setup incorrectly?

Scott
Most likely you were doing TCP Bandwidth test which generates a lot of CPU usage and RB can't generate so much traffic, that is why you need to make the bandwidth test through the boards and generate the TCP from a PC or RB1000.
Uldis, he said:
Then for fun I transferred a file via file share between the two
 
CarulloS
Member
Member
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:52 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:07 pm

All tests were from pc to pc through link

I'm suggesting windows btest program has problem not the link but that is bad because lots of people use it and many have said they can't get more than 27 mb or so throughput.

Just wanted to bring this to your attention I had thi problem on 4 different computers with good hardware
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 24, 2009 4:56 pm

Now we are commenting MT's bandwith test:

If running the setting of "Remote Tx Speed" field is meaningless. No matter what I fill in here, I get the same speed in ´recieve -Direction¨.
Even if I fill in 10bps, traffic still comes in with the line max. for instance 3Mb!

On several client CPE (all Mt off course) I can run (unlimited, see above) speed tests and they show the speed I'd expect, but when ´direction´ is choosen as "both" I get hardly any speed, or only download. Counter for upload doesn't even move. (this could be because upload is not possible because download consumes all capacity, but when I then start playing with the speed limiter to make ´both´ direction speed reading possible I get values that are very unstable and usually very slow...

On some clients I cannot run a tcp test to a server while udp runs. Then from another client on the same AP in the same network (only its own IP is different) both works fine. Sometimes it does work fine just a little later.

Sometimes bandwith tools just shows "test not permitted" and 5 mins later it has no problem running the same test.

My experiance with the tool is that it is a great tool but not always working the way it should or stable. Maybe MT should take a close look into the routines and programming of the tool.

The (windows) desktop version is actually better with the option to save some specific test parameters, but every new test opens a new test without closing the previous one. Since is sometimes opens its window over the previous test user is not always aware it does open and run not two (or three, four or five) test.
 
User avatar
ghmorris
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:46 pm

We have poor results on the Windows version of bandwidth test. Better results on the newer Routerboard-based bandwidth tests.

For really good results we are now using jperf for Windows-to-Windows bandwidth testing, with at least 10 TCP streams. http://code.google.com/p/xjperf/

Decent little how-to here: http://ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14114
This will also let you compare your 11n results with the new UBNT product line... :)
George
 
fenzke
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:38 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:17 pm

I have a 32km link with 32dbi dual pol. antenna (http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=22100), the signal level is around -58dBm, and the noise level is from -112 to -115dBm in some channel, HT Chains 0 and 1 selected. I test it with many channels configurations (from 5000Mhz to 6000Mhz, I have a superchannel license), and many HT AMPDU Priorities, but the link with no traffic is very unstable, I frequently receive disconnect from remote side, with message "extensive data lost".

When I move for some other channels (5865, 5805, 5700Mhz for example) the link it seems stable, the bitrate goes to 130Mbit/s. When I start the UDP throughput test in half direction the speed reached its about 90mbit/s, but when I select bi-direction test, the bitrate down to 6Mbit/s, and the link again turns unstable, receiving disconnect. With TCP test the problem its same, but it occurs in half direction test.

This link is running without WDS (AP Bridge and Station config in local and remote side), without Bridge (running in routing mode and without Nstreme. The periodic calibration its default, but I also tried disabled.

Any sugestion?
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:36 pm

Try to use first only one chain and make the test and get that link stable working at max speed. then enable extended channel support to use 2 20mhz channels and try to get the max speed.
After that try the same with the other chain.
If everthing works, you can try to enable both chains at the same time. If that fails (unstable link) it means that the dual pol. antenna has some problems - interfernece between the both chains. If you have an option - try to use seperate antennas.
 
fenzke
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:38 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Aug 26, 2009 8:48 pm

Thank you. I will try to use separeted antennas.

Anyone know the cross-pol isolation of L-COM HG5158DP-32D?
 
demopro
just joined
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 12:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:50 am

I had the same problems with almost the same antenna (other manufacturer, but the same feed).
Both the manufacturers claim that isolation is above 28dB.
If anyone has positive experience with dual pol. antennas?
 
User avatar
tomekmak
newbie
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:40 am
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:58 pm

My success story with 802.11n

Config:

RB411AH on both sides L4+XC
R52N on both sides
Power supply 27,6V 3A on both sides
Antennas with box:
http://www.netbridge.com.pl/produkty/mt ... ntegrated/
Technical specs:
http://www.netbridge.com.pl/wp-content/ ... 20Dual.pdf
Used freq: 5500MHz with control channel: Above
Disabled ANI
Disabled Periodic Calibration
Disabled Nstreme
EoIP used to bridge them


Situation:
Distance: 6.11 km
Loads of 5GHz networks (802.11a standard)

http://odsiebie.com/pokaz/5086025---95a8.html

Score:
At the moment the link in "rush hours" pushing around 30Mbit/10Mbit with pind bellow 10ms.
I've tested with BT when real traffic was on.

http://odsiebie.com/pokaz/5086004---86f2.html
 
User avatar
promind
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:26 am
Location: Rousse, Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:40 pm

35km success!!!
2x2 SR71A.
So now I have stable ~50km link with 90Mbps-SD traffic.
35km SR71A - 117/117 - real traffic is 87/88Mbps tcp with a pair of intel core2duo "junkboxes" x86 and 2x2 connection.
11.4km R52N - 270/270 - real traffic is 140Mbps tcp with a pair RB600A and 2x2 connection.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Try to use EOIP or MPLS(VPLS) instead of WDS and you will get even better speed.
 
fenzke
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:38 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:57 pm

promind, which antenna you are using in your 35km link?
 
User avatar
promind
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:26 am
Location: Rousse, Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Sep 01, 2009 3:50 pm

a pair of 120sm. Parabolics.

To uldis - EoIP shows very very low performance( from 90Mbps to 25/30Mbps ) - WDS seems to work better for now.
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:42 pm

a pair of 120sm. Parabolics.

To uldis - EoIP shows very very low performance( from 90Mbps to 25/30Mbps ) - WDS seems to work better for now.
Try to use VPLS/MPLS
 
demopro
just joined
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 12:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:10 am

promind,
try to set MTU higher than 1500 (eg. 1530) on wlan interfaces,and then use EoIP.
You used dual antenna or two antennas per site?
 
yifanwangluo
just joined
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:25 pm

TWO r2n

Wed Sep 02, 2009 12:53 pm

I have two R2N mini pci wireless card, one is on the RB433,one is in my notebook,the wireless link is very bad.

sometimes the rate is 300M ,sometimes the rate is 5.5M, sometimes can not link.WHO can tell me way?
 
fenzke
just joined
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:38 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:18 am

Try to use first only one chain and make the test and get that link stable working at max speed. then enable extended channel support to use 2 20mhz channels and try to get the max speed.
After that try the same with the other chain.
If everthing works, you can try to enable both chains at the same time. If that fails (unstable link) it means that the dual pol. antenna has some problems - interfernece between the both chains. If you have an option - try to use seperate antennas.
I try using only one chain, with channel 5370mhz because it was the lowest noise that I found (signal -58dBm, noise -96dbm), the bitrate goes to 65mbit/s, and I get 50mbit/s half direction throughput test. When I start bi-direction test, the bitrate varying from 6 to 36mbit/s randomly, and the speed is very bad (less than 3/3mbit/s)

I algo tried with a SR71A, and the problem its same, but I noticed a slight improvement, bitrate in full-duplex test varying from 18 to 65mbit/s, and the throughput in full-duplex test is less than 6mbit/s.

I think it can not be an antenna problem, because I'm using only 1 chain. Any sugestion?
 
Fumi
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:12 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:27 pm

Hello Tikpeople!

Any know what is AMPDU Priorities? AMPDU is agreggation of mac protocol data units. What is priorities in AMPDU? What configure?
Thanks all
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:47 am

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 64#p163264 UPDATE
I did some tweaking meanwhile but i didn't get any visible improvements...
Disabled Nstreme, removed WDS, and enabled all the HT rates..

Then i bought 2 Jirous Dual Pol Disc 24db
n2.jpg
Looks good isn't it?
200mbit UDP (120+80)
70mbit TCP FD (i made the test between the 2 links, i didn't have a x86 on both ends to make a better test)
:)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
phendry
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:42 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:41 pm

What antennas where you using before these?
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:19 pm

From my previous post http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 64#p163264
Encouraged by this thread, i purchased 2 R52N and 2 RB411AH to make a 802.11n link and see his throughput.
The antennas are 2 flat panel 10° 23dbi with different polarization (H and V).
I established a working and 100% stable link with those parameters..
 
phendry
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:42 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:23 pm

From my previous post http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... 64#p163264
Encouraged by this thread, i purchased 2 R52N and 2 RB411AH to make a 802.11n link and see his throughput.
The antennas are 2 flat panel 10° 23dbi with different polarization (H and V).
I established a working and 100% stable link with those parameters..
Do you know how many antennas out there match that description ;) Not all antennas are created equal so it would be nice to know what manufacturer/model are not so good.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:28 pm

2x http://www.interline.pl/htdocs/modules/ ... N-23/5X-HV on each end
Oh and i'm plenty of those for point to point purpose or AP purpose... and they work very good. But looks like 802.11n doesn't like them :lol:
 
CarulloS
Member
Member
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:52 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:53 pm

What exactly does the HT AMPDU settings do on the bottom with all the check boxes. I have been leaving mine default as I do not see any difference selecting them or not. Thanks
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:26 pm

What exactly does the HT AMPDU settings do on the bottom with all the check boxes. I have been leaving mine default as I do not see any difference selecting them or not. Thanks
from the wiki:
ht-ampdu-priorities - frame priorities for which AMPDU sending (aggregating frames and sending using block acknowledgement) should get negotiated and used. Using AMPDUs will increase throughput, but may increase latency therefore may not be desirable for real-time traffic (voice, video). Due to this, by default AMPDUs are enabled only for best-effort traffic.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 3119
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:53 pm

from the wiki:
ht-ampdu-priorities - frame priorities for which AMPDU sending (aggregating frames and sending using block acknowledgement) should get negotiated and used. Using AMPDUs will increase throughput, but may increase latency therefore may not be desirable for real-time traffic (voice, video). Due to this, by default AMPDUs are enabled only for best-effort traffic.
[/quote]

Well Uldis,
This is not giving much explanation. First of all the statement is full with uncertainties "should get negotiated and used", ..... " but may increase latency" .... "may not be desirable ...."
A lot of uncertainty in this wordings......

And then the last line containing "best-effort traffic." What is that? "Best-effort" What does it mean? In which case? Actually my conclusion would be indeed to leave it at default because anything else is worse?

And indeed, I tried several settings but hardly see or notice any differences. The only difference I see is that default setting give low throughput which is according this explanation preferred in case the network has to carry ´real time´ traffic due the shortest latency. But the throughput is now hardly any better then a normal configured (no ´n´) link. What is now then the gain in using ´n´?

It would be nice to explain a bit more simple to us not so technically achieved brains what AMPDU's are actually doing. Maybe we get some better understanding that way?
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:27 am

Mikrotik 802.11n + Bullet2M - is it work?
 
bitbucket
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:37 pm

I have TP-Link TL-WN861N minipci card. It is 2.4Ghz only card, but in latest Router OS 4.0beta4 I can't get work 40MHz N rates (HT-40). HT20 work fine.

Here is /interface wireless info print :

interface-type=Atheros AR5416 chip-info="mac:0xd/0x2, phy:0x81, a5:0xf0, a2:0x0, eeprom:0x0" pci-info="00:13.0"
capabilities=tx-power-control,ack-timeout-control,virtual-ap,alignment-mode,scanning,nstreme,sniffing,ht40-g,wmm
default-periodic-calibration=enabled supported-bands=2ghz-b,2ghz-g,2ghz-11n
2ghz-b-channels=2412:0,2417:0,2422:0,2427:0,2432:0,2437:0,2442:0,2447:0,2452:0,2457:0,2462:0,2467:0,2472:0,2484:0
2ghz-g-channels=2412:0,2417:0,2422:0,2427:0,2432:0,2437:0,2442:0,2447:0,2452:0,2457:0,2462:0,2467:0,2472:0,2484:0
2ghz-11n-channels=2412:0,2417:0,2422:0,2427:0,2432:0,2437:0,2442:0,2447:0,2452:0,2457:0,2462:0,2467:0,2472:0,2484:0
ht-chains=0:chain0,2:chain2

is "ht40-g" means support for HT-40 rates ? Or this card does not support it ?
 
User avatar
chapex
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Patagónia Argentina
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:33 am

hey boys... anyone make a real long long outdoor link using MIMO? Ie: 45km , 50km 60km???

regards
 
User avatar
PCaddict69
just joined
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 14, 2009 12:48 am

I have only 2 question ...

Does 802.11n work with hwmp+ mesh ( i know about the wds issue)

i wanna know if 802.11n in wds mode are more fast then a standard 802.11a wds despite de wds problem
 
MMorris
newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:42 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:45 pm

I am not sure if this is the best place for this but i have a 1 mile link setup i get 85 mbps tcp on this link. One issue i am running into is if i hide ssid on the ap and the client reboots or loses power it wont connect untill i unhide the ssid and after it associates i can rehide the ssid and it works fine untill the client loses power or i reboot it?

I am running the SR71-15 cards and am at RouterOS 4.0Bata4
I have a signal strength of -60 and CCQ is 99%-100%

Noise Floor -121 dbm

Sorry if this isnt the correct place to post this!
Thanks
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:24 pm

Harder Link! :o
SAG-ISS.jpg
SAG-ISSN.jpg
Anyone can help me figure out how HT MCS works? I'm playing with them until the link goes a little more stable, but cannot understand it properly... Is there any reference where i can get some further info about it?
This is Nstreme disabled and hw-retries=15
I'm wondering how can i fix those pings.. they are way too high imho... But if i lower hw-retries, the rate drops too much often and the bandwidth drops aswell..
I know that is not the best link ever (Fresnel fucked up), but if anyone has some nice hint i would try it :) (Software hints that is)
BTW the other link of 500 is rock stable at 270Mbs-HT :)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 23, 2009 12:48 am

Update on that link... tweaking on MCS and on extension channel i fixed the link at 260mbit-HT/260mbit-HT . (only HT-MCS 5 and 13 enabled)
Enabling Nstreme the ping has been fixed too!
I'm impressed. I didn't expect this performance with that poor link enviorment.
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:38 am

can you post your end configeration for use please
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:34 am

Here you go
/interface wireless
set 0 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=\
    mexico 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=5765 \
    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-5,mcs-13 ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any \
    ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-5,mcs-13 ht-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=10 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CF:0D \
    max-station-count=2007 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=\
    wlanN rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=SS 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=disabled
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=yes enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=2000 framer-policy=best-fit

To ensure a transparent bridging i'm using VPLS
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 23, 2009 12:49 pm

what was your end throughput on tcp and udp?
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:10 am

70Mbit FD

Are there any bugfixes on 802.11n in 4.0rc1?
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:23 am

so this is in the feald

1 more thing can you give me information on the antennas that you are useing

as i have only managed to get 35mb FD
 
Fumi
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:12 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:58 pm

Hello,

I test bonding with two R52N each side but bonding not work.. Bonding of wireless N do not work yet?
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:37 am

We tested 802.11n using SparkLAN cards. Here is the results.
All test are on 5km distance using dish dual polarization antena.

Test 1. 179.2Mbit/s We used RB600a and SparkLAN Wmia-198N, Bandwidth UDP Test:
wmia198n-5km-600a-3.jpg
Test 2. 107/103.1M We used RB600a and Wmia-198N, Bandwidth UDP Test BOTH:
wmia198n-5km-600a-fd5.jpg
Test 3. 40.5/76.3M We used rb433ah and Wmia-198N, Real Traffic Torrents via PPPoE + Bandwidth Test TCP
wmia-198n-rb433ah-hardtest-realtrafficplusbtest.jpg
Continued in next post as 3 attachments is the maximum in one post ...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by exe on Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:46 am

Test 4. 114M We used RB433AH and Wmia-198N. Real Traffic Only via 2 Ether and 2 PPPoE tunnels downloading linux distributions via torrents
wmia-198n-rb433ah-realtraffic-2ether.jpg
Test 5. 96.4/80.7M We used RB433AH and Wmia-198N. UDP Both Bandwidth test
wmia-198n-rb433ah-udp-wireless-fd-btest.jpg
Test 6. 105.2/81.2 We used X86 machine and WPEA-110N mini-pci-e on TCP Bandwidth Test
wpea-110N-x86-5km-fd2.jpg
And last test continued on next post ...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:50 am

Test 7. 131M We used x86 machine and WPEA-110N for real trafic downloading linux distributions using torrents + TCP Bandwidth Test from other location to this one:
wpea-110N-x86-5km-realtraffic-download7.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:51 pm

Hiding the SSID 802.1N is not working.

The client is not able to connect anymore.

tested with 4.0rc1

regards
Ros
 
ekkas
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:01 pm
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:13 am

The majority of the tests & info supplied here so far is on backhaul PTP links...
What I'm interested in, is one of the supposed real benefits of n, which is multipath correction. (Correct term?)
Also, as my 5GHz backhauls is more than the maximum Internet speeds I can supply (All Links>=16Mbps half-duplex; Internet 10Mps) I see no real benefit in upgrading backhaul to n at this stage(apart from the minority of clients that copy files between each other). Also as congestion is bad, using broader frequency range (40Mhz), is not a good idea here.

However, if and n AP would help my b/g clients get better throughputs due to multipath correction, that would now really interest me and I'll immediately change all my b/g & a APs to R2n/R52n cards with dual antennas. Also, due to interferrence/congestion in my area, I'll switch over to HP, but as it is a very significant cost/downtime outlay(to change all clients), I would appreciate everyones thought/experience in this regard.

In short: Would an n AP be much better that an 'b/g' or 'a' AP if the clients stay as they are(b/g or a, not n)?
I suppose, that can start a new thread as issues like the control channel would probably be useless and so on, but my question is if the dual-antenna n radio will better handle range/sensitivity/multipath that current APs.

Thanks for a great thread so far...
Ekkas
 
zedgena
just joined
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:33 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Sep 30, 2009 1:49 pm

hello
at this moment we have configured n with two 5 ghz antennas, but bandwidth test shows no more than 50 mbps, in registration first rate`s signal strength is -54, also rate stops increase at HT20-8. as i guess that`s cos of bad signal strength.


now we are going to test with Dual polarization antennas and which antennas do you advise?

another thing is that when we test bandwidth, after about 10 sec both sides reboots, we changed os to latest version 4.0rc1 but same. routerboard is RB600

Thanks
 
User avatar
mxena
newbie
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: Catalonia
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:15 pm

Hello,

Here the same results that user samcarney with WLAN-0043 Poynting antennas + R52N + 411AH. I just have dismounted a 3km link because I couldn't go up that 20Mbps TCP spite that I had 177Mbps UDP in just one direction. I have got the same results in the office.

I see success links with R52N so the guilty are the Poynting antennas? Anyone has a good N link with WLAN-0043?

In the other hand, I would open discussion about interference in N. What are our weapons against interferences? In old-fashioned links We could work with autonoise immunity, CSMA, reduce channel bandwith, reduce data rates to improve stability (I havent appreciate this on N),...

Now with N are We naked in front of interferences?
 
hkr
just joined
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:05 am

Hello,

I have RB600A + R52N as home AP. If I switch the radio to 2.4 B/G mode, I can achieve actual cca. 18-20 Mbps down from speedtest.net. That is something typical with plain G.
Even then, uplink is nearly just 3 Mbps on one of the laptops, while on another one it is 5. Strange. Is it a problem on the laptop side?

Now, if I switch the radio to 2 GHz B/G/N mode, download will decrease to cca 5 Mbps on both laptops, no matter if i set laptops to work N or not...

Does anyone have any proven wireless settings for a SOHO AP using these R52N cards?
 
dolphinik1
newbie
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 03, 2009 11:18 pm

Will be 802.11n stable as Turbo mode with one antenna on each side?
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:34 am

Try to use first only one chain and make the test and get that link stable working at max speed. then enable extended channel support to use 2 20mhz channels and try to get the max speed.
After that try the same with the other chain.
If everthing works, you can try to enable both chains at the same time. If that fails (unstable link) it means that the dual pol. antenna has some problems - interfernece between the both chains. If you have an option - try to use seperate antennas.

Hi there!

I got this message right after I have the same situation. BUT we use separate antennas.

Distance: 22km.
AP site: 2 X 1.2m antennas with different polarization.
station site: 2 X 1.4m antennas with different polarization.

With xr5 cards (a couple both sides, bonded) we have bandwidth test such as follows (all tests made on station side):
[*] direction=transmit: 115Mbps;
[*] direction=receive: 102Mbps;
[1] direction=both: 65Mbps/50Mbps.
With this configuration link works already more than an year.

Replacing existing cards with SR71A (one each side) N-draft cards we have following tests:
[*] direction=transmit: 175Mbps;
[*] direction=receive: 143Mbps;
[2] direction=both: 2.5Mbps/2.0Mbps (terrible ah.. :? ).

Note that station side antennas are bigger (1.4m diameter vs. 1.2m @AP side). Therefore, there is a normal difference of 175 vs. 143Mbps of bandwidth test. BUT what's going on when testing with direction=both?

Okay, let us suppose that there is a worst link 'cause some interference or smt... Then where is that interference when we get ref. [1] (shown above).

Is it possible the only reason of that is the distance of 22km? By the way, when we test configurations at the office, we have tests listed bellow:
[*] transmit: 127Mbps;
[*] receive: 130Mbps;
[*] both: 65/65 Mbps.

I hope somebody have any idea about that.

Screenshots attached.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
jobanrms
just joined
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:41 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 am

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1924
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:36 pm

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban
Have you tried use fixed data-rates? Some other posts say that the automatic datarate-selection does
not work well.

Stefan
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:37 pm

Your problem is most likely a problem of separation between the antennas. Try dual pol antennas with the same setup..
 
jobanrms
just joined
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:41 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 2:34 pm

I have write in the previous post that we have tested the same with mars dual pol antennas, theresult was the same. What do you mean with "seperation between the antennas"?. Yes, we has also testet with fixed rates. Thanks for help.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:04 pm

AFAIK there are 2 versions of mars antennas dual pol.. one of them isn't working good because the separation between the two connectors wasn't enough and they were causing interferences...
I tested a N link with 2 separated antennas and didn't have enough isolation. Same link with Jirous Antennas works flawlessly.
 
jobanrms
just joined
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:41 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:44 pm

What isolation in db is the minimum by dual pol antennas that the link is working?

In tiktube has anyone a video recordet that was presentet by the mum this year. In this video they hav 4 antennas, and no dual pol and the link works fine.

Sorry for my question but 2 seperate antennas with different polarization has more isolation between the polarisations as a dual pol antennas, isn't it?
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:24 pm

Your problem is most likely a problem of separation between the antennas. Try dual pol antennas with the same setup..
tell us one reason to do that. As I told you before, we have actual link with the same antennas on 5GHz. Bonded cards xr5. Also, we use antennas with different polarization, i.e. one is vertical, another - horizontal.
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:30 pm

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban
Have you tried use fixed data-rates? Some other posts say that the automatic datarate-selection does
not work well.

Stefan

Yes, we does.

But I think that we can work with data-rates=default, because our signal strength is -52 - -55dBm. Anyway, we fix it. As best result given in one direction or another.

At least, same result, poor both-sides-bandwidth-test, 2-3Mbps each site.
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:36 pm

AFAIK there are 2 versions of mars antennas dual pol.. one of them isn't working good because the separation between the two connectors wasn't enough and they were causing interferences...
I tested a N link with 2 separated antennas and didn't have enough isolation. Same link with Jirous Antennas works flawlessly.

what isolation could it be in two separate 140cm diameter dishes?
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:44 am

You know, i'm not an expert technician, i'm just explaining my own experience that might be misunderstood itself...
I think if you manage to have 2 separated antennas with the same and perfect direction (same degrees of H and V) on both side, you should have a good result..
This is almost impossible to do on long links and even the two local antennas might have a different degree of direction.
This might end on overlapping links. Two separated links don't suffer it too much (see your bonded links) but it has some problems on 802.11n.
Once again i repeat this isn't the TRUTH, but only my thoughts based on my own experience.
 
erroneous
just joined
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:26 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:53 am

Hi

We are trying a 16km with two R52N cards and Dual Pol Italian EMCTest (29dBi), signal is -65
and we have the same problems that chvdr is having.

CCQ is okay (80-100%) but when running a bw test, all rates goes to 6mbps/6mbps and the link goes down due to excessive retries.

We tried 2 R52N each side to simulate a full duplex like showed in the MUM to use 2 channels that does not interfere between them, but the result was the same.

I think i'll try one single chain with a single antenna at each side to see if i get any better result.

Does anyone have any clue about this problem?

Sorry for my bad english

Thanks
 
jobanrms
just joined
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:41 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:59 am

Sorry for my question but 2 seperate antennas with different polarization has more isolation between the polarisations as a dual pol antennas, isn't it?
I don't understand this..... has anyqone a answer to this question? :-(
 
InoX
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1966
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:44 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:51 am

yep
 
csallor
just joined
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 07, 2009 2:08 pm

802.11n ? funny...
 
airborne
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:03 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 08, 2009 3:39 pm

Hello,
i got problem with TCP performance on 802.11n.
My configuration is: 2xRB411H + R52n. I tried all possible connections, WDS was not working good.
Now i got configuration station-bridge. Config:
0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:61:04:9A arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
radio-name="000C4261049A" mode=ap-bridge ssid="sgc" area="" frequency-mode=manual-txpower 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-mode=default
periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none antenna-mode=ant-a 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=yes default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=enabled 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=any ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,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

0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:61:04:DD arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
radio-name="000C426104DD" mode=station ssid="sgc" area="" frequency-mode=manual-txpower 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-mode=default
periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none antenna-mode=ant-a 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=yes default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=enabled 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=any ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,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

With EoIP UDP result was around 90Mbps each direction. With MPLS/VPLS its about 190Mbps in each direction. Interfaces are connected
at 270.0Mbps-HT/270.0Mbps-HT. But when i try TCP bandwidth test, result is only 27-30Mbps in both direction. I tried with nstream/ without,
also i tried real connection between 2 laptops and with same result. OS version is 4.0rc1. Have any help or advice what to do, why TCP
connection is so slow? Thanks

airborne
 
User avatar
semakka
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:59 am
Location: Moraira, Alicante, Spain
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:22 pm

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know :D

Regards,
Steven
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1924
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:10 pm

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know :D

Regards,
Steven
It can be done. Look at expensive equipment like Orthogon (now Moto). They can
do MIMO for a long time now. I think it's a matter of quality of all components
(card, pigtail, antenna, isolation, software) and to find the best combination of them.
As this is not our job, we're spending our money for licensed backhaul equipment for
the moment until MT presents a working solution.

Stefan
 
JR
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:27 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:29 am

... make you wonder - what kind of reference OS/system Atheros uses?
AtherOS + Atherboard 8)
 
User avatar
semakka
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:59 am
Location: Moraira, Alicante, Spain
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:55 am

... make you wonder - what kind of reference OS/system Atheros uses?
AtherOS + Atherboard 8)
check this out:
http://www.wi-fi.org/search_products.ph ... s%5B%5D=41

Regards,
 
airborne
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:03 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:25 am

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know :D

Regards,
Steven

iam testing whole solution indoor. i saw here in forum that other people have better results with TCP connection,
so i guess that it must be something bad configured or wrong OS version. but iam out of ideas :(

airborne
 
eoinverling
just joined
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:56 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:15 pm

I've just setup an N link, 11.5km

Site A: 411AH + R52N + http://www.mars-antennas.com/item/g_ant ... _1-44.html (MA-WA56-DP25N)

Site B: 411AH + R52N + http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=22099

both sites are pretty busy with RF, and I don't know all frequencies (ie other operators!) so it's a guessing game to find a channel. Clear LOS.

As for the settings, I've pretty much winged it .. click a few buttons, not really knowing why, and now it's running and I hope it doesn't fall over ...

nstream, WDS, callibration off, HT extension below channel

Everything is pretty much default, the most confusing thing for me is which HT supported and HT basic settings to set!! If someone could explain this a little more to me?

Also, I do suffer from not R'ing TFM, so if there's a good "if you want to setup an 802.11n link, read this first" document/site anywhere, let me know also.

Performance:-

thruput (I've an RB1000 connected to site A, and a RB493 at site B)

I get 25 Mbps FD tcp, and 30Mbps FD udp ... which I'm happy enough with for now.

settings:-

/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=26 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland 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=5320 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:B9 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACDB9 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 \
wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none



/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=23 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland 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=5320 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:06 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=station-wds mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACD06 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=\
bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
User avatar
rahrouh
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:14 pm
Location: 550 Alden Road, Unit 210A
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:33 pm

Hello Normis .
I test 4 link with 802.11n , with RB/600A ,R52N , 30dBi parabolic .
On all of them when run BTest , the bandwidth are 115~149 Mbps depend on distance , but this is not my problem .
when I send file from windows computer to another windows computer the traffic rate in WLAN interface show me MAX 57 Mbps and cpu usage is 60%~70% .
I set these four link (Bridge-Station) and set route , (Bridge-Station) and set Eoip-T and Bridge with Ether1 , (Bridge-Station-wds) and Bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 and Nstreme is enable .
When I set Bridge-Station-wds and bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 I get the best result on my link but this best result only allow me to send data on tow computer only 57 Mbps .
I can get picture and send it for you .
 
User avatar
semakka
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:59 am
Location: Moraira, Alicante, Spain
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:45 pm

I've just setup an N link, 11.5km

Site A: 411AH + R52N + http://www.mars-antennas.com/item/g_ant ... _1-44.html (MA-WA56-DP25N)

Site B: 411AH + R52N + http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=22099

both sites are pretty busy with RF, and I don't know all frequencies (ie other operators!) so it's a guessing game to find a channel. Clear LOS.

As for the settings, I've pretty much winged it .. click a few buttons, not really knowing why, and now it's running and I hope it doesn't fall over ...

nstream, WDS, callibration off, HT extension below channel

Everything is pretty much default, the most confusing thing for me is which HT supported and HT basic settings to set!! If someone could explain this a little more to me?

Also, I do suffer from not R'ing TFM, so if there's a good "if you want to setup an 802.11n link, read this first" document/site anywhere, let me know also.

Performance:-

thruput (I've an RB1000 connected to site A, and a RB493 at site B)

I get 25 Mbps FD tcp, and 30Mbps FD udp ... which I'm happy enough with for now.

settings:-

/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=26 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland 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=5320 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:B9 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACDB9 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 \
wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none



/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=23 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland 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=5320 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,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:06 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=station-wds mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACD06 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=\
bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/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=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none
I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks :D

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven
 
User avatar
semakka
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:59 am
Location: Moraira, Alicante, Spain
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:48 pm

Hello Normis .
I test 4 link with 802.11n , with RB/600A ,R52N , 30dBi parabolic .
On all of them when run BTest , the bandwidth are 115~149 Mbps depend on distance , but this is not my problem .
when I send file from windows computer to another windows computer the traffic rate in WLAN interface show me MAX 57 Mbps and cpu usage is 60%~70% .
I set these four link (Bridge-Station) and set route , (Bridge-Station) and set Eoip-T and Bridge with Ether1 , (Bridge-Station-wds) and Bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 and Nstreme is enable .
When I set Bridge-Station-wds and bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 I get the best result on my link but this best result only allow me to send data on tow computer only 57 Mbps .
I can get picture and send it for you .
your problem in windows mate :D
stop clickin'... start typing...
linuzzzz rocks :D

steven
 
gabris
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:58 pm

Hello,

There is a config: pc--RB600A/R52N----RB600A/r52N--pc
ROS is 4.0rc1 on both boards.
The link is "perfect" stable (tx/rx rate 270/270Mbps, CCQ 95-100%).
BTest results: one direction 208Mbps UDP, both 153/148Mbps UDP, 144MBps TCP and both 87/72Mbps TCP. Its seems good but i tested iperf, result 30-37Mbps one direction and 24/28Mbps both direction. After that I tried copy a file between the pc-s but result was 22Mbps. What's wrong????

Gabor
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:02 am

gabris, look at the CPU load. It is near 100%?
 
eoinverling
just joined
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:56 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:05 pm

I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks :D

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven
Steven,

I agree that an nstream2 link would be as good ... in fact it would be better, as I would know more about it and what to do if something goes wrong.

my problem is I don't know enough about 802.11n .. and what the options/settings mean. Are other people's optimum settings reached by trial and error? Is there a reason for choosing MCS-0, MCS-4 and MCS-15 (for example)? Does disabling periodic calibration always stop periodic disconnects? I understand that this is all test software .. I suppose I'm looking for more information ...

E
 
gabris
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:14 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:04 am

CPU load was 15-25% if i tested pc to pc.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:24 pm

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:42 pm

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:04 pm

Good to know.. but you answered only at my first question..
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
... that is worth an upgrade for our links, that is
 
User avatar
semakka
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:59 am
Location: Moraira, Alicante, Spain
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:58 pm

I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks :D

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven
Steven,

I agree that an nstream2 link would be as good ... in fact it would be better, as I would know more about it and what to do if something goes wrong.

my problem is I don't know enough about 802.11n .. and what the options/settings mean. Are other people's optimum settings reached by trial and error? Is there a reason for choosing MCS-0, MCS-4 and MCS-15 (for example)? Does disabling periodic calibration always stop periodic disconnects? I understand that this is all test software .. I suppose I'm looking for more information ...

E
I understand your problem mate but none of us knew it all from the beginning, we all learned as the technology evolved.
There are manuals and white pages out there I suggest you start reading them.
We all learned the hard way, no one will put their knowledge on a plate for you but people will answer your questions on forums.... depending how you ask them.
Remember, before asking a question... read the manual

good luck,

Steven
 
avantwireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:11 pm

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.
I think this is laughable. N was the major feature for 4.0. Couldn't be in 3... Had to upgrade licenses to it. ( And thank you for making that no cost). But as we all are learning N interference has made it mostly unsuitable for populated areas without Nstream to combat it and Nstream for N is not being recommended. So 4.0 is a non-product in the wireless world. 4.0 should not have become a release candidate without a working Nstream and certainly not released as a "Product".... Have fun at all the user meetings, because they should have been delayed for your getting Nstream working...
 
User avatar
ghmorris
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:07 pm

Does seem very odd. I'm trying to understand why 4.0 would be released without the crown jewel (Nstream) working properly in N.

I can only guess there is addtional new hardware coming that needs 4.0 and MT didn't want to release on RC firmware...

George
 
avantwireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:33 pm

Does seem very odd. I'm trying to understand why 4.0 would be released without the crown jewel (Nstream) working properly in N.

I can only guess there is addtional new hardware coming that needs 4.0 and MT didn't want to release on RC firmware...

George
I'll bet you are correct...
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:22 am

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.
I think this is laughable. N was the major feature for 4.0. Couldn't be in 3... Had to upgrade licenses to it. ( And thank you for making that no cost). But as we all are learning N interference has made it mostly unsuitable for populated areas without Nstream to combat it and Nstream for N is not being recommended. So 4.0 is a non-product in the wireless world. 4.0 should not have become a release candidate without a working Nstream and certainly not released as a "Product".... Have fun at all the user meetings, because they should have been delayed for your getting Nstream working...
Even at the thought of that delay (working N, nstreme whatever), many $ for companies that can sell high quality licensed equipment. E. g. NERA... Motorola...

IT IS A WAR, GUYS, IT IS A WAR... A war where nobody cares about us. Of course, I'm not sure, but this companies CAN PAY nstream to be delayed.

I hope so much all I told above is a "blether" (footle, bulshits...). Am I?
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 1:25 pm

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.
 
avantwireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 1:50 pm

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

N without Nstream to defeat interference is slower that a/g.... Not much of a product...
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:09 pm

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

N without Nstream to defeat interference is slower that a/g.... Not much of a product...
haha :) well maybe not in your case, but not everyone has this problem.
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 3:01 pm

we are testing N in a 15.6km link with Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes,
signal is at -68/-70 noise is at -115

We are unable to run the link stable and to pass a decent traffic.

The better modulation it can get is 58-HT, but not able to pass more then 25mbps full duplex. And Also at zero traffic the ping is very erratic.
With just 5mbps of real traffic we have 20-50ms jitter.

very sad to not use turbo on r52n, so we cant be back to the old config..............

regards
Ros
 
acidbits
just joined
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:45 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Does WDS work on ROS4.0 and 802.11n? If not, it will in a future release?
 
d_minni
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:58 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:45 pm

Hi!

We are a WLAN-Provider and testing 802.11n in realtime production. We are use dual-polarization Antennas and 433AH and R52n ...

We have now 3 Point-To-Point Connections in work. The tested throughput is about 115 MBps on a distance of 7 km. The realtime throughput on production is now about 50 Mbit without problems and latency is peaked to 50 ms....

The only Problem was: 2 R52n cards in one 433Ah didn't work (too much interference, no throughput ...), so put the cards in 2 433 AH's and it works fine.

Now we tested on Outdoor AP's on a mixed environment a/n for higher througput to the customers ....

The rate is much higher about 3 times with just 802.11n AP and client with one omni-Antenna... So it sounds good and cheap to change it for out customers ...

But for high stability we limited the datarates to 6,9,12 MBps on the AP. If we use a/n - Mode and Limit the DataRates no 802.11a Client will connect and 2nd problem is: With only a the CCQ is Tx 90%/Rx 80%. On mixed mode after a few minutes the CCQ is to same Client 75%/30% and no throughput. The signal is with -65 dbm very fine. Some Clients works fine. I tested several frequenzy etc. For The AP we are using RB600A with two R52n und 2 R52 a and b mode.

It seems that the R52n has an interference on other R52n on the same board .....

Has anybody tested this sitoution ....

Greetings from Austria
Dietmar
 
complete2006
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:18 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:21 am

Hi all,

this is only for your information
after running a 6 km link in a country side with acceptable bandwidth we tried to establish an 802.11n 2 km-link at the city location as high speed last mile solution.

The result is: Unusable. We are not able to get a stable result. The RX levels and the signal quality was very good. I think there is to much interference ...

:(
 
kkolev
newbie
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:24 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:41 am

Hi there,
I have one suggestion to MT: add the option "short" to ht-guard-interval (currently only "any" and "long" can be set), as "any" switches between 400ns and 800ns, "long"=800ns, and I want to set 400ns i.e. "short"
 
halexx
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:34 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:17 pm

RouterOS 4.1 !!
 
avantwireless
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:04 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:00 pm

RouterOS 4.1 !!
Changelog mentions nothing about N
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:47 am

Hi all,

this is only for your information
after running a 6 km link in a country side with acceptable bandwidth we tried to establish an 802.11n 2 km-link at the city location as high speed last mile solution.

The result is: Unusable. We are not able to get a stable result. The RX levels and the signal quality was very good. I think there is to much interference ...

:(

Hi Complete,

Probably You not made proper settings. N works fine at distances lower than 10km. Believe me. When distance up to 20-25km there is a interference result because nstreme works unstable. Or not works at all. I don't know.

If not, contact support. Better share your wireless conf with us first. But after read forum about n-draft configs.

Oh, I forgot. With dist. of several kilometers I usually do configs on a table in our office taking two routers here. And when they migrate in a real nature - they works fine. Attn.: in short distances only.
Last edited by chvdr on Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:53 am

RouterOS 4.1 !!
Changelog mentions nothing about N

Completing n-draft by MikroTik SIA will be a break news in latest news on any tv... So waiting for that you should not reading this forum, just watching tv. Time by time... :-)
:lol:

Peace all,
C.G.
 
dalejoyce
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:57 pm

Hi Guys!

I am in need of some help.

I have previously setup a test link with a 2 x R52 Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards with a TCP throughput of 70mb/s TCP with FTP file transfer between 2 laptops. I recently received 2 x R52N card and was very exited about the the possible thoughput.

I have setup a link using 2 x dipoles, 2 x R52N Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards. After some testing i got the link throughput upto 63mb/s TCP using the onboard bandwith test. The CPU was running at 100% so i then moved to a FTP file transfer between 2 Laptops.

The results fluctuated between 20mb/s and 33mb/s. Could anyone shed some light on possible problem?

I have checked that antivirus and firewall are turned off.

Cheers
With reference to my last post i have tried this through PC-PC and still only 35mb/s. I have tried using only one chain and still the throughput is only 35mb/s. It appears that the second chain may not be being used.

Also can someone tell me for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x RB52N cards?
 
InoX
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1966
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:44 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:17 pm

no, you can use 11b cards...
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:59 pm

no, you can use 11b cards...
joke?
 
InoX
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1966
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:44 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:42 am

no, you can use 11b cards...
joke?
:lol:
 
dalejoyce
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:39 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:04 am

Also can someone tell me for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x RB52N cards?
Let me re-phrase that:

"for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x R52N cards each side of the wireless link? for example RB600 + 2 x R52N ---> RB600 + 2 x R52N"

Constructive comments ONLY please!
 
sq6
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:49 pm

Hello. I'm new here, but I'd like to start with 802.11n test results that I've achieved.

These are kitchen tests only but for now I don't have time for real-life tests. Maybe next week.

Equipment:

Base:
2x 14dBi 5GHz panel antenna plus 3m CNT-240 cable (one for V and one for H pol.)
1x RB 411AR(!) + R52n

Client:

2x 14dBi 5GHz panel antenna plus 3m CNT-240 cable (one for V and one for H pol.)
1x RB 411AR(!) + R52n

I've been using ROS 4.0rc1 and 4.1 to test.

Results (PC-PC)

Image
Half duplex TCP!


Image

NStreme enabled. Without NStreme it's roughly 11mbps.
Plus with only one antenna (chain) on each side it's 80+mbps half duplex TCP.

Why isn't it working well with Nstreme disabled?
Greetings.
sq6
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:24 am

24km+rb600+r52n
Image
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1924
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:54 am

But I can see big differences with and without.
More bandwidth, more stability... just like a 802.11a link.
RB411AH has 100mbit fdx ethernet..... how possible >180 mbit/s in UDP ????
Where do you see ethernet involved in this test???
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:00 pm

On b-test everything is ok , but how about real customer traffic over 802.11n?
I have 4km link and RB600+r52n+two 23dBi flat panel on each side
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:07 pm

aaa, this just means that users are not downloading anything.
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:22 pm

Torch running on AP side. Monitor wlan interface running Station side.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

Torch running on AP side. Monitor wlan interface running Station side.
so what? user not downloading anything. tell them all to run torrents at max speed :D then check
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:43 pm

I mean user 192.168.1.182 download P2P traffic over 802.11n wireless at 47mbit speed.Total link consumption floating from 60-70mbit at max. load time.
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:50 pm

This is one side installation photo
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
User avatar
infowest
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:46 am

SUMMARY - 4.1 - 802.11N Features - Point-to-point

Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm

For point-to-point 802.11n, we'd like to start migrating some links over from 802.11a. I want to be sure I know what works now and what doesn't.

1. Nstreme - Does this work, or not at all? I'm seeing various responses here such as "not recommended," "works at short distances."

2. Link distance - Assuming we don't use Nstreme, is there a maximum link distance we are capped at? Again, if nstreme does work at short distances, what distance are we talking about?

3. WDS - Does it work, or not? Does it cause a performance hit? We need to be able to pass vlans over 433AH's, so we can't use the MPLS method (not enough MTU room).

4. Other recommended settings that are going to be different from the defaults or 802.11a settings?

5. Is 5 GHz 10 / 5 GHz 5mhz using 802.11a or n?

Thanks!

Randy
Last edited by infowest on Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
sq6
just joined
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:42 pm

in my tests:
nstreme did work only on one chain (antenna) - on 2 chains it disconnected frequently

wds did work.

greetings
 
User avatar
interpoint
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:44 am

we are testing N in a 15.6km link with Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes,
signal is at -68/-70 noise is at -115

We are unable to run the link stable and to pass a decent traffic.

The better modulation it can get is 58-HT, but not able to pass more then 25mbps full duplex. And Also at zero traffic the ping is very erratic.
With just 5mbps of real traffic we have 20-50ms jitter.

very sad to not use turbo on r52n, so we cant be back to the old config..............

regards
Ros
We also have the same setup but only 10.5km link and have tried Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes and also Dual Pol Jirous 29Db dishes. I am using RB433AH and R52N Card.

I have managed to tweek it (with great difficulty) to a signal level of -69db and can get approx 101Mb TX and 80Mb RX UDP. The link is unstable though as both direction traffic will only peak at 5Mb or less. I have found that wireless encryption (TKIP) causes alot of speed decrease too. AES is working fine. I am not using WDS but am routing with OSPF.

I am using pretty much factory default settings (default power etc) in the wireless config.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: SUMMARY - 4.1 - 802.11N Features - Point-to-point

Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:54 am

3. WDS - Does it work, or not? Does it cause a performance hit? We need to be able to pass vlans over 433AH's, so we can't use the MPLS method (not enough MTU room).
The VPLS Method is establish between the two wlan of the 433AH's and doesn't passthrough the ethernets.. so i don't see your MTU problem..
 
npero
Member
Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:59 pm
Location: Serbia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:29 am

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:49 am

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...
We do that (replacing a with n-draft. one chain. ). Terrible results. Don't wasting your time.
Last edited by chvdr on Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
interpoint
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:51 am

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...
I agree too it would not be a good move..

IMHO, I would not replace the card to R52N if you can only use 1 chain. 802.11N or MIMO technology actually takes advantage of multipath to increase throughput as well as range. So one antenna will prohibit you from engaging the full potential. Your system will effectively behave like an 802.11a system and because Nstream and Turbo is not available you will not get better performance. Also don't forget that R52N cards are ufl and not mmcx so you may have to replace a pigtail too.
 
npero
Member
Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:59 pm
Location: Serbia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:02 pm

Thanks all for answer.

I think maybe using one chain can get little more bandwidth compare to 5Ghz turbo nstreme. Add one more antenna is little complicated need more space, stronger tower more cables is not option for now on that place. Also dual polarity antenna is usually solid parabolic antenna need stronger tower sometime time wind is very strong.
May be tested on some other place.

One more thanks to all.
 
zatara
newbie
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:37 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:42 am

What antennas have people had success with? I know there have been mention of Mars and a couple others who make dual pol. Any specs would be helpful.

-Z
 
Mplsguy
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:06 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:18 am

802.11N or MIMO technology actually takes advantage of multipath to increase throughput as well as range. So one antenna will prohibit you from engaging the full potential. Your system will effectively behave like an 802.11a system...
This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 23, 2009 12:32 am

This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.

theorytically true. but have you ever seen that...
 
miles
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Kosovo

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:01 pm

hi fly
I have installed the p2p link but I can't not getting tx/rx rate more than 65 MBit
Can you help me out with your configuration . Because I'm new on N so if you can give me any advise how should I use HT and HT MCS .

thx
Selim
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:54 pm

hi fly
I have installed the p2p link but I can't not getting tx/rx rate more than 65 MBit
Can you help me out with your configuration . Because I'm new on N so if you can give me any advise how should I use HT and HT MCS .

thx
Selim

Hi Fly,

who actually is fly?

;-)
 
rmichael
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:00 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:18 pm

This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.

theorytically true. but have you ever seen that...

The key phrase is provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates. Possible in PtP but highly unlikely in MtP...
 
User avatar
Hammy
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:53 pm
Location: DeKalb, IL
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:43 am

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know :D

Regards,
Steven
It might be usable at about 4.30 ;-)
 
User avatar
Hammy
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:53 pm
Location: DeKalb, IL
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:51 am

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?
You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.
If it doesn't work, why is v4 in a stable release? N-Streme is a staple of the MT wireless system and you say it's completely worthless in v4 for N.

MT needs to take the first 15 - 20 "stable" releases they do and put them in beta and RC stages. It's completely opposite to have 6 testing releases and 30 - 50 stable releases.

*sigh* I've been using MT for several years, but UBNT's AirMax is looking more and more attractive as MT continues to fumble N-Streme.
 
User avatar
Hammy
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 5:53 pm
Location: DeKalb, IL
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:01 am

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.
Polling type operation is required to deliver quality, consistent service when there are dozens of CPE with high usage levels.
 
angboontiong
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:59 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:31 pm

We tested with ..

1) Site distance: 6.5Km
2) LOS: Clear LOS
3) Antenna Site A: 23dbi patch panel & 26dbi solid parabolic
4) Antenna Site B: 23dbi patch panel & 26dbi solid parabolic

When we test, we found running on 2 chain, the signal is no so good, and if use only 1 chain, we have to physical dismantle one of the antenna (no-use) on edh end), if not, it will cause the bad signal sensitivity (Suprised~!)

After that, we dismantled both end 23dbi flat panel antenna and running only 1 chain on the 26dbi solid parabolic antenna.

We are getting 90Mbps with good latency on bandwidth test, but it only good on 1 way traffic test, if with both direction, aih~! the result is very very bad.

To make sure our finding is truth, we try to connect PC end to end (behind the MT), and we getting what same result.

And feedback from MT, they knew this issue form our feedback, i going to setup another link with...

1) Site distance: 9.8Km
2) LOS: Clear LOS
3) Antenna Site A: 32dbi wide band solid parabolic x 2
4) Antenna Site A: 32dbi wide band solid parabolic x 2
5) RB433AH x 2 units
6) R52N x 2 units

This is for them to remote access and help all of us find out, what is the root cause of it.

Hope ... Hope...
 
merlinthemagic
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:54 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:03 pm

We have a few N links out there. With 4.1, the link will drop from time to time, not disconnect (still showing in the registration table), but the station will transmit at 6.5Mbit/s and no data will pass, a few seconds later the link will come back up to 130Mbit/s and everything is fine again. These drops create 5% packet loss.

If the link is being used (60kbit/s traffic+) the link does not drop ever. A few simple pings across the link is not enough for the link to be stable. All frequencies show the same symptoms. Enabling nstreme or various other settings does not affect this issue. only way to get it stable is to move more than 60kbit/s across at all times.

Signal is -47/-48 locked at 130/130. I have tried dropping the TX on both sides, that does not fix the issue either.

I noticed that the ap shows WMM Enabled under the registration, even though it is disabled.

Ideas?

Martin Madsen
Bel Air Internet
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:22 am

4.2 is much better regarding ping/latency at high bandwidth and stability on 802.11n links. Great work!
 
User avatar
interpoint
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:20 am

4.2 is much better regarding ping/latency at high bandwidth and stability on 802.11n links. Great work!
What version were you using before ?
What distance is your link ?
What antenna are you using ?
What levels or ccq did you have v's what you have now ?

I don't see anything in the change log relating to N latency improvements.

What's new in 4.2:

*) fixed problem - RB450G ethernet did not work if one of the ports was disabled;
*) fixed ethernet of RB433 with switch chip IP175D;
*) fixed route attribute problem;
*) fixed route next-hops falling under multiple connected routes;

please explain more ..
Last edited by interpoint on Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
gala
just joined
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:35 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:36 pm

Hi All!

I need help!

I used Turbo Nstreme2, p2p link, distance 4,5km, and works fine. Bandwidth 50/10Mbit live traffic, ping 1-10ms max.
I will need a bigger bandwidth because of this I changed the link it for a N link.
Now the ping time is high and packet loss.
Detail:

x86 system, r52n, antenna dual jirous 24db
Distance 4,5km
Tx signal strengh -65
TX/RX CCQ 70-90%
AMPDU all
Chain 0,1


bandwidth test (TCP/IP) : half: 100Mbit, full: 50/50mbit ping 200-300ms

in live download the bandwidth max 25-30mbit the ping time is 40-50 ms.

Why? Ideas?

ps: sorry my english
 
User avatar
chvdr
Member
Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:17 am

Hi All!

I need help!

I used Turbo Nstreme2, p2p link, distance 4,5km, and works fine. Bandwidth 50/10Mbit live traffic, ping 1-10ms max.
I will need a bigger bandwidth because of this I changed the link it for a N link.
Now the ping time is high and packet loss.
Detail:

x86 system, r52n, antenna dual jirous 24db
Distance 4,5km
Tx signal strengh -65
TX/RX CCQ 70-90%
AMPDU all
Chain 0,1


bandwidth test (TCP/IP) : half: 100Mbit, full: 50/50mbit ping 200-300ms

in live download the bandwidth max 25-30mbit the ping time is 40-50 ms.

Why? Ideas?

ps: sorry my english

We all have same problem.
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:37 pm

Same problem here.
I have a 18km link with 70m height, 35dbi 1.2 dish antennas on both sides with dual-polarity feeds. r52n. x86 p4@1.5ghz, cpu load ~25%, no irq conflicts, using rb14.
The link works only from time to time. I have a lot of "extensive data loss" and "not polled for too long" in the logs.
The signal is in 50-60 range, and on exactly the same setup a link with cm9-s can push 75mbit one way with nstreme2, straight and stable. With n the speed is either 2mbit/s, either 14mbit, either 56-70mbit, but it's not stable at all.
Does it need signal levels in the -40 range to work stable or what? Can the rb14 be a problem?
Any hints?
Are there known problems with the implementation that you are working on? Should i wait for an update or put the cm9-s back until we have a 4.20? Given the signal levels i was hoping for a 100mbit link, but it's even worse than nstreme1. At least that's rock solid.
 
User avatar
interpoint
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:38 pm

Hi Guys,

I have a 9km Link. See signal levels in graphics below.
Transmit Link.jpg
Receive Link.jpg
I have been testing with Max UDP traffic from the Client end to the AP for 36 Hours. (see graphic). Traffic is Wireless Interface to Wireless Interface and CPU levels do not exceed 40% at any time.
Dude Transmit and Receive Link.jpg
I have spent ages aligning the antenna and the frequency being used are clear on both sides of the link.

1.) I am using Jirous 29Dbi dual pol antenna on both sides.
2.) I am using RB433AH and R52N ROS 4.1 and 2 x .5 meter LMR400 on both sides.
3.) I have clear LOS between AP and ST
4.) I have completed a frequency scan at both sides and am using clear channels.
5.) I have tried other channels and the results are similar if not worse.
6.) Bandwidth Testing set to "both ways", I can only achieve approx 5MbTX and 2MbRX
7.) Ntream is turned off
8.) Power and Rates are set to default
9.) WDS is turned off
10.) both chains are in use
11.) ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7

Question 1: Why is the TX throughput much better than the RX throughput ?

Question 2: What observations can be made about the results ?

Question 3: Why are the ping times very high ~500ms (max RX @ 22Mb-1) and only ~50ms (max TX @ 176Mb-1)

Question 4: What would cause non symetrical results like this ?

Quastion 5: Any obversations or comments about this setup is much appreciated and welcome..

This is my wireless config:
0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
mode=station ssid="ST" area="" frequency-mode=superchannel
country=no_country_set antenna-gain=0 frequency=5460 band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=5400-5500 rate-set=default
supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps
supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps 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 antenna-mode=ant-a 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=yes default-forwarding=no default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=disabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=profile1
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=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=any
ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7 ht-txchains=0,1 ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=4 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0


I have worked out the following Link Margin Calculations:

5.4Ghz @ 9.0Km

Figures from the R52N Card Specifications

Transmit power: 13dBm @ 5GHz (802.11n) 13dB @ MCS7 40MHz
RX sensitivity: -75dBm @ 5GHz (802.11n) -75/-73dBm @ MCS7 40MHz
Pigtail: 0.6 dB
Connector 1: 0.5 dB
Cable: 0.71 dB/m
Cable length: 1 Meters
Connector 2: 0.5 dB
Antenna: 28 dBi

Result:

Link Margin: 13.2dB
Therefore I should see a "theoretical" signal level of -61.8dB

In reality, I am getting the correct signal level on the TX of -60.0dB (very close to predicted) but on the RX I am only getting -66.0dB and this leaves a Link Margin of only 9db and this would prove to be unreliable.

Many thanks for any constructive comments or suggestions to make this link work better.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:34 pm

You have RF interference in RX site. I have 243.0Mbps-HT in both direction with b-test on one or other direction. Regarding both direction problem there is some standard mismatch. I consider go to full duplex system.
 
angboontiong
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:59 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:25 am

is the MT support Nstreme Dual on the 11n?
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:14 am

I don't know. I just want make two AP and two station, use 5180 and 5800 freq. and 4 antennas on each side. Set for example 10.10.10.0/24 network for one link and 10.10.11.0/24 for other and separate data flow with gateway. And then reduce antenna count using 5GHz duplexer. In that way I hope I can get 150mbit+150mbit wireless connection.
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:58 pm

How long we must wait for working NSTREME ? for 802.11N 2x ?
 
Lakis
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 703
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:59 am

How long we must wait for working NSTREME ? for 802.11N 2x ?
1-3 months
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:42 am

officially?
 
Muqatil
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:03 pm
Location: London - UK
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:25 pm

I'm out.
I wasted enough time on making it work on a live enviorment but even in a short link with a good initial signal.. during a rainy day the rates drop drastically. I'm replacing them with a dual nstreme link.
I'll be back on 802.11n as soon as it becomes a viable solution, but most of all, a stable link.
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:50 pm

me too.
However, one thing is strange. I put two NS M5 on the same places and guess what? They work flawless, connected at 216mbps. One of them is without a dish, and the other is strapped with a wire over the feed of the 1.5m dish used to test r52n.
Maybe the tx-power can be an issue? I saw that the nano-stations have plenty of it. However, they don't have as much cpu power as a 1.5ghz p4, so they can't get that much bandwidth through the link.

Bottomline, i am waiting for a bunch of sr71-15 and for nstreme2 using N cards. Until that... back to ns m5 and nstreme2 classic.
 
medinsky
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:35 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Nov 12, 2009 2:16 pm

Hi, All
I have a some problems with link on the R52N card. Please, If we have a solutions to these problems help me please.
Link description.
-RouterOS 4.2 L4
-Distance 22 km, 2.4 GHz
-side A RB600 with R52N card, antenna prime focus 1.5m
-side B PC with IA/MP1 and R52N card, antenna 1.2m offset
Problems:
1. I have the Signal Strength -59dBm, but TX/RX CCQ very low 20%/80% and sometimes link loss fully, bandwidth test show me up to 20 Mbits/s very unstable.
2. While I configure devices in wireless settings lost possibility change band to 5 GHz, I don't know as possible it. :? When I reset configuration this options come back.
P.S. When I testing NStream off/on but result was absent.
I understand that my problems with low CCQ but I don't understand when I return wireless card D-Link DWA-520 I have a CCQ 90%/100% :shock: and my link now working (with D-link card ) in Turbo mode and bandwidth test show me about 60Mbits/s stable
 
wwalcher
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:08 am
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:36 pm

KillerOPS, are you saying that you setup two NS M5 links to the same location, put them in Bridge mode, connected them via Ethernet to MT routers, bonded them together and got 216mbps throughput? If so, is this 216mbps in one direction, or 100+ in both directions? Is this true real-life throughput or just tested throughput (i.e., what testing did you perform)? What is the distance of your link? This sounds like it could be a terrific setup.
me too.
However, one thing is strange. I put two NS M5 on the same places and guess what? They work flawless, connected at 216mbps. One of them is without a dish, and the other is strapped with a wire over the feed of the 1.5m dish used to test r52n.
Maybe the tx-power can be an issue? I saw that the nano-stations have plenty of it. However, they don't have as much cpu power as a 1.5ghz p4, so they can't get that much bandwidth through the link.

Bottomline, i am waiting for a bunch of sr71-15 and for nstreme2 using N cards. Until that... back to ns m5 and nstreme2 classic.
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:21 am

no, that was the speed at which they wirelessly connected. Real throughput is about 60mbit, lower than a dual nstreme link.
So don't expect them to perform cpu-wise at the level of a rb 433ah or 600, however, wirelessly, they are miles ahead of r52n as far as i can see.
 
wirelesswaves
Member
Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:38 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:16 pm

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:03 am

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!
ROTFL man 802.11N from UBNT 148 $ for working bridge!!!!!!! 100 Mbit/s no problem.....just see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF_G_BIYqhU


We want same good radio, working N-streme from mikrotik.
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:11 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-0PzERW4ZY&NR=1

890 meters, poor signal & 55Mbit/s in 1 TCP stream no UDP no 20 sesion in TCP!!!!!!!!

ONLY 1 TCP stream & 55Mbit/s
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:50 pm

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!
ROTFL man 802.11N from UBNT 148 $ for working bridge!!!!!!! 100 Mbit/s no problem.....just see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF_G_BIYqhU


We want same good radio, working N-streme from mikrotik.
what equipment did you use here radios tails board power supply and antenna
 
conjurer
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:46 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:39 pm

Here's my working link graph of the week. Its only user traffic, both ends with 4.1 and EOIP, and r52n (tp-link).
tese week chart.png
Its only about 1.5 Km, and rarely works with 270Ht or 300Ht rates. :(
I only had good experience with short links.
Also i have tried "strix nitro" (compex) solution, and it worked better in similar case (allways 300HT, and 85Mbps full duplex).
Has anyone compared mikrotik and ubnt products on same link? With same antennas?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:40 pm

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:04 pm

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?
Yes, please post it.
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:37 pm

Heres the pics:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:38 pm

and this:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:14 pm

And how about real customer (p2p,web,ftp ) traffic? Most of people have good results with b-test or one file download.
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:38 pm

Change Local and Remote Tx Size to 150-300, and you will see dramaticaly CCQ and speed degradation. (I was test it on 10 km link on 60 cm dish, -65 db Rx/Tx signal strenght).
 
aaa
Member
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:54 am
Location: Latvia, Baltezers

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:46 pm

That exactly what I mean!

Change Local and Remote Tx Size to 150-300, and you will see dramaticaly CCQ and speed degradation. (I was test it on 10 km link on 60 cm dish, -65 Rx/Tx signal strenght).
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:58 pm

But when we change mode to A or G without N on the same R52N cards - all looks ideal: CCQ=100% on small packages like 100-300, and troughput is maximum and ideal for A and G modes.
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:59 pm

try a tcp test. Put some real-world traffic through the link.
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:05 pm

The software has many bugs still. I am actually surprised the software is not labeled as beta as the problems with Nstream etc means we can't use it in production properly yet. I'm looking forward very much to more work from MT and it certainly looks promising with these results so far, but it should still be called beta version in my opinion?

I don't have enough CPU to do tcp tests at the moment. It maxes the CPU at 25-30 mbps with the routerboard generating the traffic. I will set up a dedicated bandwidth test from behind the link soon but haven't had time.
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:11 pm

same opinion here. I don't wanna say that mikrotik n is crap, but it has quite a long way to go to be reliable. Maybe is not the right place to say that, but i think ubnt got it pretty right for now.

However, i am still waiting for the nstreme2 implementation using n from mikrotik. It would be useful for someone to confirm mikrotik is working on thins thing.
And i would also love some more detailed changelogs. There were no differences in wireless implementation for some versions, however there are big differences in performance between them.
Knowing what was changed between versions would save us a lot of wallbashing and real-world (always expensive) testing.
 
User avatar
ghmorris
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:48 am

The software has many bugs still. I am actually surprised the software is not labeled as beta as the problems with Nstream etc means we can't use it in production properly yet. I'm looking forward very much to more work from MT and it certainly looks promising with these results so far, but it should still be called beta version in my opinion?

I don't have enough CPU to do tcp tests at the moment. It maxes the CPU at 25-30 mbps with the routerboard generating the traffic. I will set up a dedicated bandwidth test from behind the link soon but haven't had time.
The last stable version with N cards in our environment was 4.0beta3. Everything since has been worse.

We have retired most of our N links due to poor performance. Running XR-5s on 3.30 Wireless Test seems to be the safe option for the moment until MT gets organized with a new, stable version of nstreme and some reliable N drivers.

The only consolation is that Ubiquiti is having similar problems. Be interesting to see who gets a production-worthy inexpensive N solution to market first.

George
 
Superdust
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:24 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:08 pm

We have no luck with MT N solutions yet.
But I think there is hope very soon...

The other day I got new FW for my Strix Nitro II from Witelcom, and now finally it`s stable.
Before it was acting just like my MT links, pore throughput, link loss etc.
Now it`s rock stable, giving me 80Mbps fdx (tcp ftp test) and 100Mbps hdx.
With 20Mhz channel I get 80Mbps hdx.

Have not tested yet with torrent traffic etc.

I do not like the OS on the Strix though, not many possibilities.
ROS is much better in that way.
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:34 pm

On 1500 byte packets looks so good (but not on small)
10 km link
60 cm dish on each side
dual polarity emmitor
R52N cards
Nstreme
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
User avatar
ghmorris
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 12:14 pm
Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:00 am

On 1500 byte packets looks so good (but not on small)
10 km link
60 cm dish on each side
dual polarity emmitor
R52N cards
Nstreme
What is your performance with TCP 20-streams?

George
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:32 pm

It's not much different with small packets? I only see a 10-20 % difference with small packets?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:34 pm

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.
+1
 
yri
newbie
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:22 pm

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.
why dont you all people try too use the ip packing ? it should kill small packets.
 
yri
newbie
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:23 pm

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?
what card did you used & r52n?
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:36 pm

i tried packing but doesn make any difference,
seems not working at all, in fact sending small packet to the wireless i see the same number of packet that on the ethernet meaning that no packet aggragtion occurs.

regards
Ros
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:36 pm

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.
why dont you all people try too use the ip packing ? it should kill small packets.
1)IP packing not work in BRIDGE MODE only routing.
2)I think no CPU power in RB411AH to IP packing 100 Mbit HDX stream true ?
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:30 pm

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?
what card did you used & r52n?
No the Ubnt sr71-15. Also I have fixed all settings. I have fixed ack, rates are just set to only the top two ht rates, turned off all advanced features like calibration etc to make it work.
 
ianek
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:56 am

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan
 
bblrl
just joined
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:32 pm

Hi!

I'm fairly new to Mikrotik, but I have a couple links running on RB433AH and R5H's and I'm very satisfied with these.

Now I'm doing some testing on RB433AH and R52N's with ROS 4.3

I must say that I'm not that satisfied anymore. The link is roughly 300 meters, and it is simply very unstable. When speed testing one direction at a time I can sometimes get impressive results. But when speed testing both ways at the same time, or while passing normal traffic, some very strange things happens. The reported connection rate drops to 6 mbps in one direction, and the link becomes very unstable. Of course this is completely unacceptable for a production link. So at the moment, for any new links I'm about to deploy, mikrotik is out of the question. Since I do like mikrotik, I hope you get this sorted quickly!
 
npbrasil
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:50 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:48 am

From ianek:
Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Yes, you're right. The truth is that the mikrotik is not ready for "real world" N applications now. I stopped all my tests, because the 802.11n (from mikrotik) at this stage is absolutely unusable, except for laboratory use. PS: R52n tests only.
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:28 pm

Well it's not that bad I think! Actually its pretty reliable once you get the settings right and does perform much better than 11a.

When Nstream is properly sorted and a few other little things it will be awesome.
 
Ciambot
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:30 pm

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan
I have the same problem.
Is it possibile that there are some unstable modules?
 
rower
newbie
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:39 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:46 pm

guys, BTW, i did some kitchen tests, and it seems, that 2.4GHz links on 52N cards work better than 5GHz. in 2.4 GHz i could get stable 50/50 MBits even in noisy environment (aprox 10 other 2.4 cells working around me, SNR ~25, signal aprox -50dBm. single 2db omni antenna on each side, single chain used, PCs with FTP and MT speedtest and other MTs as testbed), all settings - default. as soon as i switched to 5GHz - ccq drops drasticly and speed was not stable in 30-40Mbits range.

also, regarding 52N in urban environment. problem with dropping performance and CCQ was solved by enabling NStreme on both ends. at least i've got stable 30/30 link instead of 5-6 Mbits. (setup - AP on one end, client on other), and while testing live traffic, (30Mbits in peaks, 10/10 usual load) i could add extra 40 to 50 Mbits load with nearly no effect on user traffic. ccq droped from time to time below 60%, but it might have natural source behind it, so i was not hunting for ghosts.

about link - aprox 6KM, one dish on each side, using one chain. link level between 52 and 56dBm floating, SNR about 50. fresnel zone should be clear. most of the settings are default. traffic was running through EoIP tunnel. i'll try to do some more nibbling in a couple of days, like adding 2 more dishes, enabling extra interfaces and reconfiguring antennas. both ends have RB433AH, and more than 1 radio card on board.

and yes, i totally agree - 4.x versions (even 4.3) are quite raw. i feel like it is v4.0RC6, or whatever...

PS. Normis - may we all have a "surprise" update to 4.4 with winbox fixed up, that it allows editing transmit power for DT modes ? :) i'm to lazy to ssh or terminal and get these fixed by typing...
 
CarulloS
Member
Member
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:52 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 15, 2009 5:54 am

Heck, at this point even an acknowledgment that there are some issues being worked through by MT on this topic would be more comforting than silence... Look at how long ago there was a MT post to this topic...

Scott
 
conjurer
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:46 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:15 am

I am satisfied with my r52n link.
Look at dude graph:
chart.png
It is a week graph, so it is a bit rounded.
Ping is max 100 ms. Serving about 200 users over 1.5 Km.
Also we have one strix nitro (compex) link from witelcom, that crashes for some reason.
I haven't tried ubnt 2x2 yet, but i doubt it would be as good as mikrotik.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
ianek
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:02 pm

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan
I have the same problem.
Is it possibile that there are some unstable modules?
Donno, whats very strange to me also, that i cannot without Nstreme push the wireless links over 10Mbits(real traffic, not generated UDP) - either a or n mode, but im sure Ubnt or other architectures are not using NO ack protocol and they are performing much better - airmax disabled M5 products for example. Also i dont expect the Ubnt product are equipped with more CPU power than MK boards.
So its up to MK to solve the problem, but there is silence from their side ....
Hope we get it working this year.
Wish all the best

Jan
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:36 pm

α> Two Channels (extended channel mode), Two chains, nstreme = Receive Sustain 164Mbps, Send Sustain 165Mbps, Both Sustain 100Mbps. (full duplex Ethernet LOL) [mcs 0,15]
b> Two Channels (extended channel mode), One chain, nstreme = Receive Sustain 100Mbps, Send Sustain 100Mbps, Both Sustain 55Mbps. [mcs 0,15]
c> One Channel Two chains, nstreme = Receive Sustain 90Mbps, Send Sustain 90Mbps, Both Sustain 50Mbps. [mcs 0,8]
d> One Channel, One chain, nstreme = Receive Sustain 48Mbps, Send Sustain 48Mbps, Both Sustain 25Mbps. [mcs 0,8]
Have you a comparation with simple 802.11a+n-stream on same links?
I can expect this values on a RB433AH?
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Tue Dec 15, 2009 4:39 pm

PS. Normis - may we all have a "surprise" update to 4.4 with winbox fixed up, that it allows editing transmit power for DT modes ? i'm to lazy to ssh or terminal and get these fixed by typing...
what do you mean by this ?
 
spire2z
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:48 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:41 am

Well from my extensive testing so far, I would say 11n is very good if you have a strong signal. of -60 or above. But for low signals it's much worse than 11a right now performance wise. And becomes very instable. Im sure with a little more work it will be great. And reading after UBNT it's just the same story there.

Lets send some GOOD VIBES to the MT programmers to help them. Your work is great so far we only need a few more improvements now.

:-)
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:48 am

Well from my extensive testing so far, I would say 11n is very good if you have a strong signal. of -60 or above. But for low signals it's much worse than 11a right now performance wise. And becomes very instable. Im sure with a little more work it will be great. And reading after UBNT it's just the same story there.

Lets send some GOOD VIBES to the MT programmers to help them. Your work is great so far we only need a few more improvements now.

:-)
Yes improve 802.11n + Nstreme for small packet traffic (CCQ drops drasticly)
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:16 am

Yes improve 802.11n + Nstreme for small packet traffic (CCQ drops drasticly)
+1
 
jcremin
Member
Member
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:57 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:33 am

So now I have stable ~50km link with 90Mbps-SD traffic.
What kind of signals and noise floors do you have for your 50km link? How has it been performing? What kind of TCP throughput are you getting? I have one that is similar length that I'm thinking about upgrading from 5ghz A to N to get more speed.

Thanks,
Joe
 
User avatar
mojiro
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:21 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:07 pm

Looking at capabilities of a R52N card, I noticed that it supports "14". What is that?
/ interface wireless info print

interface-type=Atheros AR5416
chip-info="mac:0x80/0x2, phy:0xd0, a5:0xc0, a2:0x0, eeprom:0x0"
pci-info="00:13.0"
capabilities=tx-power-control,ack-timeout-control,virtual-ap,alignment-mode,scanning,nstreme,sniffing,power-channel,ht40-a,ht40-g,wmm,14
default-periodic-calibration=enabled
supported-bands=2ghz-b,5ghz,2ghz-g,5ghz-10mhz,5ghz-5mhz,2ghz-10mhz,2ghz-5mhz,5ghz-11n,2ghz-11n
 
devchaos
just joined
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Dec 25, 2009 4:55 am

Hello,
1 antenna V, 2 antenna V <=> 1 antenna V, 2 antenna V
or
1 antenna V, 2 antenna H <=> 1 antenna V, 2 antenna H
better for "n"?
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:01 pm

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Config and description(unfortunatelly only polish- you can use google translate):
http://www.cyberteam.pl/artykuly/conten ... 32505.html
btw> the board is 1,6 atom x86 which you can also find somewhere on this website.
The first test at 24km+rb600+r52n is located under the link(above)
You can watch the test at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZO5as93Do
Big thanks to MT!
Happy new year ;)
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:30 pm

Config and description(unfortunatelly only polish- you can use google translate):
http://www.cyberteam.pl/artykuly/conten ... 32505.html
btw> the board is 1,6 atom x86 which you can also find somewhere on this website.
The first test at 24km+rb600+r52n is located under the link(above)
You can watch the test at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZO5as93Do
Big thanks to MT!
Happy new year ;)
Make BT for 200bytes UDP packet & check CCQ/RATE/PING.....
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:42 pm

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km
Image
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:37 pm

what version of os are you running?
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:53 pm

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km
Image
True I test it now :)...... In 4.4ROS MT team improve Nstreme for 802.11n....... but again no info in Changelog as usual.
Now works much better :)
 
angboontiong
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:59 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:03 pm

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km
Image
True I test it now :)...... In 4.4ROS MT team improve Nstreme for 802.11n....... but again no info in Changelog as usual.
Now works much better :)
Ready???
V4.4 have improve the Nstrem???
We facing some strange issue in V4.3...
 
rpingar
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Italy

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:13 pm

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Dec 30, 2009 6:32 pm

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros
The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:33 am

so is the a diffrence in 4.3 and 4.4

is 4.4. more stable


and can you tel me more about hardwere?
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Dec 31, 2009 4:27 pm

Intel Atom 1,6ghz with HT + r52n+sata dom(on the picture ide dom with laptop IDE adapter)+ mpcie slot
Image
Image
I've had recrived this hardware from cyberteam.pl for testing. It's working with rb14. It's smaller than rb600 and it has dc input 12V (it's some kind of disadvatage because it isn't working with poe.
But in the near future i will recrive sth like that Image It has CF card +mpcie and what is interesting, AUPS - a ups system/battery that is directly connected to the board. The input of the board is 28VDC so you can use PoE. The AUPS advantage is that the board consumes 100% of the energy that is inside the battery, no heat and etc.
The board is fanless. Anyway, if it gets warmer i will test the 802.11n support on SR71e. Anyone tested it?
The board has 2x1Gbit integrated cards located on the pcie express bus.
Big thanks, happy new year.
MD
 
wdca
newbie
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:17 pm

This is a 802.11n link(15mbit/15mbit) r52n and the diffrence before and after upgrade to 4.4 from 4.3
Image
(left 4.3 right 4.4)
After zooming in 4.4:
Image
The diffrence is enormus!
 
magnavox
Member
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:34 pm

This is a 802.11n link(15mbit/15mbit) r52n and the diffrence before and after upgrade to 4.4 from 4.3
Image
(left 4.3 right 4.4)
After zooming in 4.4:
Image
The diffrence is enormus!

Very interesting.

Can you post traffic graph for same days?
 
devchaos
just joined
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:49 pm

Hello, I have a problem with the "n" link. ROS 4.4.
Distance 800m, 2 separate antennas 26dbi in different polarization. r52n. 5Ghz. Tried different freq.
CCQ in both directions after installation around 98-100%. But on-loading TX CCQ from bridge and RX CCQ from station near 20-25% ( Im using VPLS tunnel.
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7
ht-extension-channel=below-control
ht-txchains=0,1
nstream disabled.
Can anybody help find solution? :(
 
User avatar
infowest
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:46 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:22 pm

Wait (with the rest of us) for routeros to be fixed to work with long "n" links, and for nstreme to work with "n".

Not a great answer, but the truth.

Randy
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:00 am

4.3 was more stable then new 4.4.

4.4 - is terrible.
 
staslabs
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:05 am

"n" + Nsterme + WDS

is it work now, or I obliged to use EoIP?
 
KillerOPS
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:22 am

you should use vpls
 
vince
newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:17 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 15, 2010 1:13 pm

We have an alternative to WDS for 802.11n when we want to bridge two ethernets. But, Is there any way to have a repeater on a single 802.11n interface without using WDS?
Last edited by vince on Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
janisk
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 6263
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:46 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:48 pm

We have an alternative to WDS for 802.11n when we want to bridge two ethernets. But, Is there any way to have a repeater on 802.11n without using WDS on a single wireless interface?
see post obove yours, that says - use VPLS
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transpare ... using_MPLS
 
vince
newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:17 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:59 pm

I've already done it and this is the alternative to WDS I'm saying for two ethernets. But on that scenario one wireless interface is in bridge mode (or AP mode) and the other is station. To achive the repeater functionality both wireless interfaces will need to be on AP or WDS slave mode. And they wouldn't connect unless WDS is enabled.
 
wiyat
newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:21 pm

I would be great if the first people to test the new 802.11n support in RouterOS v4 beta 3 would post their experiences here in this thread.

Anyone who will post some 802.11n wiki tutorial with images and setup configurations that work with good speeds, will get a Level6 license from me
Wrote Mark: I posted just minutes ago a new message can you check and send me back your comments please... bets regards
 
jone8880
newbie
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:35 am

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:48 pm

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros
The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.
the same but nstream also stop working on non-N wireless cards (Atheros AR5413). The same message about pooled and disconnecting
 
uldis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 3446
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 2:55 pm

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:50 pm

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros
The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.
the same but nstream also stop working on non-N wireless cards (Atheros AR5413). The same message about pooled and disconnecting
Are you using x86 box? check the system clock and uptime if it isn't running 10 times faster when you use nstreme?
 
wiyat
newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:38 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:50 pm

DEAR ALL

I apologize to write here but I need your help with the following please.- read and send me back your comment or if you prefer send an email to marco @ telplay net

The following note is my problem. Thank you

Dear
All


I have problem with my Radius because it have 2 Millions of logs but i don't know how I can remove/delete because the only way that i know if one by one, this process isn't good to me.- For this reason I request to you the help, maybe you know any script to execute and delete automatically this logs that I have under user-manager session at the same time I have more logs under /tools user-manager logs but I don't know if the same information.

My request is: Did you know any script that can remove this log, please

I read on internet on the next link the follow information: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21214


CLEAR USERMAN LOG SCRIPT:

:local Flag
:set Flag [/tool user-manager log find]
:if ([:len $Flag] > 0) do={/tool user-manager log print append file log;/tool user-manager log remove [/tool user-manager log find];}

BUT WHEN I EXECUTE THE BELOW SCRIPT, NOT WORK FINE I GET THE NEXT ERROR:
:set Flag [/tool user-manager log find]
syntax error (line 1 column 13)

I don't know if the problem is that when the other user made the below script used the other mikrotik OS version.

Thank you, please send me your comments.

Best regards.

mark
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n and RB800

Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:37 am

Excellent combination: RB800 + SparkLAN WPEA110N MiniPCI-E!

It is a great addition to RB800: minipci-e slot and it supports wireless minipci-e cards now! We hope mikrotik will make revision and add more minipci-e slots to this great board and hope price will be cheaper too!

2km distance using RouterOS 4.5, RB800 and SparkLAN WPEA 110N MiniPCI-E. Result is great, ping is great, it is very stable:
rb800-tcp-802-11n-both.jpg
RB800 is the best RB but it should be cheaper. The best thing it has now minipci-e slot for wireless but it should be more such slots.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
 
RK
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada and Central America

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:40 pm

Hello, I have a problem with the "n" link. ROS 4.4.
Distance 800m, 2 separate antennas 26dbi in different polarization.
What is your signal strength?
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:43 pm

you can see it in his picture. signal is -47
 
devchaos
just joined
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:27 pm

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:38 pm

the signal is -50 -52. after fixing rates on load ccq much better. But nstreme doesnt working for me. Ccq 20, bw 1-2 mbits with nstreme. Without nstreme bw much better. But latency with r52 5ghz nstreme was better.
 
pikpik
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:25 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:42 am

Hello

Conf.

AP
# jan/02/1970 01:30:48 by RouterOS 4.5
# software id = RGKP-MP7S
#
/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=ap-and-client-mode allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=0 area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g=54Mbps basic-rates-b=\
1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps comment="" compression=yes 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=5600 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-8,mcs-9,mcs-10,mcs-11,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-extension-channel=below-control \
ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-txchains=0,1 \
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:1D:0F:BB:8C:66 max-station-count=2007 mode=\
bridge mtu=1500 name=to_pkp on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 \
radio-name=001D0FBB8C66 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=router-lv station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g=\
6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 \
wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=50 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=disabled wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set to_pkp 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,HT2\
0-2:0,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 to_pkp comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=no enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3998 framer-policy=best-fit
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no streaming-max-rate=0 \
streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
Client.
# jan/02/1970 01:28:38 by RouterOS 4.5
# software id = ZZ0M-XS5B
#
/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=client-mode allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=0 area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g=54Mbps basic-rates-b=1Mbps \
comment="" compression=yes 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=5600 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=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=\
mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,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-txchains=0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=\
none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=15 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:1D:0F:BB:8C:1E max-station-count=2007 mode=station mtu=1500 name=to_kosciol on-fail-retry-time=100ms \
periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=001D0FBB8C1E rate-set=configured scan-list=\
default security-profile=default ssid=router-lv station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,54Mbps supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps \
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 to_kosciol 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,HT20-0:17,HT20-1:\
17,HT20-2:17,HT20-3:17,HT20-4:17,HT20-5:17,HT20-6:17,HT20-7:17,HT40-0:17,HT40-1:17,HT40-2:17,HT40-3:17,HT40-4:17,HT40-5:17,HT40-6:17,HT40-7:17"
/interface wireless nstreme
set to_kosciol comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=no enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3998 framer-policy=best-fit
/interface wireless align
set active-mode=yes audio-max=-20 audio-min=-100 audio-monitor=00:00:00:00:00:00 filter-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 frame-size=300 frames-per-second=25 receive-all=no ssid-all=no
/interface wireless sniffer
set channel-time=200ms file-limit=10 file-name="" memory-limit=10 multiple-channels=no only-headers=no receive-errors=no streaming-enabled=no streaming-max-rate=0 \
streaming-server=0.0.0.0
/interface wireless snooper
set channel-time=200ms multiple-channels=yes receive-errors=no
monitor:
status: connected-to-ess
band: 5ghz-11n
frequency: 5600MHz
tx-rate: "270.0Mbps-HT"
rx-rate: "270.0Mbps-HT"
ssid: "XXXX"
bssid: XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX
radio-name: "XXXXXXXXXX"
signal-strength: -54dBm
tx-signal-strength: -55dBm
noise-floor: -113dBm
signal-to-noise: 59dB
tx-ccq: 99%
rx-ccq: 88%
p-throughput: 152110
overall-tx-ccq: 99%
authenticated-clients: 1
current-ack-timeout: 31
wds-link: no
nstreme: no
framing-mode: none
routeros-version: "4.5"
last-ip: 192.168.1.220
802.1x-port-enabled: yes
compression: no
wmm-enabled: yes
current-tx-powers: 6Mbps:18(18/21),9Mbps:18(18/21),12Mbps:18(18/21),18Mbps:18(18/21),24Mbps:18(18/21),36Mbps:17(17/20),48Mbps:16(16/19),54Mbps:13(13/16),HT20-0:16(16/19),
HT20-1:16(16/19),HT20-2:16(16/19),HT20-3:16(16/19),HT20-4:16(16/19),HT20-5:16(16/19),HT20-6:15(15/18),HT20-7:11(11/14),HT40-0:15(15/18),HT40-1:15(15/18),
HT40-2:15(15/18),HT40-3:15(15/18),HT40-4:15(15/18),HT40-5:15(15/18),HT40-6:14(14/17),HT40-7:10(10/13)
notify-external-fdb: no
2xRB433 +r52n

Without nstreme, when I enable it, heve disconnects. I tried to change hw_retries but it doesnt help:/ Whats wrong ?
 
RK
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada and Central America

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:44 am

you can see it in his picture. signal is -47
Notice who I was quoting and replying to.
 
ekkas
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:01 pm
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:20 am

What would optimum settings (using RB & R52n) with 2 VP antennas to extend range for legacy a/b/g clients be? Obviously they would not benefit as much in throughput as an n-client would.
The idea is to upgrade my existing APs, some have omni, some sectors, to replace R52H card with r52n and add another omni (or sector) about 3meters away to improve reception to old a/b/g clients.
In short I only want beam shaping, not aggregation, so using dual polarity would be useless for me. Have 250 clients and do not wish to upgrade them all to n (yet).

Ekkas
 
javadsh
Trainer
Trainer
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:39 am

Re: 802.11n

Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:39 pm

hi ,freinds
we used rb433ah with WLM200N5
and used this config but when we test it with mikrotik bandwidth test it,s stable and band width is 190 or 200mb but when we transfer file from a pc to another bandwidth is not stable and it has low bandwidth for ex 55 or 65 or maximum 70 mb
can you help us
thanks
 
xezen
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jan 24, 2010 9:40 am

when yoo use btest do you test udp or tcp

?
 
angboontiong
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:59 am

Re: 802.11n

Sun Jan 24, 2010 10:21 am

hi ,freinds
we used rb433ah with WLM200N5
and used this config but when we test it with mikrotik bandwidth test it,s stable and band width is 190 or 200mb but when we transfer file from a pc to another bandwidth is not stable and it has low bandwidth for ex 55 or 65 or maximum 70 mb
can you help us
thanks
You method to tetst from PC to PC is correct.
at the same time should do the pinging test...

1) PC1 ping to Routerboard 1...
2) PC 1 ping to Routerboard 2 (via the wireless link)...
3) PC 1 ping to the PC2...

see when you running on the max speed, what's the ping time...
If the ping time <10ms, mean you getting the good signal....

If either 1 of the part given high latency, mean there is the congestion at that part or the other hand to say that, that's the limitation become you cannot go for higher bandwidth.
 
User avatar
compex
just joined
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:17 am
Location: Suzhou Jiangsu Province China
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:10 am

hi ,freinds
we used rb433ah with WLM200N5
and used this config but when we test it with mikrotik bandwidth test it,s stable and band width is 190 or 200mb but when we transfer file from a pc to another bandwidth is not stable and it has low bandwidth for ex 55 or 65 or maximum 70 mb
can you help us
thanks
hello,friend
While you are doing a pc to pc test, you should run some ping test to check the ping time, and further more, keep an eye on the CPU usage.
 
Ozelo
Member
Member
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:56 am

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 26, 2010 6:08 pm

Ive done a ptp link with 802.11n, selected only MCS 7 and removed all the others data rates. Throughput is about 80mbits @ 58dB SNR CCQ 96%/96%. So far so good, but something I couldn't understand is that high latency. I was using 5g turbo nstreme, throughput was 60mbits under approx the same signal level, but latency was about 5ms avg, NOW it is at 60ms avg. Why?

Another thing I don't got yet is that about nstreme. Im using ROS 4.5 and both on lab and on site throughput was showing 122mbits, BUT thats become weird when turning on OSPF on that ptp link. Throughput drop to half so I disabled nstreme, then the link got stable @ 80mbits.

I have some doubts. Do I need to use both antennas simultaneously? (chain 0 and chain 1) Seriously... for that coding scheme.

Thanks
Ozelo
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Tue Jan 26, 2010 6:15 pm

At current version of routeros, we have latency of 25-30ms at bandwidth of 75-80Mbit/sec for 802.11n link at 5km and at 2km.

It is not fair to compare this to dual nstreme as currently 802.11n doesn't work with nstreme.
 
pikpik
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:25 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:50 am

.

It is not fair to compare this to dual nstreme as currently 802.11n doesn't work with nstreme.
Work's fine, have N link with nstreme. ~3km
 
User avatar
exe
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:15 pm
Contact:

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:41 pm

Yes but with only one chain : )
 
pikpik
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:25 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 27, 2010 1:32 pm

exe:
status: connected-to-ess
band: 5ghz-11n
frequency: 5600MHz
tx-rate: "270.0Mbps-HT"
rx-rate: "270.0Mbps-HT"
signal-strength: -54dBm
tx-signal-strength: -56dBm
noise-floor: -113dBm
signal-to-noise: 59dB
tx-ccq: 97%
rx-ccq: 87%
p-throughput: 140175
overall-tx-ccq: 97%
authenticated-clients: 1
current-ack-timeout: 31
wds-link: no
nstreme: yes
routeros-version: "4.5"
last-ip: 192.168.1.220
802.1x-port-enabled: yes
compression: no
wmm-enabled: yes
ht-txchains=0,1 ht-rxchains=0,1
i think that's two chains, am i wrong ?
Last edited by pikpik on Wed Jan 27, 2010 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
normis
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Topic Author
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 27, 2010 1:34 pm

cool! do you have any traffic running on it? what throughput do you get in both directions?
 
pikpik
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:25 am

Re: 802.11n

Wed Jan 27, 2010 2:09 pm

cool! do you have any traffic running on it? what throughput do you get in both directions?

at this moment, i have only RB433 and i'm waiting for AH. Daily i have 30mbps/12mbps with ~6000-8000 pps. I added to this traffic bandwidth-test (TCP 50 conns) and received additional 10/10 mbps (but cpu 100%). When i have new AH i take a look it and send you pc test. Today i try link ~12 km with N.

PS. sry for my eng.
 
Ozelo
Member
Member
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 3:56 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:09 pm

pikpik, can you tell us whats the latency on your ptp for 70mbits traffic? cool link thou..

I just cant deal with a 80ms latency on a single ptp using N... as it was 5ms using 5g turbo nstreme. Isn't 75ms the difference too much high for the same throughput @ 60mbits?
 
pikpik
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:25 am

Re: 802.11n

Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:30 pm

tcp or udp ?
 
valera
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:46 pm

Sorry for beginner questions...

I want to build hi perfomance home router and trying to choose configuration.
At this moment i like:
1) RB600A (i like gigabit ports)
2) Box and hi power (24HPOW)
3) R52N wireless
4) two antennas uFL (AC/SWI)

I have read all topic, but all of you builds long wifi n links with mikrotiks on two ends (and proprientary nstreme protocol). In my situation, the second devices are notebooks with intel chipsets (4695agn) or ralink card.
The question is that configuration wiil work with MIMO? My wi-fi cards support 2X in 2X out streams and seams to me R52N card too.
If not, what i need to change in config?

And maybe someone try configurations like this, what speed do you achieved?
Last edited by valera on Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
jcrites2008
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 10:53 pm

Re: 802.11n

Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:31 pm

When testing indoors at close range, do you still need to keep the antennas a certain distance apart and use different polarizations? I'm using 2 R52n's.

Thanks,

Jason

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sinisa and 13 guests