Thanks very much. I use rfx400 and rfx2400 now, they're half duplex？ Regards, Chao 在 2012-7-13 下午2:51，"Alex Zhang" <cingular.a...@gmail.com>写道：
> The tunnel.py problem seems being complained for thousand times.... :) No > one has final solution now, at least in the archive. > > In my experience, actually, this is a full-duplex problem. If your > daughter board can only support half-duplex, you need additional time to > switch to RX right after your transmission. > However, if you use a board of full-duplex, the RX and TX frequency should > have difference more than the bandwidth of the RF (about 40MHz for SBX). > But even I set the |RX - TX| > 40MHz, the flow control at each side is > needed, i.e, the messages can not be transmitted with too short interval, > otherwise, it can not receive the reply in time.... It is very strange. > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:07 AM, CHAO DONG <dch...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Josh, thanks. >> Now, when i ping B from A, A can receive some ARP requests but ok=false, >> so A Will not send ARP reply. With the same setting, i use the benchmark, A >> can receive almost all the packets from B and ok=true. >> I think there must be some difference between benchmark and tunnel. >> Who can explain this,？ >> 在 2012-7-12 下午4:57，"Josh Blum" <j...@ettus.com>写道： >> >> >>> >>> On 07/11/2012 08:57 PM, CHAO DONG wrote: >>> > Dear all, >>> > >>> > I am testing tunnel.py in the narrowband folder, the >>> > configuration is as follows: >>> > OS: ubuntu 11.10 >>> > Gnuradio: latest >>> > UHD:latest >>> > USRP 1 >>> > RFX400 >>> > >>> > I set up two machines and do following the readme step by step. >>> > When i ping machine B from A, A shows it has sent the ARP request, but >>> > no ARP reply received. >>> > In fact, B did not receive the ARP request at all. >>> > >>> > I use benchmark_rx and benchmark_tx to test the channel, it is ok. >>> > >>> > And when i use: sudo ifconfig gr0 192.168.200.1 on A, B can receive >>> > the IGMP packet from the gr0 of A. This show the gr0 on A and B is ok >>> > for IGMP protocol. >>> > >>> > Welcome any comments! >>> > >>> >>> I recall a similar discussion, and one simple solution was to use a >>> different frequency for each communication channel. >>> >>> So for communication between A -> B use frequencyX >>> and for communication B -> A use frequencyY. >>> >>> I hope that helps! >>> -josh >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list >> Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio >> >> > > > -- > > Alex, > *Dreams can come true �C just believe.* > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
