this area?
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
s that adding
a dependency on a central authentication server is asking a LOT.
Now, if cerowrt could run an AD compatible server, it would be useful for some
people, but for many, their laptops are tied to a company domain, getting them
to work well in a home domain as well is going to be messy
he time be set correctly,
something that is very commonly not the case on home devices (especially things
like printers)
David Lang
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:31 AM, David Lang wrote:
While I understand your frustration (my day job is security), people will
take "it works" over &quo
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
David Lang writes:
No disagreement there, but microsoft did, and as a result what would
be needed is AD, not just kerberos.
https://www.samba.org/samba/news/releases/4.0.0.html ? :)
Yep, that's what I was thinking of. But I don'
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
We will hopefully get around to a cerowrt refresh fairly soon - as
soon as some more test code lands - and do it on several platforms.
Until then, try chaos calmer - and for all I know we will end up
building more on openwrt directly this time rather than re
unction, firewall rules by device (which ends up
being by function), it may make it far easier to have alternate configs, one for
bridging, one for routing, and to have options to pre-enable the wifi and mesh
interfaces.
Thoughts from those who have been more invol
in quickly, and a tool like
that would make it much easier for people to get comforatable with nf_tables
(and see what benefits there are of switching)
David Lang
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Rich Brown wrote:
Folks,
Two thoughts:
1) I'm renaming this thread so that it
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, David Lang wrote:
as an example, the wndr4300 uses vlans by default. The archer has 3
radios. Everything is just mildly, maddeningly,
different.
:-)
multiple radios makes sense, why does the wndr4300 use vlans by default?
I may have answered my own question. I just ran
t; mentality
To address this, the test results should first show all the stats without
showing dropped packets, or if you need to show them, add a comment at that
point that says that data packets are given priority over ping packets, so
dropped ping packets don't imply that data packets wo
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015, Andrew Mcgregor wrote:
So, are you suggesting that, for example, Chrome's rather extensive network
debugging information get more publicised? We can probably arrange that.
That would be good. I have no idea what debugging info you are referring to.
David Lang_
tly many
people are not familiar with it. I've also run into problems that the
stock build doesn't work right if you have too many interfaces (IIRC I
ran into problems around 8 interfaces, but since I was working with
firewalls that had up to 2
rate limited, but rather that
the TCP/UDP traffic is being given priority over the ping traffic. This means
that when you max out the pipe, pings will suffer.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bu
-ack from the TCP stack of the receiving
system.
For UDP systems, it gets more interesting and service specific. But for TCP
systems it works today.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015, Joe Touch wrote:
On 3/2/2015 3:14 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015, Joe Touch wrote:
On 3/2/2015 1:40 AM, Brian Trammell wrote:
...
The real solution is to create a utility called "ping" that uses
traffic that gets prioritized the same way as the traffi
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXvGbEYeWp0&t=4795
(takes a bit to get to the wifi part)
H/T to david lang for getting it so right!
Thanks, for those interested in what I did, you can see the presentation I gave
on the topic at LISA '
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:44 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXvGbEYeWp0&t=4795
(takes a bit to get to the wifi part)
H/T to david lang for getting it so right!
Thanks, for t
average < 2 frames in steady
state). Otherwise, if the outbound queue runs at 802.11b rates, and the
inbound queues run at 802.11ac rates, there will be a serious disaster.
Since you can't ECN generalized Ethernet packets, codel would have to drop
packets. And this might have been
nts nowadays.
I am really sorry I couldn't go.
I am seeing 25% better forwarding rates on ethernet out of 3.18 vs
3.10 on the same wndr 3800 hardware, btw.
hmm, does this have a noticable effect on the HTB throttling performance?
David Lang
___
Cero
On Thu, 12 Mar 2015, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
sqm-scripts / luci-app-sqm is only available from CC (trunk). The CC
version can be installed manually, but it will complain & leave you
with
warnings about it on every subsequent package install.
Note that we've been discussing backporting i
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
1) We need a new box that can do inbound shaping at up to 300mbit. So far
that box has not appeared. We have not explored policing as an alternative.
If you are using a x86 processor, how much cpu does this take?
David Lang
2) We need a new box that
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, David Lang wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
1) We need a new box that can do inbound shaping at up to 300mbit. So far
that box has not appeared. We have not explored policing as an
alternative.
If you
ify normal flow, even if it add a small number of failures, if that
means that you can have a common set of recovery code that's well excercised and
tested.
As you are talking about loosing packets with route changes, watch out that you
don't fall into thi
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015, Alan Jenkins wrote:
Once SQM on ge00 actually dives into the PPPoE packets and
applies/tests u32 filters the LUL increases to be almost identical to
pppoe-ge00’s if both ingress and egress classification are active and
do work. So it looks like the u32 filters I naively set
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Aaron Wood wrote:
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] the 3 focus problems we have
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
On 03/16/2015 01:49 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, David Lang wrote
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, Michael Welzl wrote:
On 20. mar. 2015, at 17.31, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 20 Mar, 2015, at 16:54, Michael Welzl wrote:
I'd like people to understand that packet loss often also comes with delay -
for having to retransmit.
Or, turning it upside down, it’s always a w
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 05:03:16PM -0700, David Lang wrote:
1. If you mark packets as congested if they have ECN and drop them
if they don't, programmers will mark everything ECN (and not slow
transmission) because doing so gives th
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Michael Welzl wrote:
On 21. mar. 2015, at 01.03, David Lang wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, Michael Welzl wrote:
On 20. mar. 2015, at 17.31, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 20 Mar, 2015, at 16:54, Michael Welzl wrote:
I'd like people to understand that packet loss often
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 21 Mar, 2015, at 02:25, David Lang wrote:
As I said, there are two possibilities
1. if you mark packets sooner than you would drop them, advantage non-ECN
2. if you mark packets and don't drop them until higher levels, advantage ECN,
an
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 23 Mar, 2015, at 02:24, Dave Taht wrote:
I have long maintained it was possible to build a better fq_codel-like
policer without doing htb rate shaping, ("bobbie"), and I am tempted
to give it a go in the coming months.
I have a hazy picture in m
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 23 Mar, 2015, at 03:45, David Lang wrote:
are we running into performance issues with fq_codel? I thought all the
problems were with HTB or ingress shaping.
Cake is, in part, a response to the HTB problem; it is a few percent more
efficient
l being made to use, and the tplink has
the benefit of also doing ac...
IF you have a spare wndr3800 to reflash with what I built friday, goferit...
I have a few spare 3800s if some of you developers need one.
unfortunantly I don't have a fast connection to test on.
David Lang
I think p
and rtt_fair4be on 4 sta's.
2. lanforge wifi capacity test using tcp-download incrementing 4 sta's per
minute up to 64 sta's with each iteration attempting 500Mbps download per x
number of sta's.
what results are you getting? and what results are you hoping to get to?
David
I gathered a bunch of stats from the Scale conference this year
http://lang.hm/scale/2015/stats/
this includes very frequent dumps of transmission speed data per MAC address per
AP
David Lang
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Isaac Konikoff wrote:
Thanks for pointing out horst.
I've been t
The kernel starts the clock at -some hours so that it hits a wrap-around not
that long after startup.
David Lang
On Sat, 2 May 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 09:42:07 -0700
From: Dave Taht
To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Fw
On Mon, 4 May 2015, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2015 10:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
David Lang wrote:
The kernel starts the clock at -some hours so that it hits a wrap-around not
that long after startup.
David Lang
That went in in 2.5 development cycle. I wouldn't be have surpris
n hides so much.
David Lang
mrtg and cacti rely on snmp. While loss statistics are deeply part of
snmp, I am not aware of there being a mib for CE events and a quick
google search was unrevealing. ?
There is also a need for more cross-network monitoring using tools
such as that done by this excelle
) Or will this
work for 802.11n clients as well?
David Lang
On Sat, 23 May 2015, Aaron Wood wrote:
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -0700
From: Aaron Wood
To: bloat ,
cerowrt-devel ,
Dave Taht
Subject: Re: [Bloat] sqm-scripts on WRT1900AC
After more tweaking, and after Comcast&#
Ok, I think I'm understanding that unless the client is mimo enabled, mimo on
the the AP doesn't do any good. I'm focused on the high density conference type
setup and was wondering if going to these models would result in any mor
effective airtime. It sounds like the answer is n
I'm not sure what the difference bwtwen mimo and mu-mimo is, pointer please?
David Lang
On Fri, 29 May 2015, Pedro Tumusok wrote:
From my understanding you need an AP that supports mu-mimo and then you
have different scenarios of of how to support clients. If the client
supports mu-mimo
ideal, think through the theoretical aggregate
and realize that before you get past very many layers, you get to a bandwidh
requirement that it's not technically possible to provide.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
is getting
congested and start sending the packets through alternate paths.
Now, if the problem is that the aggregate of inbound packets to your downstreams
where you are the only path becomes higher than the available downstream
bandwidth, you need to be running an AQM to handle things.
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:49 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
We know that (see Kathy and Van's paper) that AQM algorithms only work
when they are placed at the slowest queue. However, the AQM is placed
at the
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Benjamin Cronce wrote:
On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
Hi David,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 03:44 , David Lang wrote:
The problem shows up when either usage changes rapidly, or the network
operator is not keeping up with required upgrades as gradual usage changes
happen (including when they are prevented
f this is a matter of "we can't get at where the problem really is
to fix it, so let's figure out what else we can do to mitigate the problem"
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
gh another interface in case you cut yourself off) and that
would make the soc see the queue directly.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
It looks like the 1900v2 and the 1200 have the same chipset, i saw that the
1900v2 got more memory and a faster cpu to bring it up to match the 1200.
My understanding is that the only difference between the two is 2x2 vs 3x3 and
the cost.
David Lang
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, dpr...@reed.com
support for the 1900v2 and 1200 to be far better than
the 1900v1 (especially as supplies of them dry up)
so the question is if 3x3 gives you enough value over 2x2 to make it worth
getting a 1900v2 instead of a 1200
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing lis
x27;t arrive), and results in the exact same
throughput under load.
It does have some interesting changes to the utilization curve at part load.
These could be a problem with wifi under some conditions, but I think the
trade-off is worth it since the wifi is going to end up running up to it'
ackets are not all from the same source? or even if they are
from the same source IP, are from different ports? they can't just be combined
at the IP layer.
David Lang
On Monday, August 3, 2015 12:14pm, "David Lang" said:
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015, dpr...@reed.com wrote:
> It&#
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 7 Aug, 2015, at 15:22, Rich Brown wrote:
- At that time, the wifi driver requests packets from fq_codel until a) the
the fq_codel queues are empty, or b) the wifi frame is full. In either case,
the wifi driver sends what it has.
There’s one big
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015, dpr...@reed.com wrote:
On Friday, August 7, 2015 4:03pm, "David Lang" said:
Wifi is the only place I know of where the transmit bit rate is going to vary
depending on the next hop address.
This is an interesting core issue. The question is whether
lusions, not because
I assume yuo dont know any of it, but for the two reasons that if I have a logic
flaw or am basing my results on faulty info I can be corrected, and so that
others in or watching the discussion who don't know these details can be brought
up to speed and contribute.
Da
the particular endpoints when deciding what data should be transmitted next.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
te the need for a preamble on the packet sent
after the RTS). (One of the papers I did with my student Aggelos Bletsas on
Cooperative Diversity uses CTS/RTS in this clever way - to measure the channel
while acquiring it).
how do you get the stations synchronized?
David Lang
On Friday, Au
reason to avoid aggregating.
you say the 'typical' 802.11n situation is one checksum per transmission. Is
this configurable in OpenWRT? or is it a driver/hardware issue? Does it require
special client support?
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-dev
gregation, a dual-band 'ac' card running on 2.4 GHz will effectively be
an 'n' card with such support, even if it's a hard-MAC.
right, I'm looking at what I can do to improve things even on non-ac stuff.
David Lang
__
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/meet-onhub-new-router-for-new-way-to-wi.html
specifically the issues of firmware and drivers?
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo
port AP148
and at some point chromeos was booting on AP148 though I don't
expect it to work "out of the box"
sounds promising.
how open is the wifi driver? Is it something that we can dive into and modify
for make-wifi-fast? or is it a typ
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015, Jim Gettys wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:31 PM, David Lang wrote:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/meet-onhub-new-router-for-new-way-to-wi.html
specifically the issues of firmware and drivers?
It runs a very recent kernel (3.18, IIRC).
The devel
nting than
you think.
I'll bet a lot of that stuff is either used as-is (with a different config
system), or they just don't implement it (I doubt it has QoS for example)
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.b
with the wrt1900ACS, the WAN ethernet is connected to a switch before connecting
to the wire. I believe that this causes some issues with the sqm default setup
(or is it with the fq_codel?)
David Lang
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
you are most likely applying the qdisc to the wrong
(unless the WRT1900ACS is
different from the WRT1900AC):
http://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2015/06/sqmscripts-before-and-after-at-160mbps.html
the ACS has more flash (and ram IIRC) and is 1.6GHz instead of 1.2GHz
David Lang
So I built and installed an openwrt trunk but the results were very
On Sat, 24 Oct 2015, Jonathan Morton wrote:
On 24 Oct, 2015, at 19:34, David P. Reed wrote:
Not trying to haggle. Just pointing out that this test configuration has a very
short RTT. maybe too short for our SQM to adjust to.
It should still get the bandwidth right. When it does, we’ll know
this available to put in it?
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
Hi David,
On Oct 26, 2015, at 19:15 , David Lang wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
in terms of testing wifi, the most useful series of tests to conduct
at the moment - since we plan to fix per station queuing soon
how soon is
On Sat, 13 Feb 2016, Dave Täht wrote:
I have an increasing desire to build (or buy if one exists) a couple
boxes that can "aircap" packet capture across as many bands as possible,
in these locations (and elsewhere, if people here are interested)
while they won't do -ac, the wndr3800 is availab
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016, Dave Täht wrote:
Email lists themselves seem to have become passe' - the "discourse"
engine seems like a good idea - but I LIKE email.
Some people like e-mail, some like web forums.
You can combine them and let people use whichever interface to the message
stream that the
A blog format for hardware testing would be a good idea.
David Lang
On Sat, 5 Mar 2016, Dave Taht wrote:
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 12:23:36 -0800
From: Dave Taht
To: moeller0
Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] odroid C1+ status
wow, thx f
ngs down as well (especially in bedrooms)
David Lang
When not in config mode, the input device can be disconnected and returned
to its primary role, and the display can offer status information in a
human-readable format; an RGB-controlled backlight would be sufficient for
at-a-glance is-everything-o
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jonathan Morton wrote:
quick note, your quotes mixed things I said with things Alan said
But the biggest barrier is probably that the web interface is
cluttered with features you don't need, so there's a setup wizard you
go through once, and you don't touch that even if you
on his own time. This board was the original Pi.
Broadcom does not develop the Pi or special chips for the Pi. The Pi designers
watch what Broadcom makes available and makes use of those chips in their
designs.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing
ty to transmit different signals from each
antenna so that the interference patterns from the different signals result in
different readable data depending on where the receiver is in relation to the
access point is not a trivial thing.
But it's one of the most valuable features in the spec.
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Wayne Workman wrote:
@David lang,
Dude, Help make it happen.
I don't know all the details. I don't even pretend to know anything about
IC design and manufacturing.
Look if we want a platform that is open, then it'll be an open source
chipset. Yes, the fi
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Outback Dingo wrote:
... and I'm going to order a couple, 'cause their wifi is not as good
as it could be (nobody's is), and he said I could visit periodically
with make-wifi-fast's upcoming fixes. https://eero.com/
the cznic team has already done this.
https://omnia.turr
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2016, David lang wrote:
I would do us no good to create a fully open chip if the FCC mandates
that the firmware must be locked down.
Which firmware must be locked down? I was under the impression that is
just retail end user
run a full
Web server?
no, a webserver is really cheap to run. I expect that you would not be able to
tell the difference in CPU load between running a webserver and driving a
built-in display.
David Lang
On Mar 13, 2016 10:19 AM, "Jonathan Morton" wrote:
On 13 Mar, 2016, at
something that will help the general public?
And if the FCC requires locked firmware, you won't be able to make a mini-pci
board, just the raw chips. Will you be able to sell enough to get the cost down
to a reasonable level?
David Lang
___
C
rdware.
David Lang
a
On Mar 13, 2016 5:25 PM, "David Lang" wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 12 March 2016 at 11:14, Henning Rogge wrote:
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Wayne Workman
wrote:
I understand that Broadcom was paid to develop the Pi, a tota
, but have concerns about how you can lock down part of the
firmware and not all of it.
You still have the problem of telling the chip/algorithm which set of rules to
enforce, and updating it when the requirements change.
David Lang
___
Cerowrt-devel ma
ion of the
different layers, not more. The benefits of less separation are far more
flexibility, lower costs, and in some cases, the ability to do things that
weren't possible with the separation.
Any position that requires bucking this trend is going to have a very hard time
survivin
component. Cell
phones, with their 'baseband processor' are a good example of too much
functionality being in the certified component.
We want to get more access to what's currently in the wifi chipset firmware, not
have it all locked down mor
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Wayne Workman wrote:
One thing Is for sure - if the FCC can't see this, they will have
effectively handicapped yet another technology, they will basically kill
wifi. In the public's minds it will become some gross slow thing.
Agreed.
David Lang
Again, rem
sounds like a good time for someone else to get in the mix, aiming for the low
end with a simple/cheap RF chipset that supports doing all the 'hard stuff' in
software. Someone who would be happy to have the community doing the hard stuff
for them.
David Lang
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016,
what sort of expected price?
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016, Outback Dingo wrote:
sorry guys, miss the reply all
http://www.jetwaycomputer.com/NF592.html
available soon
On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Valent Turkovic
wrote:
If you are looking for absolutely most powerful device but in smaller form
multicast packet actually multicast over the air? or is it a lot of
unicast packets?
When the network is encrypted, how can they encrypt the multicast packet so that
all nodes can hear it?
David Lang
2, 5, 10 STAs?
The per-STA-queue work should make that relatively easy, by allowing the
so what are the technical specs, costs, and expected shipping date?
a 10 antenna SDR system with a FPGA opens up some very interesting
possibilities.
David Lang
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Eric Johansson wrote:
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:39:35 -0400
From: Eric Johansson
To: "cerowrt-
found it
https://www.crowdsupply.com/lime-micro/limesdr
early bird price $199 100Khz-3.8GHz, >60MHz bandwidth at 12 bit sample depth
4 transmit and 6 receive antennas, two separate transmitters and two separate
receivers.
USB 3 interface.
looks intereting
David Lang
On Thu, 28 Apr 2
There was a new wifi firmware release today (not yet in LEDE or OpenWRT trunk)
announced around post 11400 on this forum
https://forum.openwrt.org/post.php?tid=50173&qid=325044
David Lang
On Fri, 20 May 2016, Dave Taht wrote:
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 14:16:13 -0700
From: Dave Taht
ve that's >2TB. 3TB drives are now <$100
Now, if support for larger drives really does add a lot to the system footprint,
it should be optional. But how much space are we talking about here? It should
at least be an easy-to-select option.
David Lang
_
Let me know how things go. I'd be interested in sponsoring (or at least helping
to provide hardware for) this sort of work.
I'm most interested in the crs125 or similar series of switches, it looks like a
good number of their devices are supported already.
David Lang
On Tue, 2
needing multiple APs, or you
have many stations, I expect that you will be better off with more APs at lower
power, each using different channels.
David Lang
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:55:19 -0700
From: Bob McMahon
To: Dave Taht
Cc: make-wifi-f
When I run the wifi network for the Scale conference, I will put multiple APs in
each room. This last year I tried for ~1 per 50-75 seats in theater format
(~25-30 in classroom format where there are tables).
David Lang
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
An AP per room/area, reducing
size houses to need more than one AP
to cover the entire house.
David Lang
On Thursday, June 23, 2016 4:28pm, "Bob McMahon"
said:
___
Make-wifi-fast mailing list
make-wifi-f...@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo
I think he is meaning when one unit is talking to one AP the signal levels
across multiple channels will be similar. Which is probably fairly true.
David Lang
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
Curious, where does the "in a LAN setup, the variability in [receive]
signal streng
well, with the kickstarter, I think they are selling a bill of goods.
Just using the DFS channels and aggregating them as supported by N and AC
standards would do wonders (as long as others near you don't do the same)
David Lang
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
Date: Thu, 2
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, Eric Johansson wrote:
On 6/24/2016 7:04 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Agreed. Who's going to save us?
* kickstart our own,
* license a design and enhance it to our needs (rpi 4??)
* work a deal with mikrotek to freeup docs on one of their boards so
we can replace ro
k just like a wired network, and we
have found that we just needed too much other stuff to be successful whith that
mindset.
The Analog/Radio side of things really is important, and can't just be
abstracted away.
David Lang
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
Is there a specific go
onsumer devices, and you can get them for ~50 if you push (or ~$25
if you are willing to buy used)
It didn't take higher speeds (AC, N, or even G) to make wifi popular, it just
required that the equipment come down enough in price.
David Lang
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote:
I apprec
verse mu-mimo (similarly strong signals from
several directions) long before the ability to detect wildly weaker signals.
I also expect that as the ability to more accurately digitize the signal grows,
we will first take advantage of it for higher speeds.
David Lang
__
101 - 200 of 252 matches
Mail list logo
