Karlnet
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side

To: "'karlnet@WISPNotes.com'" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side
From: Dan Metcalf <danm@suncorstainless.com>
Reply-to: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 18:48:23 -0400
List-post: <mailto:karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
What version of karlnet

Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
dan.metcalf@wbsysnet.com
781-658-2075
www.wirelessbroadbandsystems.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Norm Young [mailto:npyoung@applegatebroadband.net]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 2:51 PM
To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
Subject: Re: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side

Dan, I've tried this and I'm seeing some strange stuff.  Like it appears
that setting the BW limit in either interface sets the d/l speed for the
customer, with the lowest number predominating.

For example:

wireless=280
Ethernet=0 (wide open)
Tested d/l speed=263 kbps

wireless= 130kbps
ethernet=280kbps
Tested d/l speed= 123 kbps

wireless= 280kbps
ethernet= 130kbps
Tested d/l speed= 123 kbps

It appears that traffic in either direction on these interfaces is being
limited to the speed set in the dialog.

Anyone else see this?

Norm


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Metcalf" <danm@suncorstainless.com>
To: <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 6:42 AM
Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side


> Its actually just the TX rate on the interface
>
> Dan Metcalf
> Wireless Broadband Systems
> dan.metcalf@wbsysnet.com
> 781-658-2075
> www.wirelessbroadbandsystems.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Fisher [mailto:fisher@akorn.net]
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:18 AM
> To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side
>
> > We set the wireless side to 128k because that LIMITS how much data the
CPE
> > can move onto the wireless network,  (uploading in this case as
> > the data is
> > coming from the CPE), and then we limit the Ethernet side because this
is
> > the interface that is used for downloads.
> >
> > Thus we set a 768k/128k limit through the hardware.
>
>
> So I thought that when you set the limit on a port, that it was
> bi-directional.  Where did you read that it was one direction?  In other
> words, when you set the bandwidth limit on the wireless port, why would it
> be only one direction?  Why isn't this documented?  Oh, nevermind last.
>
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
>
>

_______________________________________________
Karlnet mailing list
Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>