Thanks, Eric. I guess I'll just stay with v4.02 and hope nobody takes too
much advantage of our symmetrical service!
Message to Karlnet: Please fix this!
Norm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Meth" <emeth@iescomm.on.ca>
To: <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 1:19 PM
Subject: [Karlnet] Bandwidth Limiting in Version 4.02
> Norm. This problem was reported to Karlnet several weeks ago and I think
is
> on their list of "one of these days we have to get around to that"
> My solution, that was forced by another issue, was to downgrade to version
> 3.88 that does work properly in the way described earlier.
> Another way, is to tell the customer he has bi-drectional service and is
> similar to a fractional T1. It is a marketing gimmick to mask a technical
> problem.
>
> Eric Meth
> IES Wireless
> Cornwall, Ontario CANADA
>
>
> >From: "Norm Young" <npyoung@applegatebroadband.net>
> >To: <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
> >Subject: Re: [Karlnet] Private side vs. public side
> >Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:50:43 -0700
> >Organization: Applegate Broadband
> >Reply-To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
>
> >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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
>
>
|