Karlnet
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Karlnet] Which F/W?

To: "'Karlnet Mailing List'" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Which F/W?
From: "Dan Metcalf" <dan.metcalf@wbsysnet.com>
Reply-to: Karlnet Mailing List <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 10:29:39 -0400
List-post: <mailto:karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
If your limiting your interface to 128k  it will drop packets and impact
performance at when the link gets near 128k

But they may NOT be your problem.. could be interference?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: karlnet-bounces@WISPNotes.com
[mailto:karlnet-bounces@WISPNotes.com]
> On Behalf Of Noyan Dede
> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:26 AM
> To: 'Karlnet Mailing List'
> Subject: [Karlnet] Which F/W?
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> This is my first message to the list.  We are a wireless equipment
> provider
> in Turkey.  For one of our customers we've installed a base station
and 5
> satellites for internet service distribution. We are currently using
4.43k
> but I am getting frequent ping timeouts from the satellites. All of
the
> satellites are bandwidth limited on their wlan interface to 128k.  In
> addition , the ping times to the base station is also very irregular
like:
> 
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=270ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=246
> Reply from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=246
> 
> To the satellite it is even worse and my last statistics said there
was
> about 9% packet loss.
> 
> My signal and noise levels are pretty stable and I really can 't
figure
> out
> the reason for instability.
> 
> We are using KN100 boards in outdoor enclosures with AC power supplies
all
> the way to the enclosure and a mini industrial PS to feed the boards
with
> clean 12 VDC on the adaptor connector.
> 
> Can someone point us in the right direction as to where to look to
solve
> this problem?
> 
> Also I'd like to know which mode is most popular in the WISP scenario
at
> the
> base station (polling base station, non polling, ISP, ...)
> 
> I, myself, am considering using a different firmware after seeing some
of
> the other problems people have been having with 4.43k but I don't know
> which
> f/w is deemed to be the most stable so far.
> 
> I'd appreciate any pointers in the matter.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Noyan Dede
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> --
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]


-- 
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

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