Karlnet
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Karlnet] KN50 Problem with 8.x firmware

To: "Karlnet Mailing List" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Subject: Re: [Karlnet] KN50 Problem with 8.x firmware
From: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" <sv@unidata.com.ua>
Reply-to: Karlnet Mailing List <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 11:59:17 +0300
List-post: <mailto:karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
It seems KN-50 big packets lost  appear  when Base station have many
clients.  If one of the two cards ( on KN-50 side or KN-100/200/AP-1000
Base ) is  Agere  PC card with Hermes Fillips chipset ( old  Orinoco, Avaya,
Dell cards  )  with 6.x firmware it seems it works well . Second Agere card
may use any firmware.
KN-50 works well also with XI-325HP 200mv PC card and with other   Intersil
chipset based  PC card in any combination Intersil/Agere cards on Base
sation.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark McKibbin" <mark@team.dcsi.net.au>
To: "Karlnet Mailing List" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 9:28 AM
Subject: RE: [Karlnet] KN50 Problem with 8.x firmware


> After reading this thread I went out and ran some tests here are the
> results, these were all done at the same location 3.6Km from ISP base
> station a new site (no other users)
>
> Dell Card V8.10
> Ping with 1024 byte packets 100 pings no packet loss
>
> Dell Card V8.75
> Ping with 1024 byte packets 100 pings 1 packet lost
>
> In other words both performed well.
>
>
> Dell Card
>
> Regards
>
> Mark McKibbin
> DCS Internet
> 64 Queen St
> Warragul
> Victoria    3820
> Australia
> www.dcsi.net.au
> mark@team.dcsi.net.au
> Ph. 1300 665 575 (Help Desk)
> Ph. +61 356 241 120 (Direct)
> Fx. 1300 556 595
> Fx. +61 356 220 617
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothy J. Steele [mailto:tsteele@e-isco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 7:11 AM
> To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> Cc: support@karlnet.com
> Subject: [Karlnet] KN50 Problem with 8.x firmware
>
> Last month there was a post to a thread from Mark McKibbin (see
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/pipermail/karlnet/2003-October/003153.html
> <http://lists.wispnotes.com/pipermail/karlnet/2003-October/003146.html>
> ) in regards to the KN50 "Blackbird" units.  His questions were in
> regards to the poor link quality of the Orinoco Gold cards and other
> cards that have been included with the units.  We have been experiencing
> similar problems (our units were purchased with Dell TrueMobile Radios
> (Agere chipset Firmware rev. 8.10.1)).  I have been running tests on a
> number of different cards with the KN50.  The following are the results:
>
> NOTE:  These tests were conducted on live point-to-multipoint
> connections.  We used all the same hardware for our testing; the only
> change was the radio card for each test.  The KN50 board was classified
> as a SOHO CPE with product v1.00-00-073017.  Our average connection
> speed with a 1024k key is around 700-900k.  The Base units we used for
> testing are using software versions 4.43 and 4.44.  They have a varied
> number of subscribers, from 4 (a new site) up to 50+ (our oldest site).
> On all these tests, the SNR was between 12dB and 18dB upstream to Base
> and 21dB to 30dB downstream from Base.
>
> Dell Radio:
> Chipset:  Agere
> Firmware ver.: 8.10.1
> PING test (a standard IP tools PING test from a PC through the Base to
> the CPE (100 packets)):  73% of the packets lost
> Throughput test (5 bandwidth tests from 2wire.com and dslreports.com):
> 278, 112, 245, 237, 298 (speed measured in kilobits)
> NOTE:  The packets lost in the PING test are RARELY noted on the client
> side (i.e. surfing the Internet, Web Page comes up unavailable).  They
> just notice a significant slowdown.
>
> Orinoco Gold:
> Chipset:  Agere
> FW ver:  8.72.1
> PING test:  64% lost
> Throughput:  451, 368, 519, 259, 311
>
> Orinoco Silver:
> Chipset:  Agere
> FW ver:  6.6.1
> PING test:  0% lost
> Throughput:  676, 574, 481, 625, 616
>
> Avaya Radio:
> Chipset:  Agere
> FW ver:  6.8.1
> PING test:  0% lost
> Throughput:  550, 447, 380, 571, 561
>
> Wave Wireless Radio:
> Chipset:  Agere
> FW ver:  6.8.1
> PING test:  1% lost
> Throughput:  515, 660, 674, 553, 622
>
> Demarctech Prism Radio:
> Chipset:  Intersil (800C)
> FW ver:  1.3.6
> PING test:  3%
> Throughput 591, 745, 652, 733, 725
>
> At the location where we were doing the final throughput tests, an NDIS
> install in a local server has the following results:
> PING test:  1% lost
> Throughput:  725, 989, 867, 967, 802
>
> I realize that the PING test is hardly conclusive, but it definitely
> coincides with the lower bandwidth connections.  Does anyone else have
> similar findings?  One other point of note is that the PING test on a
> unit connected to a highly utilized Base has significantly more dropped
> packets on the Dell and Orinoco Gold cards (i.e.  The cards are noted
> with a 73% and 64% loss on a Base with 40+ subscribers, these numbers
> drop to 35% and 23% on a Base with 20 or less clients).  This would
> indicate Base unit over saturation, but we can connect a standard NDIS
> (radio) client or a KN100 board and the PING tests and throughput tests
> are excellent (0% loss, avg. 880k throughput).
>
> It appears that cards running older versions of firmware (6.x.x) do not
> have the problems that newer firmware (8.x.x) have; at least in regards
> to the KN50.  I have upgraded the Orinoco Silver card to v8.7.5 firmware
> and it exhibits the same problems.  I downgraded the firmware and the
> problem goes away.  Our only option, at this point, is to downgrade the
> firmware on the newer cards or try to find older silver cards with the
> external antenna attachment (seeing as how the new silvers do not have
> them anymore).
>
> I tested the Orinoco Gold and the Dell Radio in a KN100 board with the
> following results:
>
> OG:
> PING test: 0% lost
> Throughput:  714, 784, 987, 966, 908
>
> Dell:
> PING Test:  1% lost
> Throughput:  837, 664, 843, 767, 813
>
> This looks like a problem with the KN50's and newer Agere firmware.
> Anytime you install 8.x firmware on any radio in the KN50, performance
> is significantly reduced and there is a high amount of IP packet
> failure.  Our research team would like to know if anyone else concurs
> with these findings and is there a solution in the works.  If not, is
> there anymore testing you would like from our end to get this issue
> resolved?
>
>
> Tim Steele & Marcus Rudd
> Wireless Networking Engineers
> e-ISCO Internet
> www.e-isco.com <http://www.e-isco.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>