From: elektra <onelektra@gmx.net>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
<b.a.t.m.a.n@open-mesh.net>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Multiple radios to improve throughput
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 04:55:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <482A54A5.5030302@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30773.75.128.50.239.1210728113.squirrel@corp.changind.com>
Hi Shane -
if all radios are operating on the same channel you can't expect any
improvement. So operate one link on channel 1 and the other on channel
11, 13 or 14 according to the regulations in your country. Channels in
the 5 GHz range are even better ;-)
Note also that many embedded devices have not enough CPU power to
saturate the capacity of a single radio link operating at full speed. At
54 Mbit a single link can have approx. 3 MByte/sec throughput, but we
have experienced that a 200 MHz MIPS CPU doesn't provide enough power
for more than 1.2 to 1.6 MByte/sec with a single interface depending on
the chipset/type of your wifi card.
cu elektra
> Hello,
>
> I have a 3 node mesh network with layout as follows:
>
> node #1 node #2 node #3
> 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.5 192.168.2.9
>
> Each node has only one radio and #1 talks to #3 via #2 and vice versa.
> If I want to improve the throughput between #1 and #3, logically I would
> add another radio to #2 so it can communicate to both #1 and #3
> simultaneously w/o having the single radio switching back and forth
> between #1 and #3.
>
> However, I ran IPERF between #1 and #3 before and after adding the
> second radio to node #2 and the bandwidth didn't really improve.
> In my node #2 configuration, I did not bridge the two wifi interfaces so
> I have ath0 and ath1 with their own IP addresses. All three nodes are
> configured with the same channel. My batmand command line for node #2
> is: batmand ath0 ath1.
>
> Can anyone advise me on what I did wrong?
>
> Thanks,
> Shane
> _______________________________________________
> B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list
> B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net
> https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-14 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-14 1:21 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Multiple radios to improve throughput Shane Chao
2008-05-14 2:55 ` elektra [this message]
2008-05-14 4:31 ` David Murray
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-02 23:33 Shane Chao
2008-06-03 8:24 ` Predrag Balorda
2008-06-05 12:39 ` Mark Kelly
2008-06-05 13:17 ` Benjamin Henrion
2008-06-05 13:43 ` Aaron Kaplan
2008-06-03 8:26 ` Predrag Balorda
2008-06-03 23:30 ` Benjamin Henrion
2008-06-03 23:41 ` cao jing
2008-06-12 3:53 ` Shane Chao
2008-06-12 8:43 ` Benjamin Henrion
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=482A54A5.5030302@gmx.net \
--to=onelektra@gmx.net \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@open-mesh.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.