From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gtolon@inti.gob.ar>
Message-ID: <51B5D0D8.8090007@inti.gob.ar>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:12:56 -0300
From: =?UTF-8?B?R2FicmllbCBUb2zDs24=?= <gtolon@inti.gob.ar>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20130606182954.GI1789@ritirata.org>
 <51B0DD43.6090500@inti.gob.ar> <20130606191823.GJ1789@ritirata.org>
 <51B1E4D6.5000900@inti.gob.ar> <20130607135713.GL1789@ritirata.org>
 <51B1F062.3060101@inti.gob.ar> <20130607144019.GM1789@ritirata.org>
 <51B214AE.2090603@inti.gob.ar> <20130607172734.GO1789@ritirata.org>
 <51B22D19.7080807@inti.gob.ar> <20130608122939.GR1789@ritirata.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130608122939.GR1789@ritirata.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batctl bw performance
Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
 <b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
 <b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/options/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
 <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n/>
List-Post: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
 <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=subscribe>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org

Hi Antonio

El 08/06/13 09:29, Antonio Quartulli escribió:
> Hello Gabriel,
>
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 03:57:29PM -0300, Gabriel Tolón wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's strange, that's why I asked if you had tested the same. It
>> couldn't be due to hardware differences? Just in case WDR3500 have
>> AR9344 SoC.
>>
>
> I guess it's the same:
>
> system type		: Atheros AR9344 rev 2
>
> and this is one test I just performed:
>
> # batctl bw a6:86:74:00:0f:12
> Bandwidth meter called towards a6:86:74:00:0f:12
> Test over in 10030ms.
> Sent 187528500 Bytes.
> Throughput: 17.83 MB/s (149.57 Mbps)

Great!

>
> There must be something different in our setup that is probably triggering a bug
> in the bw_meter (I guess).

Maybe. If you find something you want to try just tell me. Thanks!

>
> Here you have more results from tests performed a couple of weeks ago.
>
>
> Maybe I find a couple of WDR3500 on which I can remotely try to debug the
> problem....
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>

Regards

Gabriel