We regularly test out our WiFi Traffic Generator against a slew of
commercially available APs: Netgear, Cisco, Asus, Dlink...etc..
For 802.11a/b/g/n we have a 1200 station emulator:
http://candelatech.com/ct525-1200-6n_product.php
For 802.11ac we have a 384 station emulator:
http://candelatech.com/ct525-384-6ac_product.php
And we have various combinations of the above:
http://candelatech.com/lf_systems.php#wifire
Here are some sample capacity reports against a few different APs:
http://candelatech.com/downloads/wifi-capacity-reports-08152014.tar.gz
Isaac
On 08/21/2014 10:33 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
I don't suppose anyone has set up a lab containing several hundred
wireless clients and a number of APs? A stepping stone towards that
would be a railway carriage simulator, with one AP, a simulated 3G
uplink, and a couple of dozen clients.
I wonder how well simply putting fq on each of the clients and fq_codel
on the APs would work. My general impression is that fq is the right
default choice for end hosts (which are generally not at the bottleneck)
and fq_codel is the right default choice for bottleneck routers. A
typical consumer router/AP might see the bottleneck for both directions,
though not necessarily at the same time.
- Jonathan Morton
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--
Isaac Konikoff
Candela Technologies
konik...@candelatech.com
Office: +1 360 380 1618
Cell: +1 360 389 2453
Fax: +1 360 380 1431
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
