----- Original Message -----
From: "Ramin Alidousti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Russell Kliese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: "always defragment" with 2.4 kernels


> On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 12:45:02PM +1000, Russell Kliese wrote:
>
> > I've actually got a wireless network with three nodes (with each 802.11b
> > card in ad-hoc mode) as follows:
> > A <--> B <--> C.
> > A cannot communicate directly with C (and vice versa). I've set up B to
> > forward packets.
> >
> > The problem is that large packets between A and B are transferred with
> > out problems as are packets between B and C. However, large packets
> > between A and C become very unreliable (there's no problems with small
> > packets). I suspect it's something to do with B trying to transmit
> > packets to C while it's still receiving packets for A causing high error
> > rates.
>
> So what makes you think that the defrag is your solution? Your problem
sounds
> like collision, IMHO. And besides if A/B/C are using the same type of
cards
> then they have the same MTU then there should be no frag.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't get your problem.

I'm doing all my testing with ping -s to set the size of the packets. When I
set packet sizes significantly higher than the MTU size I start getting lost
packets. I was hoping that defragmentin the packets on node B will cause
less collisions because all of the fragments will be received before
transmission begins.

Russell


Reply via email to