Hello,
We study the effects of 802.11n frame aggregation on throughput. We
noticed a
strange pattern in the MPDU loss within an aggregated frame. It seems
that the
second half of the MPDUs (those with higher sequence numbers) in an
aggregated frame
are more likely to be lost. Is this a known fa
How did u determine that? only by looking at the Bitmaps in BlockAcks?
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Ali Abedi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We study the effects of 802.11n frame aggregation on throughput. We
> noticed a
> strange pattern in the MPDU loss within an aggregated frame. It seems
> that the
Hi,
Yes we look at the BA bitmap and also too we have printks in the driver
that
tells us what happened to the MPDUs in an aggregated frame.
Thanks,
Ali
On 24/10/2014 12:13 PM, Kamran Nishat wrote:
How did u determine that? only by looking at the Bitmaps in BlockAcks?
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014
It's not completely unsurprising - the initial channel estimate and
such is done at the beginning of each packet and stays constant. So if
there's some varying channel conditions that change that during the
duration of a packet, the tail end is going to end up having less SNR
and may end up getting
But for this channel conditions should be changing at the scale of 100
micro secs consistently.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> It's not completely unsurprising - the initial channel estimate and
> such is done at the beginning of each packet and stays constant. So if
> th
We don't use a rate adaptation at this moment (i.e., fixed rate) and the
setup
is stationary. So we expect to see relatively stable channel
conditions. Even if the channel
conditions change during the aggregated frame. The first half of the MPDUs
have the same chance of experiencing worse chann
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Kamran Nishat wrote:
>
> But for this channel conditions should be changing at the scale of 100
> micro secs consistently.
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > It's not completely unsurprising - the initial channel estimate and
> > such i
On 24 October 2014 13:42, Ali Abedi wrote:
> We don't use a rate adaptation at this moment (i.e., fixed rate) and the
> setup
> is stationary. So we expect to see relatively stable channel conditions.
> Even if the channel
> conditions change during the aggregated frame. The first half of the MPD
Hi Adrian,
We have a high end spectrum analyzer. So we are sure there is no
background interference
We run our experiments in the 5 GHZ spectrum. The channel conditions can
still vary due to
the movement of the people in the vicinity of the experiment setup. We
select a rate that
experiences at
On 25 October 2014 08:28, Ali Abedi wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> We have a high end spectrum analyzer. So we are sure there is no background
> interference
> We run our experiments in the 5 GHZ spectrum. The channel conditions can
> still vary due to
> the movement of the people in the vicinity of the
Thank you for sharing the story.
Even if I consider interference as a possibility, still I can't justify
the higher
chance of frame loss in the second half of the aggregate frame.
We use
PCI-express 3 antenna dual band cards
product: AR93xx Wireless Network Adapter
and/or
Atheors AR5B97 which
Dear Seongho ,
Thank you for your reply. Very good paper! I know about this conference.
I am a Ph.D. student
in computer science too.
I am very certain that what we observe is what you found in this paper.
I CC this to the mailing list so that others find out about this
problem. Your observ
Hi Seongho,
that paper looks quite interesting.
Are you planning to publish code/patches for your implementation as well?
It would be nice to have dynamic A-MPDU limiting integrated in minstrel_ht.
Thanks,
- Felix
On 26/10/2014 12:14 AM, Seongho Byeon wrote:
>
> Hi, I am Ph.d. student in Seoul
Just finally -
MCS20 -> MCS23 are very sensitive to changing channel anything. See if
you can find or make some required SNR curves for each MCS rate.
So although it doesn't surprise me to find this is happening, it's
very cute that someone's gone and done the work of figuring out how to
improve
Hi Adrian,
We observed that this can happen for any rate for some SNR values.
If the SNR is strong enough for the given MCS this won't happen.
But when the SNR approaches the transition region when
error rate starts to increase, this problem will be observed.
So this can happen even for MCS0->MC
On 30 October 2014 08:48, Ali Abedi wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
>
> We observed that this can happen for any rate for some SNR values.
> If the SNR is strong enough for the given MCS this won't happen.
> But when the SNR approaches the transition region when
> error rate starts to increase, this problem
The paper mentioned that this happens when the client is mobile.
But I confirm Adrian's observation . This problem happens even
in stationary environments with dynamic channels (e.g., people moving in
the vicinity
of the AP/Client).
Best,
Ali
On 14-10-30 12:11 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 30 O
17 matches
Mail list logo
