I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is about 2.4 miles. I can get
56M TCP across the link using the UBNT speed test.
I have several MTs on one side of the link and a RouterMaxx running MT
on the other side of the link. The best I can get between the MTs is
10M. The processors are at < 30%
How do the interfaces look? Are they negotiating to 100/full on all
sides? Any interface errors accruing on any of the devices?
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>
> I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is about 2.4 miles. I can get
> 56M TCP across the link using the UBNT spe
All are 100/full
No errors
On 4/7/2014 9:42 PM, Mike Lyon wrote:
> How do the interfaces look? Are they negotiating to 100/full on all
> sides? Any interface errors accruing on any of the devices?
>
>
>
>> On Apr 7, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>>
>> I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that
Oops, look at the right stuff. 760,000,000 tx errors in 79 days on the
wire from the RouterMaxx to the PowerBridge.
Guess I know where the problem may be.
On 4/7/2014 9:49 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
> All are 100/full
> No errors
>
> On 4/7/2014 9:42 PM, Mike Lyon wrote:
>> How do the interfaces look?
Check the cable and hard set the interfaces if you can.
Cheers,
Mike
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 6:52 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>
> Oops, look at the right stuff. 760,000,000 tx errors in 79 days on the
> wire from the RouterMaxx to the PowerBridge.
> Guess I know where the problem may be.
>> On 4/7/201
I didn't think the shell based speedtest would give those numbers
without limiting out the cpu. Were you using the web based speed test?
On 04/07/2014 06:37 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
> I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is about 2.4 miles. I can get
> 56M TCP across the link using the UBNT sp
What version firmware on the RouterMaxx?
On 04/07/2014 06:52 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
> Oops, look at the right stuff. 760,000,000 tx errors in 79 days on the
> wire from the RouterMaxx to the PowerBridge.
> Guess I know where the problem may be.
> On 4/7/2014 9:49 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>> All are
At daybreak. Already have a climber scheduled in case it is at the top
(265')
On 4/7/2014 10:05 PM, Mike Lyon wrote:
> Check the cable and hard set the interfaces if you can.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
>
>
>> On Apr 7, 2014, at 6:52 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>>
>> Oops, look at the right stuff. 760,000,
Web on UBNT, WinBox on MT
On 4/7/2014 11:36 PM, Robert wrote:
> I didn't think the shell based speedtest would give those numbers
> without limiting out the cpu. Were you using the web based speed test?
>
> On 04/07/2014 06:37 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>> I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is a
Web on UBNT is a UDP test.. Apples and oranges As the shell
based tcp test on UBNT hits processor limits very fast, it's better
switching the MT test to UDP to get a better comparison.
Best,
Robert
On 04/08/2014 03:07 AM, Scott Reed wrote:
> Web on UBNT, WinBox on MT
>
> On 4/7/2
pping the power down a little bit and
see what happens.
marlon
-Original Message-
From: Scott Reed
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 6:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Odd Speed Results
I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is about 2.4 miles. I can get
56M TCP across the
---
> From: Scott Reed
> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 6:37 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Odd Speed Results
>
> I have a link using 2 PowerBridges that is about 2.4 miles. I can get
> 56M TCP across the link using the UBNT speed test.
> I have several MTs on
12 matches
Mail list logo
