You should try the trango trick on customers that are closer in. I.e. turn the Client device so its "detuned" so that its signal strength at the tower is equivalent to the ones further out. It worked on our Trangto gear. Goiung to try it on the 802.11 stuff. See if it helps..
Scott -----Original Message----- From: "Breiland, Derek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:31:39 -0500 Subject: RE: [smartBridges] one user affecting traffic > 75%-90% seems to be a pretty large fluctuation. If you are truly > getting as > high as 90% I would not expect it to drop below 85% - ever. 80% at the > very > minimum with peaks to 90%. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Del Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 7:04 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: FW: [smartBridges] one user affecting traffic > > Scott, > The lowest link qual that the APPO sees for the clients is about 60%, > most > of the link qualities shown on the APPO are 75 - 90%. Looking at the > statistics tabs on the APPO, shows 360 failed packets, 16 aged packets, > and > zero retries, on the wireless side. It shows no errors on the Ethernet > side > of the APPO and 16,000 singledefered packets. It has been about 10 days > since the counters were reset on the APPO. > > We have all of the ABT radios set for auto fallback on the rate setting > and > the APPO set for auto fallback also with all of the rates selected (11, > 5.5, > 2, & 1 Mbps). > > I'm not certain what you mean about the rate negotiation in the last > sentence of your reply. > Kind regards, > Del > > -----Original Message----- > From: shoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 2:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Del Thompson > Subject: Re: [smartBridges] one user affecting traffic > > > Del, > > I have noticed this problem (and I run a Cisco AP). It isn't a problem > but ht e nature of the beast (maybe). What link quality does your APPO > see for the ABTs? What we have noticed is that the ABT's see the > towers > much better than the Towers see the ABT's. And in actuality, we > actually see large re-try counts (no, lowering frag has not helped) and > we also believe that the radio's are actually talking at 1 MBps up, and > therefore usable bandwidth is much smaller (600kbps?.. ) and with the > retries, one customer allowed at 256 can eat-up all that 600 kbps > pretty > fast... > > Btw.. Save me some reading time.. in the rate negotiation, do the > systems > negotiate well both ways (i.e. Client to AP is as controlling in rate > setting as AP to client?) > > Scott > > -----Original Message----- > From: Del Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:36:23 -0500 > Subject: [smartBridges] one user affecting traffic > > > Hello all, > > I have the following setup: > > ISP >> router >> backhaul >> router >> Mikrotic (bandwidth control > > unit) >> > > APPO >> ABT > > > > This particular APPO has 30 customers all using the ABT's. > > > > All customers are bandwidth limited at the tower site by the > MiKrotic, > > most > > customers are 256Kbps down, 128Kbps up. The maximum bandwidth > > purchased on > > this APPO is 512kbps/512Kbps. > > > > The problem I've noticed is if a particular customer is doing a > > download > > that lasts several minutes, every other user on that access point > sees > > a > > severe degradation in service. The other customers on that AP see > > download > > speeds drop to about 128Kbps and uploads drop to about 64Kbps. In > > other > > words, they see a decrease to about 1/2 of what they should have. > > > > We tried setting the RTS threshold on the ABT's to 500 and this had > no > > noticable effect. (APPO RTS & Fragmentation left as default setting) > > Then we lowered the RTS threshold to 256 on all of the ABT's, again, > > this > > had no noticable effect. > > We have not set the fragmentation threshold on any of our radios. > > > > We started noticing this phenomena when the number of associated > radios > > on > > the APPO reached 20. > > > > My question is, has anyone else seen this behavior and is there a > fix? > > > > APPO firmware is 1.4j.8, ABT firmware is 0.01.07 > > > > Thank you in advance for any feedback. > > Del > > > > > > > > > > ----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- > > Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV > > http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > > smartBridges <yournickname> > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > > smartBridges) > > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > ----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- > Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV > http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > smartBridges <yournickname> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > smartBridges) > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > ----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- > Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV > http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe > smartBridges <yournickname> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe > smartBridges) > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org ----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
