From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: "Dave Täht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: David Lang <david@lang.hm>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Dual Channel Wi-Fi
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 11:13:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202C71FD-571F-44D3-9FB0-08B5191279EA@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw4AK7xz6R+SXiOmze1w9P5Z4OtN8xrdL8g3jn+2+d6Ang@mail.gmail.com>
I am with David, this is going to be fun on densely populated apartment buildings. For people with no RF-competition it is sort of a "nice" trick to more or less go "duplex".
What a I missing?
Best Regards
Sebastian
> On Sep 13, 2019, at 08:13, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There's more to it than that.
>
> https://www-res.cablelabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/24150908/Dual-Channel-Wi-Fi-Performance-Test-Report-June-2019.pdf
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 7:03 AM David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>>
>> it's an optimization that will work well when there is only one person using the
>> network, and utterly collapse when there is a lot of use.
>>
>> it assumes that 'high priority' and bulk things only move in one direction, it
>> uses more channels, which will cause more collisions with other users and other
>> networks.
>>
>> a fairly typical type of idea to someone who doesn't look at what's actually
>> happening at the RF level.
>>
>> David Lang
>>
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019, Etienne Champetier wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 14:47:38 +0900
>>> From: Etienne Champetier <champetier.etienne@gmail.com>
>>> To: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>>> Subject: [Bloat] Dual Channel Wi-Fi
>>>
>>> I'm curious what people on this mailing list think about this Wi-Fi
>>> optimisation
>>>
>>> https://www.cablelabs.com/technologies/dual-channel-wi-fi
>>> https://github.com/openwrt/packages/pull/9972
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dave Täht
> CTO, TekLibre, LLC
> http://www.teklibre.com
> Tel: 1-831-205-9740
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-13 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-13 5:47 Etienne Champetier
2019-09-13 6:01 ` Dave Taht
2019-09-13 6:03 ` David Lang
2019-09-13 6:13 ` Dave Taht
2019-09-13 7:18 ` Dave Taht
2019-09-13 9:13 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2019-09-13 11:58 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202C71FD-571F-44D3-9FB0-08B5191279EA@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox