From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2.candelatech.com (mail2.candelatech.com [208.74.158.173]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2965B21F24A; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:22:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.20.125] (c-98-247-81-230.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [98.247.81.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.candelatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F049440A69D; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:22:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54EE9F84.6060508@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:22:28 -0800 From: Isaac Konikoff User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Taht , Jonathan Morton References: <54EE6222.5030408@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cerowrt-devel , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Two d-link products tested for bloat... X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 04:23:01 -0000 On 02/25/2015 04:23 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote: >>> Here's a comparison plot of box totals: >> http://www.candelatech.com/downloads/rtt_fair4be-comparison-box-plot.png >> >> That's a real mess. All of them utterly fail to get download bandwidth >> anywhere near the upload (am I right in assuming it should ideally be about >> equal?), and the only ones with even halfway acceptable latency are the ones >> with least throughput in either direction. > > And I suspect that this was a test at the highest possible MCS rates > and txpower. Isaac? Yes, highest MCS for each AP and fw defaulted tx power. I can experiment with attenuation and lower MCS rates as well. > >> >> - Jonathan Morton > > >