From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8B6D21F13F for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:36:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id n12so3766404wgh.0 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:35:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=J7F5iC7AjfDLx49bjMsGTqMy5WIcMhWJqCtVGarigUM=; b=B66bXs0ZEpWk96AHhMC/ku1WfMTK6DzaY9dbkbXxBV9TKr5+F48oDTaeTvurD8B1Dw MbjdvHcV0mRoNsvRH+ggf+pOUCU4883NPFyCD0AWhAjKxFIPmjd3VJLp4nB+6biCH4ew 4Rc3zJm7ALjeWIDmyiVy37Bm5ztRy6lz02ydf4P2Xv2TQz+0OB6JccEJplwrRDCZspAi Vjw8Aj4jxUiUfdsEJqzfPctt7sfenvijv0tKhZR1SfIv1mBYOxYMhSJ1x+w4SlTCPgnG oPo8jy0akiynO0h5p1jbBZIruu2bti77GDLZxJlWsUS9ydClv3p6vDVNtjv3dZcrWeJb 6B8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.211.39 with SMTP id mz7mr10210179wic.53.1389911727426; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:35:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.217.123.69 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:35:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <957858c7-f436-47ec-a55f-d46c6441212a@email.android.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:35:27 -0500 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Aaron Wood Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt-devel Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Managed to break 802.11n (on a 3800) X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 22:36:22 -0000 On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Aaron Wood wrote: > >>> Sebastian, after sorting out the router, it's still biased, but far >>> less >>> so, about a 2:1 ratio between upload and download. >> >> So I See offen 10:1 and worse @165Mbit/s raw wireless rate > > I get mixed results, but they aren't good. IIRC, apple really changed so= mething about the media access in 10.8, I'll look into that. And see if my= wife will let me install netperf on her laptop (I think it's still running= 10.7) > > >>> Also, my understanding was that with rts/cts, the router was in control >>> of >>> that aspect of things? >> >> That is what I thought AS well, but it is not what I See with osx 1= 0.8. >> > > It may be a case of the station aggressively asking to send, and the AP g= ranting instead of sending data to the station that's waiting. Um, probably not. Both station and AP are doing EDCA scheduling, (I'd hope) which was originally a p2p style protocol. So it is kind of overly "fair" to both. The client is doing better aggregation since it is only going one way, the AP has trouble with aggregation due to lack of per station queueing. folk have done work to try and give the APs more priority and looking at that has also long been on the todo list. > It should be clear in a monitor-mode tcpdump (or a statistical summary of= packets). but do check. I generally get terrible results from macos, and the intel wifi chip in the laptop. the ath9k in another laptop is considerably better, and ath10k (on the nuc) is not horrible. It's terrible on both ends, on this test and both the clients and the APs need a ton of work... > --Aaron > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=E4ht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.= html