my first initial and only thought is over stauration on your network, i dont see anything of enterprise grade APs listed with 30+ users, how many connections and how many users? are they all trying to download/move data at the same time. On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Richard Smith wrote: > On 01/22/2015 04:18 AM, David Lang wrote: > > Recently, we picked up the 11th floor as well and moved many people up >>> there. I got a 3rd AP (another TP-Link AC1750) and set that one up on >>> a free channel with a different ESSID. >>> >> >> I like to put all the APs on the same ESSID so that people can roam >> between them. This requires that the APs act as bridges to a dedicated >> common network, not as routers. >> > > That's the ultimate plan but for convenience of being able to easily > select what AP I'm talking to or to be able to tell folks to move from one > to another I've got them on different ESSIDs. It also helps me keep track > of what RF channel things are on. > > Then about a week before my original post I got notified that Internet >>> was down. Both 10th floor APs had stopped working. The 11th floor >>> (where I am) was still working. On the 10th floor, I could connect >>> to the TP-link via its IP address on its wired interface but it did >>> not seem to be passing wireless traffic. A reboot fixed it. >>> >> >> There has been an ongoing bug with Apple devices on 5Ghz that causes the >> wifi chipset to lockup. We think we've fixed it in the current Cerowrt, >> but I don't know what kernel versions have this problem. This is likely >> to affect multiple vendors who use the same chipset (check the openwrt >> hardware list for details of the chipsets in each model) >> > > Oooohhh! That could be it. We have a _lot_ of Apple devices. Most of the > company uses MacBook,or Air and a large number of people have iPhones and > we use iPods for some of our testing. I'll go dig through the openWRT and > get the details. > > The WNDR3700 was completely unresponsive both via WiFi and when I >>> tried its IP connected directly to it's switch with a Cat-5. I also >>> have a serial port mod on that wndr3700 so I connected up to that >>> instead. >>> >> >> hmm, it's not common to have it be unresponsive on the wired network. >> > > It's uncommon to me. :) This unit has travelled with me for years while I > worked for OLPC and its see a lot of different wireless environments. > Granted never one with this many apple clients. Usually 7-8 Linux/Windows > machines and a pile of XOs. > > So this happened a lot at your SCALE setups? > > room. All the stations are in about a 40 foot radius and all but 1 or >>> 2 have line of sight to the AP. The wndr3700 is in a closet on the >>> side of the room with other equipment so it might be 80 feet away from >>> the furthest station or so. >>> >> >> this doesn't sound unreasonable unless your users are trying to use a >> LOT of bandwidth (although the fact that you refer to the 50Mb >> bottleneck indicates that you may be) >> > > The bottleneck was just a nice side effect. We don't use that much > traffic. I only noticed the limit once I started running netperf-wrapper > tests from a wired host. > > Occasional there will be some big download that eats up bandwidth, but > when I watch the throughput during the day we peak up in to the 40Mbps but > the average is < 10Mbps (Download). > > Can I perhaps approximate signal strength by looking at the bitrate >>> for packets that station sends? The theory being that higher quality >>> RF links should use the higher bitrate encodings when sending. >>> >> >> not reliably, too many other things factor in to that. >> > > Indeed. Horst tells me I basically have 2 rates happening on the tplink > 6Mbs and 24Mbps with a few 12Mbps in there. > > If need be I can move the wndr to the same location as the tplink and >>> then have stations connect to the wndr so I can watch the rx signal >>> strength. >>> >> > Looks like that's what I'll have to do. > > There is a lot of room with consumer grade equipment from where you >> currently are. The "Enterprise Grade" systems do have a lot of >> infrastructure to coordinate the different APs. >> > > Thanks for the ray of hope. Yeah I don't need all the multi-AP > coordination handoff stuff. > > -- > Richard A. Smith > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >