well, with the kickstarter, I think they are selling a bill of goods. Just using the DFS channels and aggregating them as supported by N and AC standards would do wonders (as long as others near you don't do the same) David Lang On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote: > Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:01:22 -0700 > From: Bob McMahon > To: David Lang > Cc: dpreed@reed.com, make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, > "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" > > Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] more well funded attempts showing market demand > for better wifi > > Thanks for the clarification. Though now I'm confused about how all the > channels would be used simultaneously with an AP only solution (which is my > understanding of the kickstarter campaign.) > > Bob > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 7:14 PM, David Lang wrote: > >> I think he is meaning when one unit is talking to one AP the signal levels >> across multiple channels will be similar. Which is probably fairly true. >> >> >> David Lang >> >> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote: >> >> Curious, where does the "in a LAN setup, the variability in [receive] >>> signal strength is likely small enough" assertion come? Any specific >>> power numbers here? We test with many combinations of "signal strength >>> variability" (e.g. deltas range from 0 dBm - 50 dBm) and per different >>> channel conditions. This includes power variability within the spatial >>> streams' MiMO transmission. It would be helpful to have some physics >>> combined with engineering to produce some pragmatic limits to this. >>> >>> Also, mobile devices have a goal of reducing power in order to be >>> efficient >>> with their battery (vs a goal to balance power such that an AP can >>> receive simultaneously.) Power per bit usually trumps most other design >>> goals. There market for battery powered wi-fi devices drives a >>> semi-conductor mfg's revenue so my information come with that bias. >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:48 PM, wrote: >>> >>> The actual issues of transmitting on multiple channels at the same time >>>> are quite minor if you do the work in the digital domain (pre-DAC). You >>>> just need a higher sampling rate in the DAC and add the two signals >>>> together (and use a wideband filter that covers all the channels). No RF >>>> problem. >>>> >>>> Receiving multiple transmissions in different channels is pretty much the >>>> same problem - just digitize (ADC) a wider bandwidth and separate in the >>>> digital domain. the only real issue on receive is equalization - if you >>>> receive two different signals at different receive signal strengths, the >>>> lower strength signal won't get as much dynamic range in its samples. >>>> >>>> But in a LAN setup, the variability in signal strength is likely small >>>> enough that you can cover that with more ADC bits (or have the MAC >>>> protocol >>>> manage the station transmit power so that signals received at the AP are >>>> nearly the same power. >>>> >>>> Equalization at transmit works very well when there is a central AP (as >>>> in >>>> cellular or normal WiFi systems). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday, June 23, 2016 4:28pm, "Bob McMahon" < >>>> bob.mcmahon@broadcom.com> >>>> said: >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >>>>> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast >>>>> An AP per room/area, reducing the tx power (beacon range) has been my >>>>> approach and has scaled very well. It does require some wires to each >>>>> >>>> AP >>>> >>>>> but I find that paying an electrician to run some quality wiring to >>>>> >>>> things >>>> >>>>> that are to remain stationary has been well worth the cost. >>>>> >>>>> just my $0.02, >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:10 PM, David Lang wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Well, just using the 5GHz DFS channels in 80MHz or 160 MHz wide chunks >>>>>> would be a huge improvement, not many people are using them (yet), and >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>> >>>>> wide channels let you get a lot of data out at once. If everything is >>>>>> within a good range of the AP, this would work pretty well. If you end >>>>>> >>>>> up >>>> >>>>> needing multiple APs, or you have many stations, I expect that you will >>>>>> >>>>> be >>>> >>>>> better off with more APs at lower power, each using different channels. >>>>>> >>>>>> David Lang >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Bob McMahon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:55:19 -0700 >>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Bob McMahon >>>>>>> To: Dave Taht >>>>>>> Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, >>>>>>> "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] more well funded attempts showing market >>>>>>> demand >>>>>>> for better wifi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> hmm, I'm skeptical. To use multiple carriers simultaneously is >>>>>>> >>>>>> difficult >>>> >>>>> per RF issues. Even if that is somehow resolved, to increase >>>>>>> >>>>>> throughput >>>> >>>>> usually requires some form of channel bonding, i.e. needed on both >>>>>>> >>>>>> sides, >>>> >>>>> and brings in issues with preserving frame ordering. If this is just >>>>>>> channel hopping, that needs coordination between both sides (and isn't >>>>>>> simultaneous, possibly costing more than any potential gain.) An AP >>>>>>> >>>>>> only >>>> >>>>> solution can use channel switch announcements (CSA) but there is a >>>>>>> >>>>>> cost to >>>> >>>>> those as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess don't see any break though here and the marketing on the site >>>>>>> seems >>>>>>> to indicate something beyond physics, at least the physics that I >>>>>>> understand. Always willing to learn and be corrected if I'm >>>>>>> misunderstanding things. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bob >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Dave Taht >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Dave Taht >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalwifi/portal-turbocharged-wifi?ref=backerkit >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Portal is the first and only router specifically engineered to cut >>>>>>>>> through and avoid congestion, delivering consistent, >>>>>>>>> high-performance >>>>>>>>> WiFi with greater coverage throughout your home. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Its proprietary spectrum turbocharger technology provides access to >>>>>>>>> 300% more of the radio airwaves than any other router, improving >>>>>>>>> performance by as much as 300x, and range and coverage by as much as >>>>>>>>> 2x in crowded settings, such as city homes and multi-unit >>>>>>>>> apartments" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It sounds like they are promising working DFS support. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's not clear what chipset they are using (they are claiming wave2) >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> but they are at least publicly claiming to be using openwrt. So I >>>>>>>> threw in enough to order one for september, just so I could comment >>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>> their kickstarter page. :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'd have loved to have got in earlier (early shipments are this month >>>>>>>> apparently), but those were sold out. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalwifi/portal-turbocharged-wifi/comments >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Dave Täht >>>>>>>>> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! >>>>>>>>> http://blog.cerowrt.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Dave Täht >>>>>>>> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! >>>>>>>> http://blog.cerowrt.org >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >>>>>>>> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >>>>>> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >