From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x232.google.com (mail-oi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90B4E3B2B2; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:35:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-oi0-x232.google.com with SMTP id d205so108440259oia.0; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:35:06 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Jx1mueKKZIxYVMx3XyV33izBkRTaam+9OgIRtNgdy9M=; b=ZCOQlOSJnncwfn7UH4RhEMAqhToGIjfqc/oLE+BWjZ+gkZn5M4Xxevvmr6F8ko0Sbu LHhp3yYpika5seQdDHd1RXTwwABR44K0a7lKi995o4j/YYy2bWelxtslTvUy7EGsQotE b3cmfo9MfRfYFuj8hLl6mQWg8Vpl87e7Ir8vag6Tnts5gLsLDmGbxZ6Rt5uF2UzCWA8H 7ip0h2QYDHtml6iS5uHFlUunYFSF1nkJO6FcO7F0INJOxJ5AX1xlv4535Vj2Uzlzksiz /QMWyJRh6Wx3zgi98Rs00k3yuTsDCvecpIR4UelaUBui3GeIZub6t0kor/22oQfH4ckW 2r5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Jx1mueKKZIxYVMx3XyV33izBkRTaam+9OgIRtNgdy9M=; b=YxwZKjh7xuXQYlwnx8IoHGm/8X8/ausmXfIrlArfcH8w0xRReUZJ46Wl2NQQ4AZiut dhf9A0xKBCkTGkyzPvDFXf+/cxqL57BAOcVIG5zSddCAtZKgwyYomlLycXNgiVb/6cJr y9qICsOaagJT1IIlDBgKXG7yNSEOpNBM1ir1Y65dKUpUjAEkHY/xhRUyiCfL7Y8uIUp4 FwqJa49FJ1aZqtz+dqmj9MHr7Gr5uHZ8q2EE0mEtwirYx7WQsHxzjlXQnIMLRmnvIsme K61jaKtRExliL/A9UaI7kKPshz5JIgVeJ5P5tGZDjHk+Sn4HiKlSVQwF7a/f2siODFlH Ikyg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIJGcLsLxKu2gNfIYoNFFgrOya4WCMxhsy5CmZNLchUi5FFXs4qd7m7fvymBu0OpE/+Z9AbBI8mYOXbHQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.203.77 with SMTP id b74mr9561632oig.56.1457811305386; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:35:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.202.79.88 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:35:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160312192049.GA23295@radio2.ebirdie> References: <56B8F445.3070400@taht.net> <20160312192049.GA23295@radio2.ebirdie> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:35:05 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, cerowrt-devel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] Will full-duplex be possible on 802.11 wired air? X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 19:35:06 -0000 http://web.stanford.edu/~skatti/pubs/sigcomm13-fullduplex.pdf http://phys.org/news/2013-10-kumu-networks-wireless-full-duplex.html Someone, georgia tech I thought, had actually gone and built a chip to do it. Can't find the link. I have no doubt that we can construct ever more efficient devices, what I have grave doubts about is given the billions of existing devices pee-ing on the spectrum that there will be no way to actually make an impact. For christmas, I gave an unhappy chromecast user the wired dongle. Stuffing stockings full of that sort of stuff, repacing wifi for wired wherever possible, seems like the sanest option. I've been thinking of begging the landlords around me to let me wire up their buildings and tenants for ethernet, from 6pm onwards wifi is getting towards unusable. ... In terms of complexity in serving multiple stations - as opposed to full duplex... The number of DSPs in the 802.11ac mac is well over 400, and MU-mimo, as defined in the standard - really difficult to implement and use effectively. The first MU-mimo capable chips (wave 2) are shipping now, but Not for the last time, I wish we'd got UWB off the ground. Only needed 236 notches cut out of the spectrum a decade ago to make the existing spectrum holders happy. Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! https://www.gofundme.com/savewifi On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Erkki Lintunen wr= ote: > Last week or so I had a short peek on the lists and read something alike > 'half-duplex makes wifi feel slow [in addition to the point in > discussion and when compared to wired]'. Now couldn't find the message > to reply to the sited one but going on with this one. > > Half-duplex brought me to a news item national IT press was buzzing > about few months ago: Taneli Riihonen's doctoral dissertation "Design > and Analysis of Duplexing Modes and Forwarding Protocols for OFDM(A) > Relay Links" [1]. > > 1 http://taneli.riihonen.fi/ "Taneli Riihonen - List of Publications" > > The fuss news media made out of the research was, that the methods > Riihonen found will solely speed up 5G cellular networks. Amusingly I > saw a picture a news outlet run out, where Taneli Riihonen was standing > and in the background a slide showed text "OFDM". I thought what the > heck, this isn't just about 5G, who cares about 5G. Then forgot the news > and now got flashback. > > This might be old news/tidbits for the list, but one can't never be > sure, so passing on as in the back of my head are Dave T=C3=A4ht's words = that > a lot of new research and reading old was made for accomplishment in > current state of bufferbloat in wired connections. > > > Getting to the on-the-air-timings spoken about below, the methods Taneli > Riihonen found in his dissertation used statistical methods for time > slotting the "shout out" and "listen to" for duplexing on the air. > Intuitively this brings me to expect that the dissertation might give > ideas how to measure timings for tx and rx, and, in the best case > readily usable, tools how they have proved their theory in the theses. > > Sorry I haven't even glimpsed the 300 pages thesis. I'm only basing on > slides linked to in the same paragraph as the thesis on the above > web-page. Unfortunately the slides are in finnish. > > -Erkki > > > * Aaron Wood [2016-02-09 06:17:57 +0800]: > >> I've often wanted the same thing: What's the time-length of given packe= ts >> (using various transmission rates), and the inter-packet delays, etc. W= hat >> _is_ 100% channel utilization, in terms of packets per second of a given >> size/rate? >> >> From a pcap file full of radio-tap-level packets, can the channel usage = be >> computed? (none of the tools I looked at a few years ago could give me = a >> channel usage indication from an analysis of actual packets (with rates = and >> timestamps)). >> >> -Aaron >> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Dave T=C3=A4ht wrote: >> >> > Much more readable than the spec! >> > >> > http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000001739/ch03.html >> > >> > I still keep hoping for a comprehensive list (or a tool) for timings f= or >> > every possible operation across all the 802.11 standards. Trying to >> > figure out how long things take "on the wire" makes my brain spin. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >> > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel