[Make-wifi-fast] Thoughts on tackling airtime fairness

[Luca Muscariello]

to be fair I should say that these technologies are gonna be a lot more
expensive than wifi.
There is a good reason to keep wifi simple.

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Luca Muscariello <
luca.muscariello at gmail.com> wrote:

> LTE-U and LTE-LAA are basically the same thing.
> They require a licensed anchor.
> MuLTEFire does not.
>
> All needs to have a listen before talk and some level of fairness.
>
> All these are gonna give a lot better quality and capacity than 802.11.
> Enough to push 802.11 improvement in the standard?
>
>
> On Wednesday, 11 May 2016, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Luca Muscariello
>> <luca.muscariello at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Correct, but in between that time and now a lot has been done in
>> different
>> > areas but not much on this point.
>> > The fact that some part of the industry is looking at LTE-U is also
>> because
>> > 802.11 standard is not good enough.
>>
>> What do you think of LTE-LAA?
>>
>> I do think very strongly that actual usage of 802.11 can be made
>> vastly more efficient, that we can use up a great deal of the mac
>> currently being left unused, and schedule txops way more efficiently -
>> and that I'd love to test with michal's patch set against the LTE-U
>> tests cablelabs, etc which did
>>
>> 100 stations before (stock):
>>
>> http://blog.cerowrt.org/flent/drr/10tothe5.svg
>>
>> after
>>
>> http://blog.cerowrt.org/flent/drr/newcode.svg
>>
>> I became mortally opposed to LTE-U (lacking exponential backoff and
>> ignoring sparse station behavior, as well as today's crappy wifi
>> drivers - along with some very dubious benchmarks), but have not poked
>> much into LTE-LAA.
>>
>> I freely admit to loathing the 802.11 mac, and IF LTE-LAA could be as
>> open, accessible and usable to ordinary users as wifi was, would be
>> more embracing of it.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wednesday, 11 May 2016, David Lang <david at lang.hm> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 11 May 2016, Luca Muscariello wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> It's surprising that 802.11 standard never considered time fairness in
>> >>> the
>> >>> EDCF. A reason might be the time fairness might be enforced using the
>> >>> PCF.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> to be fair, at that point the rate variation was 1Mb - 11Mb and wasn't
>> >> expected to change much during use.
>> >>
>> >> David Lang
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Make-wifi-fast mailing list
>> > Make-wifi-fast at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Täht
>> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
>> http://blog.cerowrt.org
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/make-wifi-fast/attachments/20160511/796c68a0/attachment-0001.html>