Agreed, but just a few weeks ago, using CBQ, things were calm and stable. I can check to see if our overall data transfer is up from a month ago. Thanks for the fish! CVS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Wright" <paua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Curtis V. Schleich" <cvslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Stef Coene" <stef.coene@xxxxxxxxx>; <lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 4:49 PM Subject: Re: QOS problems switching from CBQ to HTB. > On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 09:00, Curtis V. Schleich wrote: > > Trying 4000 right now, I'll try 1500 after I have a chance to see if 4000 > > makes any difference. I have put new commands and stats (which I will > > update periodically over the next few hours) at the > > http://wireless.ccaonline.com/lartc/ site. On initial examination it does > > not seem to be making any significant difference. I've still got very laggy > > ping times, which I did not have when we were using CBQ. > > > just a red herring for you, ;-), but you may need to use some arbitrated > channel access mechanism for this many users off one AP, viz WiCCP, > otherwise channel contention will become an issue. This will likely > cause high ping times. > > > /steve > > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
