On 10/04/2012 03:53 PM, Julian Calaby wrote:
Hi Ben,
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/04/2012 03:36 PM, Julian Calaby wrote:
Hi Ben,
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I finally got my 3-attenuator system up and running,
and I'm starting to do some tests.
AP and Station are running 3.5.5+, ath9k ar9380 NICs.
Channel 157, HT40, no encryption.
One question right away: Should I expect decent performance
if I directly cable 2 wifi NICs, where one is acting as AP and
the other as station? I'm cabling ch0 to ch0, ch1 to ch1, ch2 to ch2.
Going off on a tangent: arguably it shouldn't matter which channel on
the AP card is connected to which channel on the STA card. I wonder
what results you'd get if you cabled them in each combination and
tested the throughput keeping the other variables the same. I also
wonder what impact it would have on the throughput if you started
disconnecting the cables.
I doubt it matters either....just seemed sane to start with something
I could easily keep track of in my head :)
Fair enough.
I had really shitty performance when I had only one cable connected
to the station, but I think it is probably related to rate-control,
which seems too aggressive. When I force things to slower speeds
it works fine. I'm starting to look into that now.
I hope to eventually produce big pretty graphs reporting signal, rx-rate,
etc over various attenuations...but still got a ways to go first!
Pretty graphs are always useful. It'd be nice to compare other brands
/ models of card too, but I'm guessing that's outside the scope of
what you're planning to achieve.
Are you planning to open-source any of the software / hardware you're
making to do this?
I'm going to publish the code for the attenuator (including
eagle layout & gerber files for the Arduino shield). Will market them
for sale as completed units too. Will publish a simple command-line
tool to adjust the attenuation, and unit will have knobs to turn
so you don't really need a computer to control it anyway.
The user-space code that handles traffic generation and
reporting will remain proprietary, but someone that didn't
mind playing with iperf or similar should be able to reproduce
at least the simpler test cases that I plan to do fairly easily.
We'll be able to test various APs..but on the client side,
I doubt we'll test other than ath9k anytime soon, although
I think our software would support other WiFi NICs if you didn't
try to do any of the virtual interface stuff.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
