Hi Ben, On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Nice! I wish I had a good reason to build one =) > 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. Makes sense. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/ -- 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
