On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 18:48:23 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/21/2016 09:28 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:49:43 -0700
> > David Christensen wrote:
> >> 4. The laptop TX bytes (1.2 GiB) and NAS RX bytes (731.5 MiB) do not
> >> correlate well.
> >
> > Why would [laptop TX by
On 03/21/2016 09:28 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:49:43 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
4. The laptop TX bytes (1.2 GiB) and NAS RX bytes (731.5 MiB) do not
correlate well.
Why would [laptop TX bytes and NAS RX bytes] match?
You want to devise experiments that isolate and measur
Hi,
[...]
>>> It might be a good idea to upgrade to a dual-band access point, so
>>> that you can use 5 GHz, which is typically has much cleaner channels.
>>
>> Thanks. See my other response in the thread regarding channel selection.
>>
>> Celejar
>>
> Also remember you can have too much RF pow
On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 00:45 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:15:56 - (UTC)
> Dan Purgert wrote:
>
> > On 2016-03-18, Celejar wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of
> > > my little home network, and am perplexed by the
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:15:56 - (UTC)
Dan Purgert wrote:
> On 2016-03-18, Celejar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of
> > my little home network, and am perplexed by the measured wireless
> > throughput.
> >
> > The three main devices I
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:41:05 +
Bonno Bloksma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Responding to one part of your mail. The other parts have been covered in
> other responses:
>
> > I was originally using one of the common 1/6/11 channels, and I switched to
> > 3 since I saw a lot of other stations on those c
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:49:43 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/20/2016 07:10 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > Laptop:
> >
> > RX packets:922215 errors:0 dropped:1967 overruns:0 frame:0
> >TX packets:1186319 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> >collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
On 2016-03-18, Celejar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of
> my little home network, and am perplexed by the measured wireless
> throughput.
>
> The three main devices I'm interested in:
>
> Router: Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH running OpenWrt (Chaos Cal
Hi,
Responding to one part of your mail. The other parts have been covered in other
responses:
> I was originally using one of the common 1/6/11 channels, and I switched to 3
> since I saw a lot of other stations on those channels.
> This may have resulted in some improvement, but I'm still stu
On 03/20/2016 07:10 PM, Celejar wrote:
Laptop:
RX packets:922215 errors:0 dropped:1967 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:1186319 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:724785210 (691.2 MiB) TX bytes:1311193642 (1.2 GiB)
NAS:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:48:23 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/20/2016 11:07 AM, Celejar wrote:
> > FWIW, I'm getting these:
> >
> > Tx excessive retries:392922 Invalid misc:5439
> >
> > [Rx invalids are all 0]
>
> What machine? What file or tool?
Laptop - reported by 'iwconfig'
> What
On 03/20/2016 11:07 AM, Celejar wrote:
FWIW, I'm getting these:
Tx excessive retries:392922 Invalid misc:5439
[Rx invalids are all 0]
What machine? What file or tool?
What does 'ifconfig' report on the various machines?
David
Hi
On 21/03/2016 2:22 AM, arian wrote:
> another simple bandwidth check:
> # host1: nc -l 8090 > /dev/zero
> # host2: dd if=/dev/zero | nc host1 8090
Okay, I'm trying the following.
On host 1
# ssh -f name-in-config -L 18090:localhost:8090 'nc -l 8090 > /dev/zero'
The "name-in-config" is setup
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 09:31:24 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
...
> But, I still recommend Category 5E cables.
>
>
> >> It's not clear if you are doing an apples-to-apples comparison. Perhaps
> >> iperf isn't measuring what you think it is.
> >
> > That's exactly what I'm asking: what is iperf
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 16:22:58 +0100
arian wrote:
>
> > No - I've been using the default: 'iperf -c host' on laptop, 'iperf
> > -sD' on router, NAS.
> >
> > Actually, this morning I've been getting about 17-20 Mbps between the
> > laptop and NAS. I tried bidirectional testing ('iperf -d -c ho
On 03/20/2016 06:10 AM, Celejar wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:01:58 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
Perhaps the NAS has an automatic crossover feature on it's Gigabit port.
If you do a computer-cable-computer test, you will want a (category
5E) crossover cable.
If they weren't doing crossov
> No - I've been using the default: 'iperf -c host' on laptop, 'iperf
> -sD' on router, NAS.
>
> Actually, this morning I've been getting about 17-20 Mbps between the
> laptop and NAS. I tried bidirectional testing ('iperf -d -c host',
> and the results actually remained constant.
That s
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 14:43:00 +0100
arian wrote:
>
> > Here's the part that baffles me - these are with the laptop connected
> > to the router wirelessly:
> >
> > Laptop - router:~11.8 Mbps
> > Laptop - NAS: ~14.7 Mbps
> >
> > Once again, these numbers vary widely, but are in
> Here's the part that baffles me - these are with the laptop connected
> to the router wirelessly:
>
> Laptop - router: ~11.8 Mbps
> Laptop - NAS: ~14.7 Mbps
>
> Once again, these numbers vary widely, but are in line with the laptop
> - router numbers.
>
> But here's the kicker: O
On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 15:47:57 +1300
Richard Hector wrote:
...
> FWIW, most cabling professionals (of which definitely I'm not one)
> don't make their own cables unless they absolutely have to. Factory
> ones are so much more reliable.
>
> Riser cable, being intended for fixed installation, is so
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:01:58 -0700
David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/18/2016 09:48 AM, Celejar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of
> > my little home network, and am perplexed by the measured wireless
> > throughput.
> >
> > The three main d
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:44:30 -0600 (MDT)
"John L. Ries" wrote:
> I don't know if it will help, but I hook up my Iomega NAS directly to my
> desktop machine with a regular cat 5/6 cable (each has two gigabit
> Ethernet ports, so each can connect to the rest of my network, as well
> as to each o
rote:
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:44:30
From: John L. Ries
To: Celejar
Cc: debian-user
Subject: Re: Throughput riddle
I don't know if it will help, but I hook up my Iomega NAS directly to my
desktop machine with a regular cat 5/6 cable (each has two gigabit
Ethernet ports, so each can connect
6 12:44:30
> >From: John L. Ries
> >To: Celejar
> >Cc: debian-user
> >Subject: Re: Throughput riddle
> >
> > I don't know if it will help, but I hook up my Iomega NAS directly to my
> > desktop machine with a regular cat 5/6 cable (each has two gigabit
>
I don't know if it will help, but I hook up my Iomega NAS directly to my
desktop machine with a regular cat 5/6 cable (each has two gigabit
Ethernet ports, so each can connect to the rest of my network, as well
as to each other) and that seems to help the throughput by a lot (but I
don't have a
On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote:
> I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category 6
> cables were not reliable for me.
Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I gather some don't work
so well. If you have any cat5 or better cables that are unreliable,
I'd suspect t
On 03/18/2016 07:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote:
FWIW, most cabling professionals (of which definitely I'm not one)
don't make their own cables unless they absolutely have to. Factory
ones are so much more reliable.
Riser cable, being intended for fixed installation, is solid core. The
appropriate
On 03/18/2016 06:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote:
On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote:
I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category 6
cables were not reliable for me.
Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I gather some don't work
so well. If you have any cat5 or be
On 03/18/2016 09:48 AM, Celejar wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to understand the throughput across the different links of
my little home network, and am perplexed by the measured wireless
throughput.
The three main devices I'm interested in:
Router: Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH running OpenWrt (Chaos Calmer 1
On 19/03/16 15:07, David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/18/2016 06:47 PM, Richard Hector wrote:
>> On 19/03/16 14:01, David Christensen wrote:
>>> I use category 5E cables for Gigabit. Category 5 and category
>>> 6 cables were not reliable for me.
>>
>> Cat 5 cables _should_ work, in theory, though I
30 matches
Mail list logo
