Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 18:52:13 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AP performance (again): txpower regulation Message-ID: <4910491962.20110908185213@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmom_ZHKbqt%2BQgmdq_oPU-SugbrJ3LNS=g-cpcQ7KExusUw@mail.gmail.com> References: <663133681.20110907193747@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAJ-Vmonai4LzwanLw7i5d-NyjN2b6GqfttjkdcROvOuEcuzEAw@mail.gmail.com> <437702009.20110907235248@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAJ-Vmo=R-a%2BqhDLWj1n%2BBj70Pmg4WSL6bVZ6jwCUmNq=v7EBBw@mail.gmail.com> <426917282.20110908125907@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAAUsrB5Qtokpcz-koUfYWCHrsnUUErQSAYHrXrW2F0Uvp3RzSA@mail.gmail.com> <4610390305.20110908154130@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAAUsrB6LJ%2BmuTvaqHCySh6e9dMjzshohYFE4PQ3KTezZMZS2JA@mail.gmail.com> <1705262661.20110908180850@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAAUsrB7CFu096x%2BKKWa=8O_VeSHOK10LuwJ2rWq6r8EidUrL=Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmokvXfUAZpxDgv5gLrRdLYn3YwTXAOb7QiTyUg8K5yKLHg@mail.gmail.com> <458771414.20110908183656@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAJ-Vmom_ZHKbqt%2BQgmdq_oPU-SugbrJ3LNS=g-cpcQ7KExusUw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Adrian.
You wrote 8 =D3=C5=CE=D4=D1=C2=D2=D1 2011 =C7., 18:38:36:
>>> Oi, he shouldn't be breaking regulatory requirements! :)
>> =9AI afraid, that 600mW card + 10dB antenna ALREADY out of regulatory
>> requirements, as it more than non-licensable 100mW :)
> You'd be very surprised how sensitive wireless NICs are.
> If this is just for a home access point then it's very unlikely you
> need a 600mW card.
> I get 130mbit from all places in my apartment .. with a non-high power
> 11n NIC. :)
And I want to have at least 54Mbit with powerful card :) No luck :(
10Mbit TCP (21Mbit WiFi, I think) is upper limit everywhere but in direct
sight of AP antenna.
Yes, I have 802.11n 2x2 card on my table ("conventional" one), but I
don't have pigtails for it! And nearest pigtails are in Honk-Kong.
I've ordered them two days ago, but delivery will be about 30 days :(
And some more results:
(a) 13 channel is not seen by client, 11 channel is last what it could
see, and it is worse than my 9 ch.
(b) FreeBSD 9-BETA2 is more aggressive in selecting transfer rate:
signal strength is the same, but "ifconfig wlan0 list sta" shows
"54M" almost everytime, FreeBSD 8-STABLE shows from "11M" to "48M"
from run to run.
(c) Real throughput (iperf tcp or udp) is the same with FreeBSD 9 as
with FreeBSD 8.
--=20
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4910491962.20110908185213>