Hello,

I test bonding with two R52N each side but bonding not work.. Bonding of wireless N do not work yet?

We tested 802.11n using SparkLAN cards. Here is the results.
All test are on 5km distance using dish dual polarization antena.

Test 1. 179.2Mbit/s We used RB600a and SparkLAN Wmia-198N, Bandwidth UDP Test: Test 2. 107/103.1M We used RB600a and Wmia-198N, Bandwidth UDP Test BOTH: Test 3. 40.5/76.3M We used rb433ah and Wmia-198N, Real Traffic Torrents via PPPoE + Bandwidth Test TCP Continued in next post as 3 attachments is the maximum in one post ...

Test 4. 114M We used RB433AH and Wmia-198N. Real Traffic Only via 2 Ether and 2 PPPoE tunnels downloading linux distributions via torrents Test 5. 96.4/80.7M We used RB433AH and Wmia-198N. UDP Both Bandwidth test Test 6. 105.2/81.2 We used X86 machine and WPEA-110N mini-pci-e on TCP Bandwidth Test And last test continued on next post ...

Test 7. 131M We used x86 machine and WPEA-110N for real trafic downloading linux distributions using torrents + TCP Bandwidth Test from other location to this one:

Hiding the SSID 802.1N is not working.

The client is not able to connect anymore.

tested with 4.0rc1

regards
Ros

The majority of the tests & info supplied here so far is on backhaul PTP links...
What I'm interested in, is one of the supposed real benefits of n, which is multipath correction. (Correct term?)
Also, as my 5GHz backhauls is more than the maximum Internet speeds I can supply (All Links>=16Mbps half-duplex; Internet 10Mps) I see no real benefit in upgrading backhaul to n at this stage(apart from the minority of clients that copy files between each other). Also as congestion is bad, using broader frequency range (40Mhz), is not a good idea here.

However, if and n AP would help my b/g clients get better throughputs due to multipath correction, that would now really interest me and I'll immediately change all my b/g & a APs to R2n/R52n cards with dual antennas. Also, due to interferrence/congestion in my area, I'll switch over to HP, but as it is a very significant cost/downtime outlay(to change all clients), I would appreciate everyones thought/experience in this regard.

In short: Would an n AP be much better that an 'b/g' or 'a' AP if the clients stay as they are(b/g or a, not n)?
I suppose, that can start a new thread as issues like the control channel would probably be useless and so on, but my question is if the dual-antenna n radio will better handle range/sensitivity/multipath that current APs.

Thanks for a great thread so far...
Ekkas

hello
at this moment we have configured n with two 5 ghz antennas, but bandwidth test shows no more than 50 mbps, in registration first rate`s signal strength is -54, also rate stops increase at HT20-8. as i guess that`s cos of bad signal strength.


now we are going to test with Dual polarization antennas and which antennas do you advise?

another thing is that when we test bandwidth, after about 10 sec both sides reboots, we changed os to latest version 4.0rc1 but same. routerboard is RB600

Thanks

Hello,

Here the same results that user samcarney with WLAN-0043 Poynting antennas + R52N + 411AH. I just have dismounted a 3km link because I couldn't go up that 20Mbps TCP spite that I had 177Mbps UDP in just one direction. I have got the same results in the office.

I see success links with R52N so the guilty are the Poynting antennas? Anyone has a good N link with WLAN-0043?

In the other hand, I would open discussion about interference in N. What are our weapons against interferences? In old-fashioned links We could work with autonoise immunity, CSMA, reduce channel bandwith, reduce data rates to improve stability (I havent appreciate this on N),...

Now with N are We naked in front of interferences?

Hello,

I have RB600A + R52N as home AP. If I switch the radio to 2.4 B/G mode, I can achieve actual cca. 18-20 Mbps down from speedtest.net. That is something typical with plain G.
Even then, uplink is nearly just 3 Mbps on one of the laptops, while on another one it is 5. Strange. Is it a problem on the laptop side?

Now, if I switch the radio to 2 GHz B/G/N mode, download will decrease to cca 5 Mbps on both laptops, no matter if i set laptops to work N or not...

Does anyone have any proven wireless settings for a SOHO AP using these R52N cards?

Will be 802.11n stable as Turbo mode with one antenna on each side?

Try to use first only one chain and make the test and get that link stable working at max speed. then enable extended channel support to use 2 20mhz channels and try to get the max speed.
After that try the same with the other chain.
If everthing works, you can try to enable both chains at the same time. If that fails (unstable link) it means that the dual pol. antenna has some problems - interfernece between the both chains. If you have an option - try to use seperate antennas.

Hi there!

I got this message right after I have the same situation. BUT we use separate antennas.

Distance: 22km.
AP site: 2 X 1.2m antennas with different polarization.
station site: 2 X 1.4m antennas with different polarization.

With xr5 cards (a couple both sides, bonded) we have bandwidth test such as follows (all tests made on station side):
[*] direction=transmit: 115Mbps;
[*] direction=receive: 102Mbps;
[1] direction=both: 65Mbps/50Mbps.
With this configuration link works already more than an year.

Replacing existing cards with SR71A (one each side) N-draft cards we have following tests:
[*] direction=transmit: 175Mbps;
[*] direction=receive: 143Mbps;
[2] direction=both: 2.5Mbps/2.0Mbps (terrible ah.. ).

Note that station side antennas are bigger (1.4m diameter vs. 1.2m @AP side). Therefore, there is a normal difference of 175 vs. 143Mbps of bandwidth test. BUT what's going on when testing with direction=both?

Okay, let us suppose that there is a worst link 'cause some interference or smt... Then where is that interference when we get ref. [1] (shown above).

Is it possible the only reason of that is the distance of 22km? By the way, when we test configurations at the office, we have tests listed bellow:
[*] transmit: 127Mbps;
[*] receive: 130Mbps;
[*] both: 65/65 Mbps.

I hope somebody have any idea about that.

Screenshots attached.

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban

Have you tried use fixed data-rates? Some other posts say that the automatic datarate-selection does
not work well.

Stefan

Your problem is most likely a problem of separation between the antennas. Try dual pol antennas with the same setup..

I have write in the previous post that we have tested the same with mars dual pol antennas, theresult was the same. What do you mean with "seperation between the antennas"?. Yes, we has also testet with fixed rates. Thanks for help.

AFAIK there are 2 versions of mars antennas dual pol.. one of them isn't working good because the separation between the two connectors wasn't enough and they were causing interferences...
I tested a N link with 2 separated antennas and didn't have enough isolation. Same link with Jirous Antennas works flawlessly.

What isolation in db is the minimum by dual pol antennas that the link is working?

In tiktube has anyone a video recordet that was presentet by the mum this year. In this video they hav 4 antennas, and no dual pol and the link works fine.

Sorry for my question but 2 seperate antennas with different polarization has more isolation between the polarisations as a dual pol antennas, isn't it?

Your problem is most likely a problem of separation between the antennas. Try dual pol antennas with the same setup..

tell us one reason to do that. As I told you before, we have actual link with the same antennas on 5GHz. Bonded cards xr5. Also, we use antennas with different polarization, i.e. one is vertical, another - horizontal.

Hello @ all.

We are a small wisp in Germany. Im reading for a long time here in the forum. We have problems with N, too. The same Problem as chvdr.

Our Equipment at both Sites:

RB433AH + R52N + 2*30dBi Mars Antennas Flat Pannel (No DUAL!!) but in Dual-Polarisation (1 * hor + 1 * ver).

The 2 Antennas (H + V on both Sites) are mounted in a distance of 1 meter. The Distance of the 2 Points (AP and Client) are 11 Km.

The Line is TOP.

But the Results are the same as chvdr. Receive or Send allone are no Problems and the CCQ is at 95% - 100% TX and RX. Only when Traffic is set to both, the Link is breaking down. The Results are the same as chvdr. The CCQ is then at 3% - 4% TX and RX. We have all the settings tested but there is no better. I don't understand what the problem is becaus another user here in the forum have stable links with same hardware! We have the same Line with dual-Antennas tested but the same results with the others.

Are there any Mounting-defaults on the sites between the antennas?

Thanks for help.....

joban

Have you tried use fixed data-rates? Some other posts say that the automatic datarate-selection does
not work well.

Stefan

Yes, we does.

But I think that we can work with data-rates=default, because our signal strength is -52 - -55dBm. Anyway, we fix it. As best result given in one direction or another.

At least, same result, poor both-sides-bandwidth-test, 2-3Mbps each site.

AFAIK there are 2 versions of mars antennas dual pol.. one of them isn't working good because the separation between the two connectors wasn't enough and they were causing interferences...
I tested a N link with 2 separated antennas and didn't have enough isolation. Same link with Jirous Antennas works flawlessly.

what isolation could it be in two separate 140cm diameter dishes?

You know, i'm not an expert technician, i'm just explaining my own experience that might be misunderstood itself...
I think if you manage to have 2 separated antennas with the same and perfect direction (same degrees of H and V) on both side, you should have a good result..
This is almost impossible to do on long links and even the two local antennas might have a different degree of direction.
This might end on overlapping links. Two separated links don't suffer it too much (see your bonded links) but it has some problems on 802.11n.
Once again i repeat this isn't the TRUTH, but only my thoughts based on my own experience.

Hi

We are trying a 16km with two R52N cards and Dual Pol Italian EMCTest (29dBi), signal is -65
and we have the same problems that chvdr is having.

CCQ is okay (80-100%) but when running a bw test, all rates goes to 6mbps/6mbps and the link goes down due to excessive retries.

We tried 2 R52N each side to simulate a full duplex like showed in the MUM to use 2 channels that does not interfere between them, but the result was the same.

I think i'll try one single chain with a single antenna at each side to see if i get any better result.

Does anyone have any clue about this problem?

Sorry for my bad english

Thanks

Sorry for my question but 2 seperate antennas with different polarization has more isolation between the polarisations as a dual pol antennas, isn't it?

I don't understand this..... has anyqone a answer to this question?

yep

802.11n ? funny...

Hello,
i got problem with TCP performance on 802.11n.
My configuration is: 2xRB411H + R52n. I tried all possible connections, WDS was not working good.
Now i got configuration station-bridge. Config:
0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:61:04:9A arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
radio-name="000C4261049A" mode=ap-bridge ssid="sgc" area="" frequency-mode=manual-txpower country=no_country_set
antenna-gain=0 frequency=5180 band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=default rate-set=configured supported-rates-b=""
supported-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" basic-rates-a/g="" max-station-count=2007 ack-timeout=dynamic tx-power-mode=default
periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none antenna-mode=ant-a wds-mode=disabled
wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-ignore-ssid=no update-stats-interval=disabled
default-authentication=yes default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=enabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=default disconnect-timeout=3s
on-fail-retry-time=100ms preamble-mode=short compression=no allow-sharedkey=no station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=any ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 ht-txchains=0,1 ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=15 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled
hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0

0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0C:42:61:04:DD arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
radio-name="000C426104DD" mode=station ssid="sgc" area="" frequency-mode=manual-txpower country=no_country_set
antenna-gain=0 frequency=5180 band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=default rate-set=configured supported-rates-b=""
supported-rates-a/g="" basic-rates-b="" basic-rates-a/g="" max-station-count=2007 ack-timeout=dynamic tx-power-mode=default
periodic-calibration=default periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none antenna-mode=ant-a wds-mode=disabled
wds-default-bridge=none wds-default-cost=100 wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-ignore-ssid=no update-stats-interval=disabled
default-authentication=yes default-forwarding=yes default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=enabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=default disconnect-timeout=3s
on-fail-retry-time=100ms preamble-mode=short compression=no allow-sharedkey=no station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=any ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-14,mcs-15 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0 ht-txchains=0,1 ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=15 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled
hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0

With EoIP UDP result was around 90Mbps each direction. With MPLS/VPLS its about 190Mbps in each direction. Interfaces are connected
at 270.0Mbps-HT/270.0Mbps-HT. But when i try TCP bandwidth test, result is only 27-30Mbps in both direction. I tried with nstream/ without,
also i tried real connection between 2 laptops and with same result. OS version is 4.0rc1. Have any help or advice what to do, why TCP
connection is so slow? Thanks

airborne

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know

Regards,
Steven

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know

Regards,
Steven

It can be done. Look at expensive equipment like Orthogon (now Moto). They can
do MIMO for a long time now. I think it's a matter of quality of all components
(card, pigtail, antenna, isolation, software) and to find the best combination of them.
As this is not our job, we're spending our money for licensed backhaul equipment for
the moment until MT presents a working solution.

Stefan

... make you wonder - what kind of reference OS/system Atheros uses?
AtherOS + Atherboard

... make you wonder - what kind of reference OS/system Atheros uses?
AtherOS + Atherboard

check this out:
http://www.wi-fi.org/search_products.ph ... s%5B%5D=41

Regards,

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know

Regards,
Steven

iam testing whole solution indoor. i saw here in forum that other people have better results with TCP connection,
so i guess that it must be something bad configured or wrong OS version. but iam out of ideas

airborne

I've just setup an N link, 11.5km

Site A: 411AH + R52N + http://www.mars-antennas.com/item/g_ant ... _1-44.html (MA-WA56-DP25N)

Site B: 411AH + R52N + http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=22099

both sites are pretty busy with RF, and I don't know all frequencies (ie other operators!) so it's a guessing game to find a channel. Clear LOS.

As for the settings, I've pretty much winged it .. click a few buttons, not really knowing why, and now it's running and I hope it doesn't fall over ...

nstream, WDS, callibration off, HT extension below channel

Everything is pretty much default, the most confusing thing for me is which HT supported and HT basic settings to set!! If someone could explain this a little more to me?

Also, I do suffer from not R'ing TFM, so if there's a good "if you want to setup an 802.11n link, read this first" document/site anywhere, let me know also.

Performance:-

thruput (I've an RB1000 connected to site A, and a RB493 at site B)

I get 25 Mbps FD tcp, and 30Mbps FD udp ... which I'm happy enough with for now.

settings:-

/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=26 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=0 default-forwarding=yes \
dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5320 frequency-mode=manual-txpower hide-ssid=no \
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:B9 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACDB9 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 \
wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-\
1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none



/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=23 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=0 default-forwarding=yes \
dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5320 frequency-mode=manual-txpower hide-ssid=no \
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:06 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=station-wds mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACD06 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=\
bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-\
1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none

Hello Normis .
I test 4 link with 802.11n , with RB/600A ,R52N , 30dBi parabolic .
On all of them when run BTest , the bandwidth are 115~149 Mbps depend on distance , but this is not my problem .
when I send file from windows computer to another windows computer the traffic rate in WLAN interface show me MAX 57 Mbps and cpu usage is 60%~70% .
I set these four link (Bridge-Station) and set route , (Bridge-Station) and set Eoip-T and Bridge with Ether1 , (Bridge-Station-wds) and Bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 and Nstreme is enable .
When I set Bridge-Station-wds and bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 I get the best result on my link but this best result only allow me to send data on tow computer only 57 Mbps .
I can get picture and send it for you .

I've just setup an N link, 11.5km

Site A: 411AH + R52N + http://www.mars-antennas.com/item/g_ant ... _1-44.html (MA-WA56-DP25N)

Site B: 411AH + R52N + http://www.l-com.com/item.aspx?id=22099

both sites are pretty busy with RF, and I don't know all frequencies (ie other operators!) so it's a guessing game to find a channel. Clear LOS.

As for the settings, I've pretty much winged it .. click a few buttons, not really knowing why, and now it's running and I hope it doesn't fall over ...

nstream, WDS, callibration off, HT extension below channel

Everything is pretty much default, the most confusing thing for me is which HT supported and HT basic settings to set!! If someone could explain this a little more to me?

Also, I do suffer from not R'ing TFM, so if there's a good "if you want to setup an 802.11n link, read this first" document/site anywhere, let me know also.

Performance:-

thruput (I've an RB1000 connected to site A, and a RB493 at site B)

I get 25 Mbps FD tcp, and 30Mbps FD udp ... which I'm happy enough with for now.

settings:-

/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=26 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=0 default-forwarding=yes \
dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5320 frequency-mode=manual-txpower hide-ssid=no \
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:B9 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=ap-bridge mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACDB9 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 \
wds-default-bridge=bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-\
1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none



/interface wireless
set 0 ack-timeout=dynamic adaptive-noise-immunity=none allow-sharedkey=no antenna-gain=23 antenna-mode=ant-a area="" arp=enabled band=5ghz-onlyn basic-rates-a/g="" \
basic-rates-b=1Mbps comment="" compression=no country=ireland default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-authentication=yes default-client-tx-limit=0 default-forwarding=yes \
dfs-mode=none disable-running-check=no disabled=no disconnect-timeout=3s frame-lifetime=0 frequency=5320 frequency-mode=manual-txpower hide-ssid=no \
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-amsdu-limit=8192 ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 \
ht-extension-channel=below-control ht-guard-interval=any ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14 ht-txchains=\
0,1 hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0 hw-retries=4 l2mtu=2290 mac-address=00:0C:42:3A:CD:06 max-station-count=\
2007 mode=station-wds mtu=1500 name=wlan1 on-fail-retry-time=100ms periodic-calibration=disabled periodic-calibration-interval=60 preamble-mode=both \
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 radio-name=000C423ACD06 rate-set=configured scan-list=default security-profile=default ssid=mik-new-n station-bridge-clone-mac=\
00:00:00:00:00:00 supported-rates-a/g="" supported-rates-b=1Mbps tx-power-mode=default update-stats-interval=disabled wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-default-bridge=\
bridge1 wds-default-cost=100 wds-ignore-ssid=no wds-mode=dynamic wmm-support=disabled
/interface wireless manual-tx-power-table
set wlan1 comment="" manual-tx-powers="1Mbps:17,2Mbps:17,5.5Mbps:17,11Mbps:17,6Mbps:17,9Mbps:17,12Mbps:17,18Mbps:17,24Mbps:17,36Mbps:17,48Mbps:17,54Mbps:17,HT20-0:0,HT20-\
1:0,HT20-2:0,HT20-3:0,HT20-4:0,HT20-5:0,HT20-6:0,HT20-7:0,HT40-0:0,HT40-1:0,HT40-2:0,HT40-3:0,HT40-4:0,HT40-5:0,HT40-6:0,HT40-7:0"
/interface wireless nstreme
set wlan1 comment="" disable-csma=no enable-nstreme=yes enable-polling=yes framer-limit=3200 framer-policy=none

I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven

Hello Normis .
I test 4 link with 802.11n , with RB/600A ,R52N , 30dBi parabolic .
On all of them when run BTest , the bandwidth are 115~149 Mbps depend on distance , but this is not my problem .
when I send file from windows computer to another windows computer the traffic rate in WLAN interface show me MAX 57 Mbps and cpu usage is 60%~70% .
I set these four link (Bridge-Station) and set route , (Bridge-Station) and set Eoip-T and Bridge with Ether1 , (Bridge-Station-wds) and Bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 and Nstreme is enable .
When I set Bridge-Station-wds and bridge Ether1 with Wlan1 I get the best result on my link but this best result only allow me to send data on tow computer only 57 Mbps .
I can get picture and send it for you .

your problem in windows mate
stop clickin'... start typing...
linuzzzz rocks

steven

Hello,

There is a config: pc--RB600A/R52N----RB600A/r52N--pc
ROS is 4.0rc1 on both boards.
The link is "perfect" stable (tx/rx rate 270/270Mbps, CCQ 95-100%).
BTest results: one direction 208Mbps UDP, both 153/148Mbps UDP, 144MBps TCP and both 87/72Mbps TCP. Its seems good but i tested iperf, result 30-37Mbps one direction and 24/28Mbps both direction. After that I tried copy a file between the pc-s but result was 22Mbps. What's wrong????

Gabor

gabris, look at the CPU load. It is near 100%?

I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven

Steven,

I agree that an nstream2 link would be as good ... in fact it would be better, as I would know more about it and what to do if something goes wrong.

my problem is I don't know enough about 802.11n .. and what the options/settings mean. Are other people's optimum settings reached by trial and error? Is there a reason for choosing MCS-0, MCS-4 and MCS-15 (for example)? Does disabling periodic calibration always stop periodic disconnects? I understand that this is all test software .. I suppose I'm looking for more information ...

E

CPU load was 15-25% if i tested pc to pc.

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.

Good to know.. but you answered only at my first question..

Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

... that is worth an upgrade for our links, that is

I have a Nstreme Dual Link on 5G with 28dBi panel antennas, XR5 and RB433AH at 27 Km doing the same as your N setup.
you can use bonding and achieve more.
So: what is the point of N? - all right you use a card instead of two so you save 50 bucks

N is advertised as we should be worry about ether ports of our boards not being able to sustain the wireless traffic...

Steven

Steven,

I agree that an nstream2 link would be as good ... in fact it would be better, as I would know more about it and what to do if something goes wrong.

my problem is I don't know enough about 802.11n .. and what the options/settings mean. Are other people's optimum settings reached by trial and error? Is there a reason for choosing MCS-0, MCS-4 and MCS-15 (for example)? Does disabling periodic calibration always stop periodic disconnects? I understand that this is all test software .. I suppose I'm looking for more information ...

E

I understand your problem mate but none of us knew it all from the beginning, we all learned as the technology evolved.
There are manuals and white pages out there I suggest you start reading them.
We all learned the hard way, no one will put their knowledge on a plate for you but people will answer your questions on forums.... depending how you ask them.
Remember, before asking a question... read the manual

good luck,

Steven

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.

I think this is laughable. N was the major feature for 4.0. Couldn't be in 3... Had to upgrade licenses to it. ( And thank you for making that no cost). But as we all are learning N interference has made it mostly unsuitable for populated areas without Nstream to combat it and Nstream for N is not being recommended. So 4.0 is a non-product in the wireless world. 4.0 should not have become a release candidate without a working Nstream and certainly not released as a "Product".... Have fun at all the user meetings, because they should have been delayed for your getting Nstream working...

Does seem very odd. I'm trying to understand why 4.0 would be released without the crown jewel (Nstream) working properly in N.

I can only guess there is addtional new hardware coming that needs 4.0 and MT didn't want to release on RC firmware...

George

Does seem very odd. I'm trying to understand why 4.0 would be released without the crown jewel (Nstream) working properly in N.

I can only guess there is addtional new hardware coming that needs 4.0 and MT didn't want to release on RC firmware...

George

I'll bet you are correct...

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.

I think this is laughable. N was the major feature for 4.0. Couldn't be in 3... Had to upgrade licenses to it. ( And thank you for making that no cost). But as we all are learning N interference has made it mostly unsuitable for populated areas without Nstream to combat it and Nstream for N is not being recommended. So 4.0 is a non-product in the wireless world. 4.0 should not have become a release candidate without a working Nstream and certainly not released as a "Product".... Have fun at all the user meetings, because they should have been delayed for your getting Nstream working...

Even at the thought of that delay (working N, nstreme whatever), many $ for companies that can sell high quality licensed equipment. E. g. NERA... Motorola...

IT IS A WAR, GUYS, IT IS A WAR... A war where nobody cares about us. Of course, I'm not sure, but this companies CAN PAY nstream to be delayed.

I hope so much all I told above is a "blether" (footle, bulshits...). Am I?

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

N without Nstream to defeat interference is slower that a/g.... Not much of a product...

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

N without Nstream to defeat interference is slower that a/g.... Not much of a product...

haha well maybe not in your case, but not everyone has this problem.

we are testing N in a 15.6km link with Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes,
signal is at -68/-70 noise is at -115

We are unable to run the link stable and to pass a decent traffic.

The better modulation it can get is 58-HT, but not able to pass more then 25mbps full duplex. And Also at zero traffic the ping is very erratic.
With just 5mbps of real traffic we have 20-50ms jitter.

very sad to not use turbo on r52n, so we cant be back to the old config..............

regards
Ros

Does WDS work on ROS4.0 and 802.11n? If not, it will in a future release?

Hi!

We are a WLAN-Provider and testing 802.11n in realtime production. We are use dual-polarization Antennas and 433AH and R52n ...

We have now 3 Point-To-Point Connections in work. The tested throughput is about 115 MBps on a distance of 7 km. The realtime throughput on production is now about 50 Mbit without problems and latency is peaked to 50 ms....

The only Problem was: 2 R52n cards in one 433Ah didn't work (too much interference, no throughput ...), so put the cards in 2 433 AH's and it works fine.

Now we tested on Outdoor AP's on a mixed environment a/n for higher througput to the customers ....

The rate is much higher about 3 times with just 802.11n AP and client with one omni-Antenna... So it sounds good and cheap to change it for out customers ...

But for high stability we limited the datarates to 6,9,12 MBps on the AP. If we use a/n - Mode and Limit the DataRates no 802.11a Client will connect and 2nd problem is: With only a the CCQ is Tx 90%/Rx 80%. On mixed mode after a few minutes the CCQ is to same Client 75%/30% and no throughput. The signal is with -65 dbm very fine. Some Clients works fine. I tested several frequenzy etc. For The AP we are using RB600A with two R52n und 2 R52 a and b mode.

It seems that the R52n has an interference on other R52n on the same board .....

Has anybody tested this sitoution ....

Greetings from Austria
Dietmar

Hi all,

this is only for your information
after running a 6 km link in a country side with acceptable bandwidth we tried to establish an 802.11n 2 km-link at the city location as high speed last mile solution.

The result is: Unusable. We are not able to get a stable result. The RX levels and the signal quality was very good. I think there is to much interference ...

Hi there,
I have one suggestion to MT: add the option "short" to ht-guard-interval (currently only "any" and "long" can be set), as "any" switches between 400ns and 800ns, "long"=800ns, and I want to set 400ns i.e. "short"

RouterOS 4.1 !!

RouterOS 4.1 !!

Changelog mentions nothing about N

Hi all,

this is only for your information
after running a 6 km link in a country side with acceptable bandwidth we tried to establish an 802.11n 2 km-link at the city location as high speed last mile solution.

The result is: Unusable. We are not able to get a stable result. The RX levels and the signal quality was very good. I think there is to much interference ...

Hi Complete,

Probably You not made proper settings. N works fine at distances lower than 10km. Believe me. When distance up to 20-25km there is a interference result because nstreme works unstable. Or not works at all. I don't know.

If not, contact support. Better share your wireless conf with us first. But after read forum about n-draft configs.

Oh, I forgot. With dist. of several kilometers I usually do configs on a table in our office taking two routers here. And when they migrate in a real nature - they works fine. Attn.: in short distances only.

RouterOS 4.1 !!

Changelog mentions nothing about N

Completing n-draft by MikroTik SIA will be a break news in latest news on any tv... So waiting for that you should not reading this forum, just watching tv. Time by time...


Peace all,
C.G.

Hi Guys!

I am in need of some help.

I have previously setup a test link with a 2 x R52 Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards with a TCP throughput of 70mb/s TCP with FTP file transfer between 2 laptops. I recently received 2 x R52N card and was very exited about the the possible thoughput.

I have setup a link using 2 x dipoles, 2 x R52N Wireless cards and 2 x 433AH Routerboards. After some testing i got the link throughput upto 63mb/s TCP using the onboard bandwith test. The CPU was running at 100% so i then moved to a FTP file transfer between 2 Laptops.

The results fluctuated between 20mb/s and 33mb/s. Could anyone shed some light on possible problem?

I have checked that antivirus and firewall are turned off.

Cheers

With reference to my last post i have tried this through PC-PC and still only 35mb/s. I have tried using only one chain and still the throughput is only 35mb/s. It appears that the second chain may not be being used.

Also can someone tell me for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x RB52N cards?

no, you can use 11b cards...

no, you can use 11b cards...

joke?

no, you can use 11b cards...

joke?

Also can someone tell me for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x RB52N cards?

Let me re-phrase that:

"for 300mb/s do you have to be using 2 x R52N cards each side of the wireless link? for example RB600 + 2 x R52N ---> RB600 + 2 x R52N"

Constructive comments ONLY please!

Hello. I'm new here, but I'd like to start with 802.11n test results that I've achieved.

These are kitchen tests only but for now I don't have time for real-life tests. Maybe next week.

Equipment:

Base:
2x 14dBi 5GHz panel antenna plus 3m CNT-240 cable (one for V and one for H pol.)
1x RB 411AR(!) + R52n

Client:

2x 14dBi 5GHz panel antenna plus 3m CNT-240 cable (one for V and one for H pol.)
1x RB 411AR(!) + R52n

I've been using ROS 4.0rc1 and 4.1 to test.

Results (PC-PC)


Half duplex TCP!




NStreme enabled. Without NStreme it's roughly 11mbps.
Plus with only one antenna (chain) on each side it's 80+mbps half duplex TCP.

Why isn't it working well with Nstreme disabled?
Greetings.
sq6

24km+rb600+r52n

But I can see big differences with and without.
More bandwidth, more stability... just like a 802.11a link.

RB411AH has 100mbit fdx ethernet..... how possible >180 mbit/s in UDP ????

Where do you see ethernet involved in this test???

On b-test everything is ok , but how about real customer traffic over 802.11n?
I have 4km link and RB600+r52n+two 23dBi flat panel on each side

aaa, this just means that users are not downloading anything.

Torch running on AP side. Monitor wlan interface running Station side.

Torch running on AP side. Monitor wlan interface running Station side.

so what? user not downloading anything. tell them all to run torrents at max speed then check

I mean user 192.168.1.182 download P2P traffic over 802.11n wireless at 47mbit speed.Total link consumption floating from 60-70mbit at max. load time.

This is one side installation photo

For point-to-point 802.11n, we'd like to start migrating some links over from 802.11a. I want to be sure I know what works now and what doesn't.

1. Nstreme - Does this work, or not at all? I'm seeing various responses here such as "not recommended," "works at short distances."

2. Link distance - Assuming we don't use Nstreme, is there a maximum link distance we are capped at? Again, if nstreme does work at short distances, what distance are we talking about?

3. WDS - Does it work, or not? Does it cause a performance hit? We need to be able to pass vlans over 433AH's, so we can't use the MPLS method (not enough MTU room).

4. Other recommended settings that are going to be different from the defaults or 802.11a settings?

5. Is 5 GHz 10 / 5 GHz 5mhz using 802.11a or n?

Thanks!

Randy

in my tests:
nstreme did work only on one chain (antenna) - on 2 chains it disconnected frequently

wds did work.

greetings

we are testing N in a 15.6km link with Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes,
signal is at -68/-70 noise is at -115

We are unable to run the link stable and to pass a decent traffic.

The better modulation it can get is 58-HT, but not able to pass more then 25mbps full duplex. And Also at zero traffic the ping is very erratic.
With just 5mbps of real traffic we have 20-50ms jitter.

very sad to not use turbo on r52n, so we cant be back to the old config..............

regards
Ros

We also have the same setup but only 10.5km link and have tried Dual Pol Jirous 24Db dishes and also Dual Pol Jirous 29Db dishes. I am using RB433AH and R52N Card.

I have managed to tweek it (with great difficulty) to a signal level of -69db and can get approx 101Mb TX and 80Mb RX UDP. The link is unstable though as both direction traffic will only peak at 5Mb or less. I have found that wireless encryption (TKIP) causes alot of speed decrease too. AES is working fine. I am not using WDS but am routing with OSPF.

I am using pretty much factory default settings (default power etc) in the wireless config.

3. WDS - Does it work, or not? Does it cause a performance hit? We need to be able to pass vlans over 433AH's, so we can't use the MPLS method (not enough MTU room).

The VPLS Method is establish between the two wlan of the 433AH's and doesn't passthrough the ethernets.. so i don't see your MTU problem..

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...

We do that (replacing a with n-draft. one chain. ). Terrible results. Don't wasting your time.

Is anyone try to replace 5Ghz turbo link with 802.11n link using only one chain, antenna ?

Can I get more bandwidth simple replacing miniPCI card ?

Good 5Ghz turbo nstreme link in bandwidth test get 75Mbit in one way UDP test, can be faster only replacing miniPCI card ?

Thanks...

I agree too it would not be a good move..

IMHO, I would not replace the card to R52N if you can only use 1 chain. 802.11N or MIMO technology actually takes advantage of multipath to increase throughput as well as range. So one antenna will prohibit you from engaging the full potential. Your system will effectively behave like an 802.11a system and because Nstream and Turbo is not available you will not get better performance. Also don't forget that R52N cards are ufl and not mmcx so you may have to replace a pigtail too.

Thanks all for answer.

I think maybe using one chain can get little more bandwidth compare to 5Ghz turbo nstreme. Add one more antenna is little complicated need more space, stronger tower more cables is not option for now on that place. Also dual polarity antenna is usually solid parabolic antenna need stronger tower sometime time wind is very strong.
May be tested on some other place.

One more thanks to all.

What antennas have people had success with? I know there have been mention of Mars and a couple others who make dual pol. Any specs would be helpful.

-Z

802.11N or MIMO technology actually takes advantage of multipath to increase throughput as well as range. So one antenna will prohibit you from engaging the full potential. Your system will effectively behave like an 802.11a system...

This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.

This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.

theorytically true. but have you ever seen that...

hi fly
I have installed the p2p link but I can't not getting tx/rx rate more than 65 MBit
Can you help me out with your configuration . Because I'm new on N so if you can give me any advise how should I use HT and HT MCS .

thx
Selim

hi fly
I have installed the p2p link but I can't not getting tx/rx rate more than 65 MBit
Can you help me out with your configuration . Because I'm new on N so if you can give me any advise how should I use HT and HT MCS .

thx
Selim

Hi Fly,

who actually is fly?

This is not completely true - 11n has other advantages besides multipath - the most important being frame aggregation and block acknowledgement (used even if you have one chain), which ensures more efficent use of medium, therefore, provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates, throughput will increase, even in 20MHz channel.

theorytically true. but have you ever seen that...

The key phrase is provided that link quality allows the use of 11n rates. Possible in PtP but highly unlikely in MtP...

Let's just admit: N is good on a test bench but when we take it outside we all have problems.
I switched from MKTK to UBNT and back playing with all kind of N h-ware and antennas; doesn't work as reliable as advertised... not just yet in outdoor. Manny days spent to run tests, climbing towers and replacing h-ware.
Indoor - works just peachy.

Shame... 7 years of struggling for the standard to be ratified by the Wireless Alliance from which 2 years of N draft 2.0.
Transmission on up to 3 streams supporting up to 450mbps, packet aggregation (the famous A-MPDU), block coding (STBC) - they all look good on paper but not on real life.

I am frustrated. I think N sucks, in the end; I'll probably change my opinion in a month or probably 12, never know

Regards,
Steven

It might be usable at about 4.30

4.0 is out!!
Did you fix nstreme on 802.11n?
Did you make any change on 802.11n at all?

You should run Nstreme with 802.11abg protocols, with 802.11n currently it's not recommended to use Nstreme. We are working on an entirely new Nstreme version, but it's not implemented in v4, because it's not made yet.

If it doesn't work, why is v4 in a stable release? N-Streme is a staple of the MT wireless system and you say it's completely worthless in v4 for N.

MT needs to take the first 15 - 20 "stable" releases they do and put them in beta and RC stages. It's completely opposite to have 6 testing releases and 30 - 50 stable releases.

*sigh* I've been using MT for several years, but UBNT's AirMax is looking more and more attractive as MT continues to fumble N-Streme.

I don't see how anything has changed? In v3 you didn't have 802.11n, all you had is 802.11abg with Nstreme. You still have the same in v4, only you have turbo-less 802.11n in addition to that.

Polling type operation is required to deliver quality, consistent service when there are dozens of CPE with high usage levels.

We tested with ..

1) Site distance: 6.5Km
2) LOS: Clear LOS
3) Antenna Site A: 23dbi patch panel & 26dbi solid parabolic
4) Antenna Site B: 23dbi patch panel & 26dbi solid parabolic

When we test, we found running on 2 chain, the signal is no so good, and if use only 1 chain, we have to physical dismantle one of the antenna (no-use) on edh end), if not, it will cause the bad signal sensitivity (Suprised~!)

After that, we dismantled both end 23dbi flat panel antenna and running only 1 chain on the 26dbi solid parabolic antenna.

We are getting 90Mbps with good latency on bandwidth test, but it only good on 1 way traffic test, if with both direction, aih~! the result is very very bad.

To make sure our finding is truth, we try to connect PC end to end (behind the MT), and we getting what same result.

And feedback from MT, they knew this issue form our feedback, i going to setup another link with...

1) Site distance: 9.8Km
2) LOS: Clear LOS
3) Antenna Site A: 32dbi wide band solid parabolic x 2
4) Antenna Site A: 32dbi wide band solid parabolic x 2
5) RB433AH x 2 units
6) R52N x 2 units

This is for them to remote access and help all of us find out, what is the root cause of it.

Hope ... Hope...

We have a few N links out there. With 4.1, the link will drop from time to time, not disconnect (still showing in the registration table), but the station will transmit at 6.5Mbit/s and no data will pass, a few seconds later the link will come back up to 130Mbit/s and everything is fine again. These drops create 5% packet loss.

If the link is being used (60kbit/s traffic+) the link does not drop ever. A few simple pings across the link is not enough for the link to be stable. All frequencies show the same symptoms. Enabling nstreme or various other settings does not affect this issue. only way to get it stable is to move more than 60kbit/s across at all times.

Signal is -47/-48 locked at 130/130. I have tried dropping the TX on both sides, that does not fix the issue either.

I noticed that the ap shows WMM Enabled under the registration, even though it is disabled.

Ideas?

Martin Madsen
Bel Air Internet

4.2 is much better regarding ping/latency at high bandwidth and stability on 802.11n links. Great work!

4.2 is much better regarding ping/latency at high bandwidth and stability on 802.11n links. Great work!

What version were you using before ?
What distance is your link ?
What antenna are you using ?
What levels or ccq did you have v's what you have now ?

I don't see anything in the change log relating to N latency improvements.

What's new in 4.2:

*) fixed problem - RB450G ethernet did not work if one of the ports was disabled;
*) fixed ethernet of RB433 with switch chip IP175D;
*) fixed route attribute problem;
*) fixed route next-hops falling under multiple connected routes;

please explain more ..

Hi All!

I need help!

I used Turbo Nstreme2, p2p link, distance 4,5km, and works fine. Bandwidth 50/10Mbit live traffic, ping 1-10ms max.
I will need a bigger bandwidth because of this I changed the link it for a N link.
Now the ping time is high and packet loss.
Detail:

x86 system, r52n, antenna dual jirous 24db
Distance 4,5km
Tx signal strengh -65
TX/RX CCQ 70-90%
AMPDU all
Chain 0,1


bandwidth test (TCP/IP) : half: 100Mbit, full: 50/50mbit ping 200-300ms

in live download the bandwidth max 25-30mbit the ping time is 40-50 ms.

Why? Ideas?

ps: sorry my english

Hi All!

I need help!

I used Turbo Nstreme2, p2p link, distance 4,5km, and works fine. Bandwidth 50/10Mbit live traffic, ping 1-10ms max.
I will need a bigger bandwidth because of this I changed the link it for a N link.
Now the ping time is high and packet loss.
Detail:

x86 system, r52n, antenna dual jirous 24db
Distance 4,5km
Tx signal strengh -65
TX/RX CCQ 70-90%
AMPDU all
Chain 0,1


bandwidth test (TCP/IP) : half: 100Mbit, full: 50/50mbit ping 200-300ms

in live download the bandwidth max 25-30mbit the ping time is 40-50 ms.

Why? Ideas?

ps: sorry my english

We all have same problem.

Same problem here.
I have a 18km link with 70m height, 35dbi 1.2 dish antennas on both sides with dual-polarity feeds. r52n. x86 p4@1.5ghz, cpu load ~25%, no irq conflicts, using rb14.
The link works only from time to time. I have a lot of "extensive data loss" and "not polled for too long" in the logs.
The signal is in 50-60 range, and on exactly the same setup a link with cm9-s can push 75mbit one way with nstreme2, straight and stable. With n the speed is either 2mbit/s, either 14mbit, either 56-70mbit, but it's not stable at all.
Does it need signal levels in the -40 range to work stable or what? Can the rb14 be a problem?
Any hints?
Are there known problems with the implementation that you are working on? Should i wait for an update or put the cm9-s back until we have a 4.20? Given the signal levels i was hoping for a 100mbit link, but it's even worse than nstreme1. At least that's rock solid.

Hi Guys,

I have a 9km Link. See signal levels in graphics below.
I have been testing with Max UDP traffic from the Client end to the AP for 36 Hours. (see graphic). Traffic is Wireless Interface to Wireless Interface and CPU levels do not exceed 40% at any time.
I have spent ages aligning the antenna and the frequency being used are clear on both sides of the link.

1.) I am using Jirous 29Dbi dual pol antenna on both sides.
2.) I am using RB433AH and R52N ROS 4.1 and 2 x .5 meter LMR400 on both sides.
3.) I have clear LOS between AP and ST
4.) I have completed a frequency scan at both sides and am using clear channels.
5.) I have tried other channels and the results are similar if not worse.
6.) Bandwidth Testing set to "both ways", I can only achieve approx 5MbTX and 2MbRX
7.) Ntream is turned off
8.) Power and Rates are set to default
9.) WDS is turned off
10.) both chains are in use
11.) ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7

Question 1: Why is the TX throughput much better than the RX throughput ?

Question 2: What observations can be made about the results ?

Question 3: Why are the ping times very high ~500ms (max RX @ 22Mb-1) and only ~50ms (max TX @ 176Mb-1)

Question 4: What would cause non symetrical results like this ?

Quastion 5: Any obversations or comments about this setup is much appreciated and welcome..

This is my wireless config:

0 R name="wlan1" mtu=1500 arp=enabled disable-running-check=no interface-type=Atheros 11N
mode=station ssid="ST" area="" frequency-mode=superchannel
country=no_country_set antenna-gain=0 frequency=5460 band=5ghz-onlyn scan-list=5400-5500 rate-set=default
supported-rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps
supported-rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps basic-rates-b=1Mbps basic-rates-a/g=6Mbps
max-station-count=2007 ack-timeout=dynamic tx-power-mode=default periodic-calibration=default
periodic-calibration-interval=60 dfs-mode=none antenna-mode=ant-a wds-mode=disabled wds-default-bridge=none
wds-default-cost=100 wds-cost-range=50-150 wds-ignore-ssid=no update-stats-interval=disabled
default-authentication=yes default-forwarding=no default-ap-tx-limit=0 default-client-tx-limit=0
proprietary-extensions=post-2.9.25 wmm-support=disabled hide-ssid=no security-profile=profile1
disconnect-timeout=3s on-fail-retry-time=100ms preamble-mode=both compression=no allow-sharedkey=no
station-bridge-clone-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ht-guard-interval=any
ht-extension-channel=above-control
ht-supported-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7,mcs-8,mcs-9,mcs-10,mcs-11,mcs-12,mcs-13,mcs-14,mcs-
15
ht-basic-mcs=mcs-0,mcs-1,mcs-2,mcs-3,mcs-4,mcs-5,mcs-6,mcs-7 ht-txchains=0,1 ht-rxchains=0,1 ht-amsdu-limit=8192
ht-amsdu-threshold=8192 hw-retries=4 frame-lifetime=0 adaptive-noise-immunity=none
hw-fragmentation-threshold=disabled hw-protection-mode=none hw-protection-threshold=0

I have worked out the following Link Margin Calculations:

5.4Ghz @ 9.0Km

Figures from the R52N Card Specifications

Transmit power: 13dBm @ 5GHz (802.11n) 13dB @ MCS7 40MHz
RX sensitivity: -75dBm @ 5GHz (802.11n) -75/-73dBm @ MCS7 40MHz
Pigtail: 0.6 dB
Connector 1: 0.5 dB
Cable: 0.71 dB/m
Cable length: 1 Meters
Connector 2: 0.5 dB
Antenna: 28 dBi

Result:

Link Margin: 13.2dB
Therefore I should see a "theoretical" signal level of -61.8dB

In reality, I am getting the correct signal level on the TX of -60.0dB (very close to predicted) but on the RX I am only getting -66.0dB and this leaves a Link Margin of only 9db and this would prove to be unreliable.

Many thanks for any constructive comments or suggestions to make this link work better.

You have RF interference in RX site. I have 243.0Mbps-HT in both direction with b-test on one or other direction. Regarding both direction problem there is some standard mismatch. I consider go to full duplex system.

is the MT support Nstreme Dual on the 11n?

I don't know. I just want make two AP and two station, use 5180 and 5800 freq. and 4 antennas on each side. Set for example 10.10.10.0/24 network for one link and 10.10.11.0/24 for other and separate data flow with gateway. And then reduce antenna count using 5GHz duplexer. In that way I hope I can get 150mbit+150mbit wireless connection.

How long we must wait for working NSTREME ? for 802.11N 2x ?

How long we must wait for working NSTREME ? for 802.11N 2x ?

1-3 months

officially?

I'm out.
I wasted enough time on making it work on a live enviorment but even in a short link with a good initial signal.. during a rainy day the rates drop drastically. I'm replacing them with a dual nstreme link.
I'll be back on 802.11n as soon as it becomes a viable solution, but most of all, a stable link.

me too.
However, one thing is strange. I put two NS M5 on the same places and guess what? They work flawless, connected at 216mbps. One of them is without a dish, and the other is strapped with a wire over the feed of the 1.5m dish used to test r52n.
Maybe the tx-power can be an issue? I saw that the nano-stations have plenty of it. However, they don't have as much cpu power as a 1.5ghz p4, so they can't get that much bandwidth through the link.

Bottomline, i am waiting for a bunch of sr71-15 and for nstreme2 using N cards. Until that... back to ns m5 and nstreme2 classic.

Hi, All
I have a some problems with link on the R52N card. Please, If we have a solutions to these problems help me please.
Link description.
-RouterOS 4.2 L4
-Distance 22 km, 2.4 GHz
-side A RB600 with R52N card, antenna prime focus 1.5m
-side B PC with IA/MP1 and R52N card, antenna 1.2m offset
Problems:
1. I have the Signal Strength -59dBm, but TX/RX CCQ very low 20%/80% and sometimes link loss fully, bandwidth test show me up to 20 Mbits/s very unstable.
2. While I configure devices in wireless settings lost possibility change band to 5 GHz, I don't know as possible it. When I reset configuration this options come back.
P.S. When I testing NStream off/on but result was absent.
I understand that my problems with low CCQ but I don't understand when I return wireless card D-Link DWA-520 I have a CCQ 90%/100% and my link now working (with D-link card ) in Turbo mode and bandwidth test show me about 60Mbits/s stable

KillerOPS, are you saying that you setup two NS M5 links to the same location, put them in Bridge mode, connected them via Ethernet to MT routers, bonded them together and got 216mbps throughput? If so, is this 216mbps in one direction, or 100+ in both directions? Is this true real-life throughput or just tested throughput (i.e., what testing did you perform)? What is the distance of your link? This sounds like it could be a terrific setup.

me too.
However, one thing is strange. I put two NS M5 on the same places and guess what? They work flawless, connected at 216mbps. One of them is without a dish, and the other is strapped with a wire over the feed of the 1.5m dish used to test r52n.
Maybe the tx-power can be an issue? I saw that the nano-stations have plenty of it. However, they don't have as much cpu power as a 1.5ghz p4, so they can't get that much bandwidth through the link.

Bottomline, i am waiting for a bunch of sr71-15 and for nstreme2 using N cards. Until that... back to ns m5 and nstreme2 classic.

no, that was the speed at which they wirelessly connected. Real throughput is about 60mbit, lower than a dual nstreme link.
So don't expect them to perform cpu-wise at the level of a rb 433ah or 600, however, wirelessly, they are miles ahead of r52n as far as i can see.

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!

ROTFL man 802.11N from UBNT 148 $ for working bridge!!!!!!! 100 Mbit/s no problem.....just see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF_G_BIYqhU


We want same good radio, working N-streme from mikrotik.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-0PzERW4ZY&NR=1

890 meters, poor signal & 55Mbit/s in 1 TCP stream no UDP no 20 sesion in TCP!!!!!!!!

ONLY 1 TCP stream & 55Mbit/s

I have seen a huge amount of posts on the forum relating to the "slagging off of N mode"

But has anyone actually got any useful experiences of using 80211n in an Urbanistic type environment, eg AP's mounted on street lights down a narrow street, where N might benefit from reflections,

Rather than all these posts where folk are trying to squeeze every ounce of throughput by using N over a PtP link, where the whole concept of 80211n has been misunderstood.!!!

ROTFL man 802.11N from UBNT 148 $ for working bridge!!!!!!! 100 Mbit/s no problem.....just see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF_G_BIYqhU


We want same good radio, working N-streme from mikrotik.

what equipment did you use here radios tails board power supply and antenna

Here's my working link graph of the week. Its only user traffic, both ends with 4.1 and EOIP, and r52n (tp-link). Its only about 1.5 Km, and rarely works with 270Ht or 300Ht rates.
I only had good experience with short links.
Also i have tried "strix nitro" (compex) solution, and it worked better in similar case (allways 300HT, and 85Mbps full duplex).
Has anyone compared mikrotik and ubnt products on same link? With same antennas?

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?

Yes, please post it.

Heres the pics:

and this:

And how about real customer (p2p,web,ftp ) traffic? Most of people have good results with b-test or one file download.

Change Local and Remote Tx Size to 150-300, and you will see dramaticaly CCQ and speed degradation. (I was test it on 10 km link on 60 cm dish, -65 db Rx/Tx signal strenght).

That exactly what I mean!

Change Local and Remote Tx Size to 150-300, and you will see dramaticaly CCQ and speed degradation. (I was test it on 10 km link on 60 cm dish, -65 Rx/Tx signal strenght).

But when we change mode to A or G without N on the same R52N cards - all looks ideal: CCQ=100% on small packages like 100-300, and troughput is maximum and ideal for A and G modes.

try a tcp test. Put some real-world traffic through the link.

The software has many bugs still. I am actually surprised the software is not labeled as beta as the problems with Nstream etc means we can't use it in production properly yet. I'm looking forward very much to more work from MT and it certainly looks promising with these results so far, but it should still be called beta version in my opinion?

I don't have enough CPU to do tcp tests at the moment. It maxes the CPU at 25-30 mbps with the routerboard generating the traffic. I will set up a dedicated bandwidth test from behind the link soon but haven't had time.

same opinion here. I don't wanna say that mikrotik n is crap, but it has quite a long way to go to be reliable. Maybe is not the right place to say that, but i think ubnt got it pretty right for now.

However, i am still waiting for the nstreme2 implementation using n from mikrotik. It would be useful for someone to confirm mikrotik is working on thins thing.
And i would also love some more detailed changelogs. There were no differences in wireless implementation for some versions, however there are big differences in performance between them.
Knowing what was changed between versions would save us a lot of wallbashing and real-world (always expensive) testing.

The software has many bugs still. I am actually surprised the software is not labeled as beta as the problems with Nstream etc means we can't use it in production properly yet. I'm looking forward very much to more work from MT and it certainly looks promising with these results so far, but it should still be called beta version in my opinion?

I don't have enough CPU to do tcp tests at the moment. It maxes the CPU at 25-30 mbps with the routerboard generating the traffic. I will set up a dedicated bandwidth test from behind the link soon but haven't had time.

The last stable version with N cards in our environment was 4.0beta3. Everything since has been worse.

We have retired most of our N links due to poor performance. Running XR-5s on 3.30 Wireless Test seems to be the safe option for the moment until MT gets organized with a new, stable version of nstreme and some reliable N drivers.

The only consolation is that Ubiquiti is having similar problems. Be interesting to see who gets a production-worthy inexpensive N solution to market first.

George

We have no luck with MT N solutions yet.
But I think there is hope very soon...

The other day I got new FW for my Strix Nitro II from Witelcom, and now finally it`s stable.
Before it was acting just like my MT links, pore throughput, link loss etc.
Now it`s rock stable, giving me 80Mbps fdx (tcp ftp test) and 100Mbps hdx.
With 20Mhz channel I get 80Mbps hdx.

Have not tested yet with torrent traffic etc.

I do not like the OS on the Strix though, not many possibilities.
ROS is much better in that way.

On 1500 byte packets looks so good (but not on small)
10 km link
60 cm dish on each side
dual polarity emmitor
R52N cards
Nstreme

On 1500 byte packets looks so good (but not on small)
10 km link
60 cm dish on each side
dual polarity emmitor
R52N cards
Nstreme

What is your performance with TCP 20-streams?

George

It's not much different with small packets? I only see a 10-20 % difference with small packets?

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.

+1

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.

why dont you all people try too use the ip packing ? it should kill small packets.

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?

what card did you used & r52n?

i tried packing but doesn make any difference,
seems not working at all, in fact sending small packet to the wireless i see the same number of packet that on the ethernet meaning that no packet aggragtion occurs.

regards
Ros

In ROS 4.3 Nstreme(BESTFIT frame 4000) works well for traffic comprising of packages 500-1500bytes.
But real traffic heave many 48-200bytes packet effect :CCQ crash from 90-95% to 30% , data rate drops lower & and again and again.

why dont you all people try too use the ip packing ? it should kill small packets.

1)IP packing not work in BRIDGE MODE only routing.
2)I think no CPU power in RB411AH to IP packing 100 Mbit HDX stream true ?

Got a good result with newest software version using 2 duel pol dishes a link of 20 miles aprox over sea is running at 80 mbps half duplex and actually does do 40/40 full duplex which we thought pretty good. It has a signal in the 50s and is using nstream which does bomb out ocasionally but works quite well. Could post images of test later if anyones interested?

what card did you used & r52n?

No the Ubnt sr71-15. Also I have fixed all settings. I have fixed ack, rates are just set to only the top two ht rates, turned off all advanced features like calibration etc to make it work.

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan

Hi!

I'm fairly new to Mikrotik, but I have a couple links running on RB433AH and R5H's and I'm very satisfied with these.

Now I'm doing some testing on RB433AH and R52N's with ROS 4.3

I must say that I'm not that satisfied anymore. The link is roughly 300 meters, and it is simply very unstable. When speed testing one direction at a time I can sometimes get impressive results. But when speed testing both ways at the same time, or while passing normal traffic, some very strange things happens. The reported connection rate drops to 6 mbps in one direction, and the link becomes very unstable. Of course this is completely unacceptable for a production link. So at the moment, for any new links I'm about to deploy, mikrotik is out of the question. Since I do like mikrotik, I hope you get this sorted quickly!

From ianek:

Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.

Yes, you're right. The truth is that the mikrotik is not ready for "real world" N applications now. I stopped all my tests, because the 802.11n (from mikrotik) at this stage is absolutely unusable, except for laboratory use. PS: R52n tests only.

Well it's not that bad I think! Actually its pretty reliable once you get the settings right and does perform much better than 11a.

When Nstream is properly sorted and a few other little things it will be awesome.

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan

I have the same problem.
Is it possibile that there are some unstable modules?

guys, BTW, i did some kitchen tests, and it seems, that 2.4GHz links on 52N cards work better than 5GHz. in 2.4 GHz i could get stable 50/50 MBits even in noisy environment (aprox 10 other 2.4 cells working around me, SNR ~25, signal aprox -50dBm. single 2db omni antenna on each side, single chain used, PCs with FTP and MT speedtest and other MTs as testbed), all settings - default. as soon as i switched to 5GHz - ccq drops drasticly and speed was not stable in 30-40Mbits range.

also, regarding 52N in urban environment. problem with dropping performance and CCQ was solved by enabling NStreme on both ends. at least i've got stable 30/30 link instead of 5-6 Mbits. (setup - AP on one end, client on other), and while testing live traffic, (30Mbits in peaks, 10/10 usual load) i could add extra 40 to 50 Mbits load with nearly no effect on user traffic. ccq droped from time to time below 60%, but it might have natural source behind it, so i was not hunting for ghosts.

about link - aprox 6KM, one dish on each side, using one chain. link level between 52 and 56dBm floating, SNR about 50. fresnel zone should be clear. most of the settings are default. traffic was running through EoIP tunnel. i'll try to do some more nibbling in a couple of days, like adding 2 more dishes, enabling extra interfaces and reconfiguring antennas. both ends have RB433AH, and more than 1 radio card on board.

and yes, i totally agree - 4.x versions (even 4.3) are quite raw. i feel like it is v4.0RC6, or whatever...

PS. Normis - may we all have a "surprise" update to 4.4 with winbox fixed up, that it allows editing transmit power for DT modes ? i'm to lazy to ssh or terminal and get these fixed by typing...

Heck, at this point even an acknowledgment that there are some issues being worked through by MT on this topic would be more comforting than silence... Look at how long ago there was a MT post to this topic...

Scott

I am satisfied with my r52n link.
Look at dude graph: It is a week graph, so it is a bit rounded.
Ping is max 100 ms. Serving about 200 users over 1.5 Km.
Also we have one strix nitro (compex) link from witelcom, that crashes for some reason.
I haven't tried ubnt 2x2 yet, but i doubt it would be as good as mikrotik.

Well, after some tests, the N with r52n cards is performing very bad , at link where r52 card in A-turbo and nstreme mode performing aroung 40mbit HD, the N link without nstreme is disconnecting all the time , max troughput is aroung 10-12mbit real HD traffic.
Pitty i was fan of MK architecture, but the UBNT products are nowadays flawless and working at first deployment -same location , same antennas , on the other hand i had spent weeks of testing N links on MK platform getting very bad results with now "stable" 4 firmware.
I will switch where needed to M5 products and wait until MK release really working solution. Comes to me very crazy how is it possble the 4 software is here for a months and such a horrible situation was not fixed until now.
Hope the MK programmers will fix this soon.

Jan

I have the same problem.
Is it possibile that there are some unstable modules?

Donno, whats very strange to me also, that i cannot without Nstreme push the wireless links over 10Mbits(real traffic, not generated UDP) - either a or n mode, but im sure Ubnt or other architectures are not using NO ack protocol and they are performing much better - airmax disabled M5 products for example. Also i dont expect the Ubnt product are equipped with more CPU power than MK boards.
So its up to MK to solve the problem, but there is silence from their side ....
Hope we get it working this year.
Wish all the best

Jan

α> Two Channels (extended channel mode), Two chains, nstreme = Receive Sustain 164Mbps, Send Sustain 165Mbps, Both Sustain 100Mbps. (full duplex Ethernet LOL) [mcs 0,15]
b> Two Channels (extended channel mode), One chain, nstreme = Receive Sustain 100Mbps, Send Sustain 100Mbps, Both Sustain 55Mbps. [mcs 0,15]
c> One Channel Two chains, nstreme = Receive Sustain 90Mbps, Send Sustain 90Mbps, Both Sustain 50Mbps. [mcs 0,8]
d> One Channel, One chain, nstreme = Receive Sustain 48Mbps, Send Sustain 48Mbps, Both Sustain 25Mbps. [mcs 0,8]

Have you a comparation with simple 802.11a+n-stream on same links?
I can expect this values on a RB433AH?

PS. Normis - may we all have a "surprise" update to 4.4 with winbox fixed up, that it allows editing transmit power for DT modes ? i'm to lazy to ssh or terminal and get these fixed by typing...

what do you mean by this ?

Well from my extensive testing so far, I would say 11n is very good if you have a strong signal. of -60 or above. But for low signals it's much worse than 11a right now performance wise. And becomes very instable. Im sure with a little more work it will be great. And reading after UBNT it's just the same story there.

Lets send some GOOD VIBES to the MT programmers to help them. Your work is great so far we only need a few more improvements now.

Well from my extensive testing so far, I would say 11n is very good if you have a strong signal. of -60 or above. But for low signals it's much worse than 11a right now performance wise. And becomes very instable. Im sure with a little more work it will be great. And reading after UBNT it's just the same story there.

Lets send some GOOD VIBES to the MT programmers to help them. Your work is great so far we only need a few more improvements now.

Yes improve 802.11n + Nstreme for small packet traffic (CCQ drops drasticly)

Yes improve 802.11n + Nstreme for small packet traffic (CCQ drops drasticly)

+1

So now I have stable ~50km link with 90Mbps-SD traffic.

What kind of signals and noise floors do you have for your 50km link? How has it been performing? What kind of TCP throughput are you getting? I have one that is similar length that I'm thinking about upgrading from 5ghz A to N to get more speed.

Thanks,
Joe

Looking at capabilities of a R52N card, I noticed that it supports "14". What is that?

/ interface wireless info print

interface-type=Atheros AR5416
chip-info="mac:0x80/0x2, phy:0xd0, a5:0xc0, a2:0x0, eeprom:0x0"
pci-info="00:13.0"
capabilities=tx-power-control,ack-timeout-control,virtual-ap,alignment-mode,scanning,nstreme,sniffing,power-channel,ht40-a,ht40-g,wmm,14
default-periodic-calibration=enabled
supported-bands=2ghz-b,5ghz,2ghz-g,5ghz-10mhz,5ghz-5mhz,2ghz-10mhz,2ghz-5mhz,5ghz-11n,2ghz-11n

Hello,
1 antenna V, 2 antenna V <=> 1 antenna V, 2 antenna V
or
1 antenna V, 2 antenna H <=> 1 antenna V, 2 antenna H
better for "n"?

Config and description(unfortunatelly only polish- you can use google translate):
http://www.cyberteam.pl/artykuly/conten ... 32505.html
btw> the board is 1,6 atom x86 which you can also find somewhere on this website.
The first test at 24km+rb600+r52n is located under the link(above)
You can watch the test at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZO5as93Do
Big thanks to MT!
Happy new year

Config and description(unfortunatelly only polish- you can use google translate):
http://www.cyberteam.pl/artykuly/conten ... 32505.html
btw> the board is 1,6 atom x86 which you can also find somewhere on this website.
The first test at 24km+rb600+r52n is located under the link(above)
You can watch the test at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZO5as93Do
Big thanks to MT!
Happy new year

Make BT for 200bytes UDP packet & check CCQ/RATE/PING.....

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km

what version of os are you running?

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km

True I test it now ...... In 4.4ROS MT team improve Nstreme for 802.11n....... but again no info in Changelog as usual.
Now works much better

Only now i've got the access on running link with rb600<--> x86 2,4ghz @24km

True I test it now ...... In 4.4ROS MT team improve Nstreme for 802.11n....... but again no info in Changelog as usual.
Now works much better

Ready???
V4.4 have improve the Nstrem???
We facing some strange issue in V4.3...

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros

The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.

so is the a diffrence in 4.3 and 4.4

is 4.4. more stable


and can you tel me more about hardwere?

Intel Atom 1,6ghz with HT + r52n+sata dom(on the picture ide dom with laptop IDE adapter)+ mpcie slot


I've had recrived this hardware from cyberteam.pl for testing. It's working with rb14. It's smaller than rb600 and it has dc input 12V (it's some kind of disadvatage because it isn't working with poe.
But in the near future i will recrive sth like that It has CF card +mpcie and what is interesting, AUPS - a ups system/battery that is directly connected to the board. The input of the board is 28VDC so you can use PoE. The AUPS advantage is that the board consumes 100% of the energy that is inside the battery, no heat and etc.
The board is fanless. Anyway, if it gets warmer i will test the 802.11n support on SR71e. Anyone tested it?
The board has 2x1Gbit integrated cards located on the pcie express bus.
Big thanks, happy new year.
MD

This is a 802.11n link(15mbit/15mbit) r52n and the diffrence before and after upgrade to 4.4 from 4.3

(left 4.3 right 4.4)
After zooming in 4.4:

The diffrence is enormus!

This is a 802.11n link(15mbit/15mbit) r52n and the diffrence before and after upgrade to 4.4 from 4.3

(left 4.3 right 4.4)
After zooming in 4.4:

The diffrence is enormus!

Very interesting.

Can you post traffic graph for same days?

Hello, I have a problem with the "n" link. ROS 4.4.
Distance 800m, 2 separate antennas 26dbi in different polarization. r52n. 5Ghz. Tried different freq.
CCQ in both directions after installation around 98-100%. But on-loading TX CCQ from bridge and RX CCQ from station near 20-25% ( Im using VPLS tunnel.
ht-ampdu-priorities=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7
ht-extension-channel=below-control
ht-txchains=0,1
nstream disabled.
Can anybody help find solution?

Wait (with the rest of us) for routeros to be fixed to work with long "n" links, and for nstreme to work with "n".

Not a great answer, but the truth.

Randy

4.3 was more stable then new 4.4.

4.4 - is terrible.

"n" + Nsterme + WDS

is it work now, or I obliged to use EoIP?

you should use vpls

We have an alternative to WDS for 802.11n when we want to bridge two ethernets. But, Is there any way to have a repeater on a single 802.11n interface without using WDS?

We have an alternative to WDS for 802.11n when we want to bridge two ethernets. But, Is there any way to have a repeater on 802.11n without using WDS on a single wireless interface?

see post obove yours, that says - use VPLS
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transpare ... using_MPLS

I've already done it and this is the alternative to WDS I'm saying for two ethernets. But on that scenario one wireless interface is in bridge mode (or AP mode) and the other is station. To achive the repeater functionality both wireless interfaces will need to be on AP or WDS slave mode. And they wouldn't connect unless WDS is enabled.

I would be great if the first people to test the new 802.11n support in RouterOS v4 beta 3 would post their experiences here in this thread.

Anyone who will post some 802.11n wiki tutorial with images and setup configurations that work with good speeds, will get a Level6 license from me

Wrote Mark: I posted just minutes ago a new message can you check and send me back your comments please... bets regards

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros

The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.

the same but nstream also stop working on non-N wireless cards (Atheros AR5413). The same message about pooled and disconnecting

no differnece between 4.3 and 4.4 over 802.11n difficult link.

regards
Ros

The thing is that in older ros versions the small packets were not pooled or the link was repeatedly reassociating/disconnecting.

the same but nstream also stop working on non-N wireless cards (Atheros AR5413). The same message about pooled and disconnecting

Are you using x86 box? check the system clock and uptime if it isn't running 10 times faster when you use nstreme?

DEAR ALL

I apologize to write here but I need your help with the following please.- read and send me back your comment or if you prefer send an email to marco @ telplay net

The following note is my problem. Thank you

Dear
All


I have problem with my Radius because it have 2 Millions of logs but i don't know how I can remove/delete because the only way that i know if one by one, this process isn't good to me.- For this reason I request to you the help, maybe you know any script to execute and delete automatically this logs that I have under user-manager session at the same time I have more logs under /tools user-manager logs but I don't know if the same information.

My request is: Did you know any script that can remove this log, please

I read on internet on the next link the follow information: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21214


CLEAR USERMAN LOG SCRIPT:

:local Flag
:set Flag [/tool user-manager log find]
:if ([:len $Flag] > 0) do={/tool user-manager log print append file log;/tool user-manager log remove [/tool user-manager log find];}

BUT WHEN I EXECUTE THE BELOW SCRIPT, NOT WORK FINE I GET THE NEXT ERROR:
:set Flag [/tool user-manager log find]
syntax error (line 1 column 13)

I don't know if the problem is that when the other user made the below script used the other mikrotik OS version.

Thank you, please send me your comments.

Best regards.

mark

Excellent combination: RB800 + SparkLAN WPEA110N MiniPCI-E!

It is a great addition to RB800: minipci-e slot and it supports wireless minipci-e cards now! We hope mikrotik will make revision and add more minipci-e slots to this great board and hope price will be cheaper too!

2km distance using RouterOS 4.5, RB800 and SparkLAN WPEA 110N MiniPCI-E. Result is great, ping is great, it is very stable:
RB800 is the best RB but it should be cheaper. The best thing it has now minipci-e slot for wireless but it should be more such slots.

Hello, I have a problem with the "n" link. ROS 4.4.
Distance 800m, 2 separate antennas 26dbi in different polarization.

What is your signal strength?

you can see it in his picture. signal is -47

the signal is -50 -52. after fixing rates on load ccq much better. But nstreme doesnt working for me. Ccq 20, bw 1-2 mbits with nstreme. Without nstreme bw much better. But latency with r52 5ghz nstreme was better.