hello,
could anyone write some tips for configure two router os on rb 532 and 802.11a without nstream and with best possible encryption.rb 532 speed is 333 and speed with in two rb532 is now only about 20Mbps.
Is WDS ok? any other bridge mode? Must use ip routing for better performance?
any hints...?
anyone know how to configure to get this results:
http://www.mikrotik.com/Documentation/wireless_test.pdf
thank you,
tomas
I agree that MikroTik .PDF is misleading to say the least. My testing has largely only related to NStreme2 and while total aggregate throughput is close to what the .PDF shows you will not see anything more than 20-22Mbps FDX with a RB532. The board just doesn'thave the CPU power to manage more than that with the current NStreme2 code.
Oh, and to achieve 20-22Mbps FDX with NStreme2 on RB532 boards you will need to run v2.9rc9. Later OS versions included the current v2.9.4 have a problem with the NStreme2 interface just stop passing data under high loads requiring the interface to be disabled and then re-enabled.
Best,
Brad
Oh, and to achieve 20-22Mbps FDX with NStreme2 on RB532 boards you will need to run v2.9rc9. Later OS versions included the current v2.9.4 have a problem with the NStreme2 interface just stop passing data under high loads requiring the interface to be disabled and then re-enabled.
Best,
Brad
There is no problem to transmit more that 20Mbps FDX with Nstreme 2 running v2.9.4 (nonnection tracking disabled).We have 3km link:I agree that MikroTik .PDF is misleading to say the least. My testing has largely only related to NStreme2 and while total aggregate throughput is close to what the .PDF shows you will not see anything more than 20-22Mbps FDX with a RB532. The board just doesn'thave the CPU power to manage more than that with the current NStreme2 code.
Oh, and to achieve 20-22Mbps FDX with NStreme2 on RB532 boards you will need to run v2.9rc9. Later OS versions included the current v2.9.4 have a problem with the NStreme2 interface just stop passing data under high loads requiring the interface to be disabled and then re-enabled.
Best,
Brad
Code: Select all
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> /sys reso print
uptime: 14m3s
free-memory: 18636kB
total-memory: 30384kB
model: "RouterBOARD 500"
cpu: "MIPS 4Kc V0.10"
cpu-frequency: 333MHz
cpu-load: 100
free-hdd-space: 35448kB
total-hdd-space: 61440kB
write-sect-since-reboot: 0
write-sect-total: 0
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual p
Flags: X - disabled, R - running
0 R name="nstreme1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0B:6B:35:E4:31 arp=enabled
disable-running-check=no tx-radio=wlan1 rx-radio=wlan2
remote-mac=00:0B:6B:33:1B:61 tx-band=5ghz-turbo tx-frequency=5700
rx-band=5ghz-turbo rx-frequency=5550 rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps
rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps
framer-policy=none framer-limit=4000
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual monitor nstreme1
rx-signal-strength: -61dBm
tx-signal-strength: -65dBm
rx-rate: 54Mbps
tx-rate: 54Mbps
connected: yes
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> monitor-traffic nstreme1,
received-packets-per-second: 3789
received-bits-per-second: 45.4Mbps
sent-packets-per-second: 2515
sent-bits-per-second: 30.4MbpsHello Brad,
We understand that people get different results when testing -- and that is because there are a number of variables such as configuration settings, RouterOS version, wireless hardware, platform hardware, bugs, cables, interference, antennas, environment (lot of materials where signal bounce and cancel each other), and so on.
So if you don't get the same results as us or others, you should try to address the issues of why this happens. But, don't accuse us or others of misleading people on purpose. Life is much too short to work with people that start making accusations unreasonably. We will not assist, support, or sell to those that takes this path.
John
We understand that people get different results when testing -- and that is because there are a number of variables such as configuration settings, RouterOS version, wireless hardware, platform hardware, bugs, cables, interference, antennas, environment (lot of materials where signal bounce and cancel each other), and so on.
So if you don't get the same results as us or others, you should try to address the issues of why this happens. But, don't accuse us or others of misleading people on purpose. Life is much too short to work with people that start making accusations unreasonably. We will not assist, support, or sell to those that takes this path.
John
Hi uldis,
interesting result.
I've ordered 2 routerboards but after many post claiming low throughput of RB with Nstreme2 I'm getting little bit worried.
What type of traffic it was(UDP/TCP)?
It's bridged or routed?
What is the avg latency you get over link when 50% loaded?
My goal is to set-up 20Mbit/full duplex TCP link with low latency ( >5ms).
Is it a dream or reality?
interesting result.
I've ordered 2 routerboards but after many post claiming low throughput of RB with Nstreme2 I'm getting little bit worried.
What type of traffic it was(UDP/TCP)?
It's bridged or routed?
What is the avg latency you get over link when 50% loaded?
My goal is to set-up 20Mbit/full duplex TCP link with low latency ( >5ms).
Is it a dream or reality?
There is no problem to transmit more that 20Mbps FDX with Nstreme 2 running v2.9.4 (nonnection tracking disabled).We have 3km link:I agree that MikroTik .PDF is misleading to say the least. My testing has largely only related to NStreme2 and while total aggregate throughput is close to what the .PDF shows you will not see anything more than 20-22Mbps FDX with a RB532. The board just doesn'thave the CPU power to manage more than that with the current NStreme2 code.
Oh, and to achieve 20-22Mbps FDX with NStreme2 on RB532 boards you will need to run v2.9rc9. Later OS versions included the current v2.9.4 have a problem with the NStreme2 interface just stop passing data under high loads requiring the interface to be disabled and then re-enabled.
Best,
BradCode: Select all[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> /sys reso print uptime: 14m3s free-memory: 18636kB total-memory: 30384kB model: "RouterBOARD 500" cpu: "MIPS 4Kc V0.10" cpu-frequency: 333MHz cpu-load: 100 free-hdd-space: 35448kB total-hdd-space: 61440kB write-sect-since-reboot: 0 write-sect-total: 0 [uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual p Flags: X - disabled, R - running 0 R name="nstreme1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0B:6B:35:E4:31 arp=enabled disable-running-check=no tx-radio=wlan1 rx-radio=wlan2 remote-mac=00:0B:6B:33:1B:61 tx-band=5ghz-turbo tx-frequency=5700 rx-band=5ghz-turbo rx-frequency=5550 rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps framer-policy=none framer-limit=4000 [uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual monitor nstreme1 rx-signal-strength: -61dBm tx-signal-strength: -65dBm rx-rate: 54Mbps tx-rate: 54Mbps connected: yes [uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> monitor-traffic nstreme1, received-packets-per-second: 3789 received-bits-per-second: 45.4Mbps sent-packets-per-second: 2515 sent-bits-per-second: 30.4Mbps
What type of traffic it was(UDP/TCP)? UDP Bandwidth test.Hi uldis,
interesting result.
I've ordered 2 routerboards but after many post claiming low throughput of RB with Nstreme2 I'm getting little bit worried.
What type of traffic it was(UDP/TCP)?
It's bridged or routed?
What is the avg latency you get over link when 50% loaded?
My goal is to set-up 20Mbit/full duplex TCP link with low latency ( >5ms).
Is it a dream or reality?
It's bridged or routed? Routed
Doing Full Btest with 20mbps both direction using UDP we had approx 8ms. With TCP approx 15ms.
Whoaa...guess I should check this forum more often!Hello Brad,
We understand that people get different results when testing -- and that is because there are a number of variables such as configuration settings, RouterOS version, wireless hardware, platform hardware, bugs, cables, interference, antennas, environment (lot of materials where signal bounce and cancel each other), and so on.
So if you don't get the same results as us or others, you should try to address the issues of why this happens. But, don't accuse us or others of misleading people on purpose. Life is much too short to work with people that start making accusations unreasonably. We will not assist, support, or sell to those that takes this path.
John
First, let me say there was no intention to disparage the MikroTik product and if that impression came across I apologize.
I think we are all saying the same thing here. 44Mbps is about all the RB532 can handle. Cut it up however you want, but 44Mbps is it. If it's 21-22Mbps FDX or 45Mbps HDX the RB532 is still is only capable of about 40-45Mbps.
I would love to see an NSTreme2 configuration loaded on two RB532s passing more than 45Mbps aggregate throughput, but I just don't see it happening. I posted several screenshots of BW test results testing from one 3GHz MT box to another 3GHz MT box across two RB532s running NStreme2. The results don't lie unless I've configured the NStreme2 setup incorrectly.
The two RB532s are sitting side by side with rssi readings at a solid -60. The NStreme2 configuration is setup exactly as the MT example shows. Please provide me a NStreme2 configuration for the RB532 that will produce better than 21-21Mbps FDX payload capacity...I don't believe one exists.
Best,
Brad
My goal is to set-up 20Mbit/full duplex TCP link with low latency ( >5ms).
Is it a dream or reality?
These two screenshots will show the latency you can expect with a fully loaded 20Mbps FDX RB532 link. I haven't tried v2.9.5 yet, but plan to this weekend.
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9rc9 ... -20-05.jpg
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p4_ ... -20-05.jpg
Not only did v2.9rc9 outperform v2.9.4 by about 2MB it also did not crash like v2.9.4. Again latency was better with v2.9rc9 as well...
36MB Rate on v2.9.4 crashed so quickly I didn't even bother taking a snapshot.
36MB Rate on v2.9rc9 did not crash, but the results were much poorer than the 18MB or 24MB rates.
BTW, rssi readings on all tests run are solid -60.
Setup:
192.168.1.70 RM Test Unit 1 3.0GHz
Ethernet
192.168.14.100 RB532 NStreme2
Wireless
192.168.14.101 RB532 NStreme2
Ethernet
192.168.1.71 RM Test Unit 2 3.0GHz
Best,
Brad
Apples and oranges. I am only refering to FDX links...NSTreme2. Under load a FDX link will always outperform a HDX link... this is important for VoIP applications etc...I don't have any trouble getting 37Mbps using NStreme1 with RB532s and 2.9.4 which is what is advertised in the PDF.
I am using SR5 radio cards that have a -60dBm signal at 30km.
Ken
Best,
Brad
[/quote]
There is no problem to transmit more that 20Mbps FDX with Nstreme 2 running v2.9.4 (nonnection tracking disabled).We have 3km link:[/quote]
Ok, now show us what the graph history looked like...my guess is it was all over the place jumping up and down. The snapshot you provided does not show any history. My test information shows latency over the link during the test and a history of solid & consistant 21-22Mbps FDX.
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9rc9 ... -20-05.jpg
Sure, I could set the Rates to 54MB on my test setup as well, but links that jump all over the place from 45/30Mbps to 10/5Mbps and back are of no use to us. Many tests over and over demonstrate on the RB532 a 24MB Rate & NStreme2 setup is the most solid combination.
Solid consistant BW is what is required for our clients. If your RB532 test setup can show 5, 10, 15 minutes of sustained 45Mbps/30Mbps then you have something and I want a copy!
Best,
Brad
There is no problem to transmit more that 20Mbps FDX with Nstreme 2 running v2.9.4 (nonnection tracking disabled).We have 3km link:
Code: Select all
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> /sys reso print
uptime: 14m3s
free-memory: 18636kB
total-memory: 30384kB
model: "RouterBOARD 500"
cpu: "MIPS 4Kc V0.10"
cpu-frequency: 333MHz
cpu-load: 100
free-hdd-space: 35448kB
total-hdd-space: 61440kB
write-sect-since-reboot: 0
write-sect-total: 0
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual p
Flags: X - disabled, R - running
0 R name="nstreme1" mtu=1500 mac-address=00:0B:6B:35:E4:31 arp=enabled
disable-running-check=no tx-radio=wlan1 rx-radio=wlan2
remote-mac=00:0B:6B:33:1B:61 tx-band=5ghz-turbo tx-frequency=5700
rx-band=5ghz-turbo rx-frequency=5550 rates-b=1Mbps,2Mbps,5.5Mbps,11Mbps
rates-a/g=6Mbps,9Mbps,12Mbps,18Mbps,24Mbps,36Mbps,48Mbps,54Mbps
framer-policy=none framer-limit=4000
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> wireless nstreme-dual monitor nstreme1
rx-signal-strength: -61dBm
tx-signal-strength: -65dBm
rx-rate: 54Mbps
tx-rate: 54Mbps
connected: yes
[uldis@NSRB5PMI] interface> monitor-traffic nstreme1,
received-packets-per-second: 3789
received-bits-per-second: 45.4Mbps
sent-packets-per-second: 2515
sent-bits-per-second: 30.4MbpsOk, now show us what the graph history looked like...my guess is it was all over the place jumping up and down. The snapshot you provided does not show any history. My test information shows latency over the link during the test and a history of solid & consistant 21-22Mbps FDX.
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9rc9 ... -20-05.jpg
Sure, I could set the Rates to 54MB on my test setup as well, but links that jump all over the place from 45/30Mbps to 10/5Mbps and back are of no use to us. Many tests over and over demonstrate on the RB532 a 24MB Rate & NStreme2 setup is the most solid combination.
Solid consistant BW is what is required for our clients. If your RB532 test setup can show 5, 10, 15 minutes of sustained 45Mbps/30Mbps then you have something and I want a copy!
Best,
Brad
just made a test
Hi,
boards arrived, so I upgraded from installed 2.9.1 to 2.9.5
and the results are:
max UDP full duplex:
28.5/29Mbit/s
max TCP full duplex:
23/8
slow cpu on machines generating traffic
when changed RBs, it was the same, so I guess CPU was limiting
max TCP one-way
29Mbit/s
when passing limited traffic, FDX 25/25Mbit
latency was from 5 to 15ms
setup:
nstreme2 in bridge with ether1, freq1 5500, freq2 5700, no-turbo(it was the same with/without), CPU clock 330MHz, framing: none, signal -55, tested on desk, linked on 54Mbit
I have a question:
I played with RBs from friend and in bios, there was an option to overclock CPU to 399MHz, but on mine, there is max 330. they are from the same delivery,same price,look same
i want to try 399, it should increse the throughpt, cause the RBs CPU is limiting. any ideas how to do it??
boards arrived, so I upgraded from installed 2.9.1 to 2.9.5
and the results are:
max UDP full duplex:
28.5/29Mbit/s
max TCP full duplex:
23/8
slow cpu on machines generating traffic
when changed RBs, it was the same, so I guess CPU was limiting
max TCP one-way
29Mbit/s
when passing limited traffic, FDX 25/25Mbit
latency was from 5 to 15ms
setup:
nstreme2 in bridge with ether1, freq1 5500, freq2 5700, no-turbo(it was the same with/without), CPU clock 330MHz, framing: none, signal -55, tested on desk, linked on 54Mbit
I have a question:
I played with RBs from friend and in bios, there was an option to overclock CPU to 399MHz, but on mine, there is max 330. they are from the same delivery,same price,look same
i want to try 399, it should increse the throughpt, cause the RBs CPU is limiting. any ideas how to do it??
Re: just made a test
Here are a few test results running v2.9.5 on a couple RB532s:Hi,
boards arrived, so I upgraded from installed 2.9.1 to 2.9.5
and the results are:
max UDP full duplex:
28.5/29Mbit/s
max TCP full duplex:
23/8
slow cpu on machines generating traffic
when changed RBs, it was the same, so I guess CPU was limiting
max TCP one-way
29Mbit/s
when passing limited traffic, FDX 25/25Mbit
latency was from 5 to 15ms
setup:
nstreme2 in bridge with ether1, freq1 5500, freq2 5700, no-turbo(it was the same with/without), CPU clock 330MHz, framing: none, signal -55, tested on desk, linked on 54Mbit
I have a question:
I played with RBs from friend and in bios, there was an option to overclock CPU to 399MHz, but on mine, there is max 330. they are from the same delivery,same price,look same
i want to try 399, it should increse the throughpt, cause the RBs CPU is limiting. any ideas how to do it??
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p5_ ... 0-1-05.jpg
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p5_ ... 0-1-05.jpg
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p5_ ... 0-1-05.jpg
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p5_ ... 0-1-05.jpg
http://www.belwave.com/NStreme2_v2p9p5_ ... 0-1-05.jpg
It appears MT has fixed the NStreme lockup/crash problem as long as no Framer Policy is set. This is great news as now we'll be able to run firmware newer than v2.9rc9 on NStreme2 links!
Although the higher Data rates are not as stable as the 24MB Data Rate they are much more symmetrical than previous versions and able to squeak out a few more Mbps.
Test setup:
MT 3GHz router 192.168.1.70
ethernet
MT RB532 NStreme2 192.168.14.100
wireless
MT RB532 NStreme2 192.168.14.101
ethernet
MT 3GHz router 192.168.1.71
Best,
Brad
Re: just made a test
Interesting. I believe the only two options on the RB532s I've checked are 266MHz & 333MHz. However, I do recall reading somewhere that MT had an optional (special order?) 400MHz RB532. Possibly your friend ended up with the optional CPU?I have a question:
I played with RBs from friend and in bios, there was an option to overclock CPU to 399MHz, but on mine, there is max 330. they are from the same delivery,same price,look same
i want to try 399, it should increse the throughpt, cause the RBs CPU is limiting. any ideas how to do it??
Best,
Brad
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests