Page 1 of 1
400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:50 pm
by Athan
Why ROS doesn't support short GI? Currently "long" is ...long and "any" is still "long" resulting to 130/270Mbps.
I wonder why MT still insist not to implement the standard 400msec short GI option.
Re: 400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:47 am
by uldis
there is no such option.
The short guard interval is enabled for the highest enabled MCS data rate.
Currently short guard interval is not supported for Nv2 protocol.
Re: 400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:36 pm
by Athan
there is no such option.
The short guard interval is enabled for the highest enabled MCS data rate.
Too bad. If options for long GI and auto are available, why not one that enables short GI? Such an option can increase data rate by 11% and that's why it is supported by most 802.11n devices.
Sorry but i have to consider this as a missing standard functionality. After all, give it as an optional setting and let users decide if they make use of it or not.
Re: 400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:19 pm
by uldis
if the device can operate normally, for example, at MCS15 then it can easy try to jump from 270mbps to 300mbps.
Re: 400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:47 pm
by Athan
if the device can operate normally, for example, at MCS15 then it can easy try to jump from 270mbps to 300mbps.
Maybe, but this doesn't apply on lower rates. Why sacrifice 11% of true throughput when a simple standard setting supported by every descent wlan device (including all 802.11n Atheros) could gain it?
Please forgive me but I don't understand such MT idiosyncrasies. I do hate repeating myself, but why not implementing all standard options and let users decide themselves whether they want to use them or not?
Re: 400msec - short guard interval
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:10 am
by benson
if the device can operate normally, for example, at MCS15 then it can easy try to jump from 270mbps to 300mbps.
Maybe, but this doesn't apply on lower rates. Why sacrifice 11% of true throughput when a simple standard setting supported by every descent wlan device (including all 802.11n Atheros) could gain it?
Please forgive me but I don't understand such MT idiosyncrasies. I do hate repeating myself, but why not implementing all standard options and let users decide themselves whether they want to use them or not?
We agree, I suggest mikrotik to add a short option to that. let user to select any|long|short