View Full Version : SuperG differences from V2 to V3
ninedd
06-08-2006, 11:06 AM
Hi - this is mainly for Tony I guess.
In V2 (that's 2.10.0 WRAP) with CM9's set to B mode, the Fast Frame / Busting / Compression features operate. We actually have a 45 KM link that (due to location and antenna limitations) we're running an 802.11b link, and don't really have other options. However, it's a great link, with a -70ish, it's rock solid at 11mbit, and our thoughput with the Atheros magic on is great - 1500K or so. Since it's grid to grid, we really don't have channel interference in this location to worry about and it's been perfect for about a year and a half.
However, we're hooking up the WAR's with WARtenna clients, using the Compex cards, but in B mode, we're seeing FAR less throughput and it looks that the 'Super' features don't operate in B mode, which is a problem for us. If I'm correct on what's happening here, we'd substantially drop throughput if we upgrade everything to V3 and loose "Super" in B mode. :(
Atheros discourages SuperG features from being used in 11b mode due to incompatibilities with various older 11b clients. This is why the star-v3 platform no longer includes SuperG features with the legacy 11b mode.
The solution is to place the AP in 802.11b/g mode, and all SuperG clients in 11g mode. This will allow you to use SuperG on the hardware supported, while still allowing legacy 11b clients to associate.
ninedd
06-08-2006, 12:24 PM
OK. Didn't really want to do that, since the way it worked in V2 seemed perfect to me. We could switch on and off the Super features in either B or G mode at our choice, which seemed perfect.
However, on this particular backhaul link, if we set them to G mode and lock them at 11Mbit, then I guess that essentially accomplish's the same thing.
Thanx, Todd.
We are still evaluating the usefulness of this restriction, and may re-enable SuperG support with 11b in future releases.
I use all 11g mode everything but still force to 11mbit transmit rates for my non-cloaked APs.
That accomplishes exactly what you want because all you really care about here is using 11Mbps/CCK instead of XX/OFDM because I'm betting XX/OFDM performs poorly for you.
You actually might want to try 2x cloaking over that link. 2x cloaking at a higher data rate like 36 is roughly twice as fast as a standard 11Mbps/CCK link and it's more resistant to interference and it uses 10MHz of spectrum instead of 20MHz.
ninedd
06-08-2006, 06:13 PM
We are still evaluating the usefulness of this restriction, and may re-enable SuperG support with 11b in future releases.Thanx Tony. For now, the WRAP's on that 45KM backhaul link are still in the air, and are doing famously. From that standpoint, it's not really an issue we need to deal with immediately.
Actually, it's something I noticed on a 2.10.0/WRAP/CM9 AP that points towards me at home. I've been running a TR-CPQ at home with good results, and moved up to a WARTenna, but didn't get a speed increase. I went back to a WRAPTenna and it's just smokes along, and that's when I put 2 and 2 together. I don't really want to try switching that WRAP/AP into G mode with all the clients that are on it, since we have zero problems with it and ''if it aint broke, don't fix..''. :)
In any case, thanx for keeping it in mind. :)
- Todd
ninedd
06-08-2006, 06:25 PM
I use all 11g mode everything but still force to 11mbit transmit rates for my non-cloaked APs.
That accomplishes exactly what you want because all you really care about here is using 11Mbps/CCK instead of XX/OFDM because I'm betting XX/OFDM performs poorly for you.
You actually might want to try 2x cloaking over that link. 2x cloaking at a higher data rate like 36 is roughly twice as fast as a standard 11Mbps/CCK link and it's more resistant to interference and it uses 10MHz of spectrum instead of 20MHz.Yes, exactly. We tried G Mode in V2 for this Backhaul, and yes.. I'm suspecting that OFDM didn't do something as nicely, because performance and stability were not there. We moved 'back' to B mode, and it's been... 18 months with nearly zero problems, and VERY fast link.
Since this is going to a small community, and since we're using directional Grids, we don't really find any interference problem at 2.4Ghz. So, (at least in this limited circumstance) a plain old 802.11b 11mbit link from CM9 to CM9 with normal grids is a smok'n fast and stable link over long distances.
One end of it is also a building top lease, with an board of directors that took many month's to approve the exact location and size and shape and color of the antenna and enclosure, so changing ANYTHING on that end may be problematic. :)
Actually, I also wasn't sure if being in G mode and locking things at 11Mbit would still do CCK or if it was a 11Mbit OFDM - so thanx for the input, I'll give it a try. :)
ninedd
06-08-2006, 06:29 PM
I use all 11g mode everything but still force to 11mbit transmit rates for my non-cloaked APs. That accomplishes exactly what you want because all you really care about here is using 11Mbps/CCK instead of XX/OFDM because I'm betting XX/OFDM performs poorly for you.Hmm. One thing I just thought of. Right now, we have the link set to auto speed, and it nearly always maintains 11mbit anyway, but it does switch down every now and again in severe weather for example. I'm not sure how often it needs to do that exactly, but if we lock a G link at 11, then it's locked at 11 only, isn't it? I can't specify ''11 mbit or best offer'' anywhere can I? Loosing the ability rate shift if it needs to might possibly break that link in bad conditions....
That's correct, forcing to 11 forces to 11. Auto tries everything.
I can tell you from experience that if 11 doesn't currently work, 2 wont work very well either so why even bother trying. Locking at 11 is relatively safe.
There used to be a big difference with the caveman prism and orinoco 11b cards between received signal needs among 1, 2, 5.5 and 11mbit data rates. In modern times with our atheros cards, there's little difference in receive signal requirement for 11, 5.5, 2, and 1. 11 already works at like -90.
I was recommending that you test out 2x cloaking since I thought you already had WARs up, but I see you're saying you have been using them in general, not that you put them up for this link. Well anyway, for that 45km link if you ever get to upgrade it to StarOS v3/x86 or you put WAR2s in on each end, it's worth trying out 2x cloaking for improved performance. Yeah 11mbit with SuperG features performs quite decent and is very sturdy.
rbolduc
06-08-2006, 07:35 PM
Yeah 11mbit with SuperG features performs quite decent and is very sturdy.
Tog, you are currently doing this with v3/war and mixed clients or just for backhaul links? I have a mix of CPE's, CPQ's and 2 or 3 2300's just for good measure... Hmmm I might give this a try on my new war/4 ap just for the fun of it.. ;)
Reed
My backhauls are almost all 11a set to auto.
I'm using 11g mode forced to 11mbit transmit rate on my "last mile" client APs.
ninedd
06-09-2006, 05:26 PM
I can tell you from experience that if 11 doesn't currently work, 2 wont work very well either so why even bother trying. Locking at 11 is relatively safe.I agree in most cases. Don't rely on slower speed - fix whatever is broken with the link in the first place. :)I was recommending that you test out 2x cloaking since I thought you already had WARs up, but I see you're saying you have been using them in general, not that you put them up for this link.Well, actually we don't really have any WAR stuff in real production. We're pretty excited about the possibilities, and spending lots of money trying to get it all to work, but at this point, none of our WAR stuff has gone to any customers.
Like I mentioned, with all our existing Atheros V2 AP's, we'd be moving backwards in speed quote a bit with the WARtennas, so using it on our existing AP's seems like a bad idea.
We've also just been unable to get WAR's to perform anything close to our existing WRAP/Prism AP's do. We actually just completed a 75' tower and put WAR's on it, that is about 100 feet away from our existing 16 foot 'tower' with a Prixsm/WRAP. Driving around, we have a pretty hard time even making a link to the WAR/Compex, but can link immediately to the WRAP/Prism, even in cases where we can physically see the new tower and where the WRAP is obscured by tree & ground cover. The WAR shows up in the site survey, but we just can't seem to associate unless we're really close, unsually under 2 miles.
So, we need to figure out what's going on. We'd love to standardize on the WAR platform for everything. I'd just as soon have one simular platform for everything we do AP & CPE. I think people so often don't recognise the cost with dealing with a dozen different 'solutions', and if one solution can do it all, that's perfect by me. We just haven't had much luck getting things to work for us so far, but we'll give it another go this weekend. :)
Well I wont go into painstaking detail, but I have replaced almost all of my sites that were WRAP/v2/atheros with WAR/v3/atheros and had absolutely no negatives. It's faster and more stable. The two heavily-trafficked sites that are left that I haven't switched to WARs yet every day I say to myself "I can't wait to switch that over to a WAR board with some compex cards in it."
I do have all atheros clients, though.
I even put a CM9 in my laptop, you can't beat it. Even recent broadcom wireless crud that comes with most laptops seems weak and deaf compared to a CM9.
If you have CB3s and Tranzeos and whatever else attached to Prism cards, yeah, you have to be careful and your mileage may vary attaching older 11b devices to atheros cards. Thankfully I never went that route and always used atheros clients even if WRAPs did cost a bit more.
From what I've seen on the forums, v3 has generally better compatibility with 11b devices. Make sure you try unchecking "short preamble" in your radio setup and of course set your distance to something reasonably long like 10 miles.
I have three "solutions" now, one is a WRAP/rootenna for when we find any WRAPs that we have left, one is a WAR2/rootenna and the other is a D-Link DWL-G810/rootenna for when it's a cheap residential client that's close to the AP.
ninedd
06-09-2006, 07:15 PM
"I can't wait to switch that over to a WAR board with some compex cards in it."That answers my question from the other thread. :) I had asked if you're using CM9's or Compex's or both. :)
If you have CB3s and Tranzeos and whatever else attached to Prism cards, yeah, you have to be careful and your mileage may vary attaching older 11b devices to atheros cards. Thankfully I never went that route and always used atheros clients even if WRAPs did cost a bit more.We've never gone the CB3 way, and the issue I'm seeing here is Compex/WAR/AP to Compex/WAR/Client. We did get a few WET11's way back when, and they've actualy worked fine for us, but we were really not interested in assembling stuff with duck tape to save a few $. We decided early on that the only way to go was a quality, dependable CPE that looks professional and operates professionally. It's FAR more imporant NOT to have to roll a truck back to the customer over and over again. We want to plug and forget it, plus it's got to be simple and reliable for the installer to connect.
I know it's might not be a popular view on the forums, but for us Tranzeo has been fine, and particularly the CPQ-19's are really nice. They are not just a dumb cheap bridge in a box, and we don't purchase them to be the cheapest thing going. We love the new firmware, it's features and their performance, and we love StarOS.
That all being said, going forward, we expect to be Star Exclusive, so that we can have a single platform for AP and CPE, from 900 to 5.8 and whatever comes next.
From what I've seen on the forums, v3 has generally better compatibility with 11b devices. Make sure you try unchecking "short preamble" in your radio setup and of course set your distance to something reasonably long like 10 miles.Well, it's WAR to WAR, so that shouldn't be an issue. I did however, do that. I have distance set at 30 miles currently - there's not a huge performance benefit anyway, and being way to long is safer than being a little to short. :)
On the V2/WRAP/AP/Atheros that points towards my house, we have one Wet11 still, several TR-CPE-200, some CPE80's, some CPQ's (Atheros) and some StarV2/WRAP/Atheros CPE's and have zero problems with linking or passing data.
I appreciate the input Tog. I guess I'm just brainstorming and trying to think out loud what could be the issue. We're WAR to WAR, Compex to Compex and I've tried all the settings. Linking at 2 or 3 or 4 miles is fine I guess, but not when our existing Star/Prism AP's link perfectly to everything we throw at them up to thier 12 mile limitation.
What's really getting me is that the site survey sees the AP's there with simular RSSI to the WRAP/Prism, yet won't link.
Well, I'll go for another drive in the morning and see what I can hear then. Thanx.
I have been using all CM9s, but I just deployed my first three compex cards last weekend and they have been fantastic. Good signal, full performance.
If it's WAR to WAR and you have atheros cards at both ends you should be able to link up pretty easily. I guess I'd have to say re-check all your settings on both ends, try without WEP if you're using it, etc.
rafamous
10-04-2006, 12:31 PM
IMHO it would be great to keep the super features with b only in V3. I use it in most of my links and get great results.
Just my 2 cents, no big deal if it doesn't happen.
Thanks again for all your hard work.
See ya,
Rich
ninedd
10-04-2006, 05:28 PM
I agree. We have several V2 backhauls, and most of our V2 AP's that I can't replace for exactly that reason. For these situations, going to V3 looses the "Super" features, and performance goes way down. Of course, for the places where we've been able to go V3 and 5Ghz, it also rocks.