A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 8th 20, 09:20 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Chris Green
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 286
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

Andy Burns wrote:
Chris Green wrote:

you don't get 1000Mb/s on a
Gigabit wired connection do you!


Actually yes.

Well I did some checks (admittedly a few years ago) and actual
throughputs on Gigabit links were mostly somewhat less, here are the
actual throughputs I got (on the best two systems I tried):-

^ Destination ^ Hardware ^ Disk drive ^ Connection ^ Bandwidth ^ cp ^ rsync to nfs ^ rsync direct ^ rsync daemon ^ comments ^
| revo | Intel Atom | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 911 Mb/s | 50.7 MB/s | 38.7 MB/s | 10.6 MB/s | | Processor limited but quite good |
| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 | ::: | ::: | 28.9 MB/s | 25.0 MB/s | 10.8 MB/s | | ::: |
| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 51.9 MB/s | 45.8 MB/s | 10.7 MB/s | | ::: |
| test | Intel quad | Internal | 1000Mb/s | 850 Mb/s | 80.3 MB/s | 56.3 MB/s | 66.4 MB/s | | |
| ::: | ::: | USB 2.0 ** | ::: | ::: | 84.6 MB/s | 46.5 MB/s | 44.2 MB/s | | ::: |
| ::: | ::: | eSata | ::: | ::: | 79.6 MB/s | 52.8 MB/s | 69.7 MB/s | | |

These were all from a fairly fast quad core based desktop running Linux, 'test'
was also a Linux desktop. So at best I was getting about 85% of Gigabit speed.


I just checked a file transfer, 16.3MB/s, so that's probably around
150Mb/s which ain't half bad.


That's a bit more throughout than I get on a "supposed" 866Mbps link,
openWRT on the HH5a doesn't support hardware packet offload, so router
CPU becomes the bottleneck


--
Chris Green

  #22  
Old April 8th 20, 10:17 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
NY[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 91
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
MissRiaElaine wrote:

That's me screwed then. Don't use wireless at all. Everything wired in
Cat 6 back to the patch panel


As they tend to get thinner and lighter, laptops are ditching inbuilt
ethernet sockets, if you want wired you'll end up with a USB
soap-on-a-rope giving you ethernet, monitor connection etc ... think
you'll be safe with desktops for a few years yet.


And you have to remember to carry around the soap-on-a-rope (*) and the DVD
drive and all the other things that used to be built into the laptop.

Removing a socket because it is too big to fit the case is putting things
arse-about-face: you design the case to fit the required innards, not the
other way round. I have a USB TV adaptor, and rather than make the case
slightly wider at one end to take the Belling Lee aerial socket (as is the
case with another similar adaptor) they chose to fit a miniature coax socket
and supply a short converter lead. The mini socket and plug are a very loose
fit, so the weight of the aerial cable or any slight movement of the cable
pulls the converter out of the socket on the adaptor. I have sellotaped mine
on very securely.


(*) I wonder why soap-on-a-ropes became so popular (1960s/70s) and then sank
without trace. One of my first memories (I was 3 years old) was of a
so-called "friend" grabbing my soap-on-a-rope that I'd received that day for
my birthday and flushing it down the loo. I walloped him. I say "so-called
friend" - you know the situation: the mothers are good friends, so surely
their sons will want to be friends too. As if.

  #23  
Old April 8th 20, 10:26 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
NY[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 91
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

"Chris Green" wrote in message
...
Andy Burns wrote:
Chris Green wrote:

I get much more than that from APs (well, routers configured as APs)
in the room where the client is. I'm getting 300Mb/s at the moment
for example, but the AP is only a few feet from me.


A wifi connection that claims that speed, or actual throughput to a
local server?


Throughput probably isn't 300Mb/s but you don't get 1000Mb/s on a
Gigabit wired connection do you! It's certainly pretty good though.

I just checked a file transfer, 16.3MB/s, so that's probably around
150Mb/s which ain't half bad. I think that a longer transfer that
really saturated the connection might well be a bit faster.


I tested two Windows computers transferring a 2 GB file by shared (SMB)
drive. Firstly with both computers connected to the router by Ethernet and
then with one of them connected by wifi (and other still by Ethernet). There
was no other wifi traffic and there were no other networks on the same or
adjacent channels.

The all-Ethernet transfer showed a bit rate (Task Manager, Networking) that
was not far short of 1 Gbps. The graph showed a fairly steady line, with
occasional very brief dips in speed due to buffers becoming full. I didn't
time the transfer in bytes/second, but I imagine there's a bit of overhead.
The theoretical maximum (in GB/s) is 1 Gbps / 8, but I tend to divide by 10
rather than 8 to allow for overheads.

I then repeated it for wifi. The laptop's Task Manager, Networking reported
a connection speed of around 50-100 Mbps - it varied randomly over time -
and the transfer ran at about 50% of maximum (where "maximum" is presumably
the connection speed at that moment - shame Task Manager on Win 7 doesn't
report real Mbps rather than % of link speed. And the graph showed a
sawtooth between 0 and 100% with a period of a few seconds - so definitely
not running flat-out.

  #24  
Old April 8th 20, 11:37 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Graham J[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 334
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

NY wrote:
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
MissRiaElaine wrote:

That's me screwed then. Don't use wireless at all. Everything wired
in Cat 6 back to the patch panel


As they tend to get thinner and lighter, laptops are ditching inbuilt
ethernet sockets, if you want wired you'll end up with a USB
soap-on-a-rope giving you ethernet, monitor connection etc ... think
you'll be safe with desktops for a few years yet.


Many years back I had a laptop with a PCMCIA card - the card was about
5mm thick. The card was an Ethernet adapter. To connect the RJ45 plug
one pulled out a plastic housing and pushed the connector through it.
The card was probably from 3Com, see picture at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_Card

At the time you could also get PCMCIA cards with a cable adapter
(dongle) having a RJ45 socket on the end.


--
Graham J
  #25  
Old April 8th 20, 12:02 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Jeff Gaines
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 410
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

On 08/04/2020 in message Graham J wrote:

Many years back I had a laptop with a PCMCIA card - the card was about 5mm
thick. The card was an Ethernet adapter. To connect the RJ45 plug one
pulled out a plastic housing and pushed the connector through it. The card
was probably from 3Com, see picture at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_Card

At the time you could also get PCMCIA cards with a cable adapter (dongle)
having a RJ45 socket on the end.


I still have some of those - including one that works on my Psion netBook
(the original and the best).

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
This is as bad as it can get, but don't bet on it
  #26  
Old April 8th 20, 07:05 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Andy Burns[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

Graham J wrote:

Many years back I had a laptop with a PCMCIA card - the card was about
5mm thick.* The card was an Ethernet adapter.


Yes I remember those horror days, and parallel port ethernet! I've seen
some thin laptops which have a "flip down" ethernet socket, so it
doesn't take space when not in use,
  #27  
Old April 8th 20, 09:25 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
MissRiaElaine[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 303
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

On 08/04/2020 11:37, Graham J wrote:

At the time you could also get PCMCIA cards with a cable adapter
(dongle) having a RJ45 socket on the end.


Yes I remember those. The proprietary connector that connected the cable
with the RJ45 socket on to the card itself invariably fell out when the
clips that held it in place broke.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
  #28  
Old April 9th 20, 12:22 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 692
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 19:05:30 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
Graham J wrote:

Many years back I had a laptop with a PCMCIA card - the card was about
5mm thick.* The card was an Ethernet adapter.


Yes I remember those horror days, and parallel port ethernet! I've seen
some thin laptops which have a "flip down" ethernet socket, so it
doesn't take space when not in use,


Ethernet has been through various iterations.

The original was a radio based system in Hawaii.

The first commercial systems were based on Intel / Xerox chips and used a single [thick] cable that you literally stuck the connections into - these wired back to a port similar to a parallel one. I worked on a TDR device to test the cables in service in 1989. 10Mbps

The second used thinner cables strung together with T pieces and BNC connectors and nick named cheapernet. 10Mbps.

Then came twisted pair and RJ45 connectors. An 10Mbps eight port switch cost ~800 in 1994 (now 8). Originally also 10Mbps, but increased over time to 100Mbps over cat 5e cables and 1Gbps over cat 6 cables.

These days wired connections are often replaced by Wi-Fi. Although you will be lucky to get the range you can get with a Cat 5e cable.
  #29  
Old April 9th 20, 01:19 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
NY[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 91
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

"R. Mark Clayton" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 19:05:30 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
Graham J wrote:

Many years back I had a laptop with a PCMCIA card - the card was about
5mm thick. The card was an Ethernet adapter.


Yes I remember those horror days, and parallel port ethernet! I've seen
some thin laptops which have a "flip down" ethernet socket, so it
doesn't take space when not in use,


Ethernet has been through various iterations.

The original was a radio based system in Hawaii.

The first commercial systems were based on Intel / Xerox chips and used a
single [thick] cable that you literally stuck the connections into - these
wired back to a port similar to a parallel one. I worked on a TDR device
to test the cables in service in 1989. 10Mbps

The second used thinner cables strung together with T pieces and BNC
connectors and nick named cheapernet. 10Mbps.

Then came twisted pair and RJ45 connectors. An 10Mbps eight port switch
cost ~800 in 1994 (now 8). Originally also 10Mbps, but increased over
time to 100Mbps over cat 5e cables and 1Gbps over cat 6 cables.

These days wired connections are often replaced by Wi-Fi. Although you
will be lucky to get the range you can get with a Cat 5e cable.


I've experience of all three types of cabling.

Thick Ethernet was a pain. The cable was so thick that it was like wrestling
a snake, and you could only insert taps ("stingers") and transceivers at
designated places (maxima for the reflected signal) which were marked on the
sheath of the cable. The drop cable from each transceiver was also thick and
difficult to route, and a sliding latch was needed at each end to prevent
the weight and stiffness of the cable from pulling the plug out of the
socket. I think the drop cables used MIDI-type D connectors.

Thin Ethernet was a lot better. The thinner cable and BNC connectors made it
a lot easier to insert a new branch for a new computer. Its main problem was
that it was an open-ended ring (a bus?) rather than star topology, so if you
needed to insert a new length of cable and a new T piece, you took down the
LAN for *everyone* on that segment. (*) Some network cards were so sensitive
that they even upset the whole LAN if a T piece was unplugged from or
plugged into the card, even though the length of the LAN was not broken.

So all that cable was ripped out and miles of "structure cabling" was
installed: a separate length of Cat 5 from each PC to the router/switch/hub.
Now for the first time, every computer was isolated from all the others, and
plugging/unplugging your cable didn't affect anyone else - unless you made a
software error such as enabling DHCP on a server which competed with the
building-wide DHCP server (been there, done that). Then we learned the joys
of RJ45 connectors - in particular, how incredibly fragile the plastic side
clip is and how easily it breaks off.


(*) There was a lot of announcing "I'm about to break the LAN in half an
hour. Make sure you've got things saved." This was mainly for terminal
sessions from PC to server, as opposed to SMB remote access to files from
client PC to server. The worst that would happen is that you might have to
login again afterwards. With file access, you need to save onto the server
any changes in your local copy of a file before the session dies.

  #30  
Old April 9th 20, 04:53 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
MissRiaElaine[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 303
Default Recommendations for Mesh Wifi please, wired backhaul preferred

On 09/04/2020 13:19, NY wrote:

(*) There was a lot of announcing "I'm about to break the LAN in half an
hour. Make sure you've got things saved." This was mainly for terminal
sessions from PC to server, as opposed to SMB remote access to files
from client PC to server. The worst that would happen is that you might
have to login again afterwards. With file access, you need to save onto
the server any changes in your local copy of a file before the session
dies.


I don't remember Thicknet, but the first network system I used at work
was Thinnet with BNC's and T-pieces, and it was what I first installed
at home. It worked reasonably well for remote control of the packet
radio BBS PC (486DX466 on DOS 6.22..!) which was in the garage to
minimise antenna coax runs, and the PC's I was using upstairs in the
bedroom. Hadn't discovered t'interweb at that time.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Mesh" wifi systems Tim+[_2_] uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 September 12th 18 12:46 AM
Community BB backhaul Cmorgan uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 August 24th 05 12:51 AM
Mesh Broadband? Mike NG uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 April 19th 05 06:46 AM
Laptop WiFi Problem. Wired NIC works - WiFi does not any ideas please? DeeBee uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 7 April 3rd 05 06:01 PM
backhaul - (what's in a name?) robert w hall uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 January 9th 05 09:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2020 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.