Fastest Bridging Configuration
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by on May 16, 2008, 3:26 pm
Please log in for more thread options looking for the fastest wireless link I can set up (bridging). I have two LANs (separate buildings) that are 0.4 miles apart that I want to bridge together. I've set up past links using Buffalo WHR-HP-G54s running Tomato Firmware. I get low latency with 25Mbps max of throughput (with semi- parabolic grid antennas - 24dBi). Given that Buffalo can't sell wireless equipment due to an injunction, I cannot go that route again. Besides, I'd like to go faster. I've thought up some ideas on ways to leverage standard 802.11 equipment. Some thoughts: 1. Channel bond A & G radios in a dual-radio bridge, such as the Cisco Aironet 1240 (no success there yet). 2. Run two bridge links and bond the two links at each end with a capable switch (Cisco calls it "EtherChannel). 3. Bridge with 802.11n (Draft 2.0). I understand that some of the new technologies of N still are effective in narrow focused beam configuration (24 dBi SPG antennas) over G. Maybe use antennas that have broader coverage if MIMO can be taken advantaged at that distance. 4. Full-duplex (Not to spec, I know) / transmit on 1 antenna, receive on another (with difference polarization). Or use multiple radios, one that transmit on 5 ghz, but receives on 2.4 ghz (is that even possible?) I'd like to hear of some (better) ideas, especially what has actually worked. I can probably spend a $1000 on each end for the radios if I can get better speeds. Thanks, Michael | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Aaron Leonard on May 16, 2008, 5:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options street price.) 24dBi is overkill for this app; Yagis make sense. (3 per AP, ideally a couple feet apart. Should be able to get 100Mbps HDX at least? (Remember to use AES if you want 11n rates.) Should ought to work, although you'd be something of a pioneer. Cheers, Aaron ---- ~ Maybe someone can direct me to a previous post, but simply, I'm ~ looking for the fastest wireless link I can set up (bridging). I have ~ two LANs (separate buildings) that are 0.4 miles apart that I want to ~ bridge together. ~ ~ I've set up past links using Buffalo WHR-HP-G54s running Tomato ~ Firmware. I get low latency with 25Mbps max of throughput (with semi- ~ parabolic grid antennas - 24dBi). Given that Buffalo can't sell ~ wireless equipment due to an injunction, I cannot go that route ~ again. Besides, I'd like to go faster. ~ ~ I've thought up some ideas on ways to leverage standard 802.11 ~ equipment. Some thoughts: ~ ~ 1. Channel bond A & G radios in a dual-radio bridge, such as the ~ Cisco Aironet 1240 (no success there yet). ~ ~ 2. Run two bridge links and bond the two links at each end with a ~ capable switch (Cisco calls it "EtherChannel). ~ ~ 3. Bridge with 802.11n (Draft 2.0). I understand that some of the ~ new technologies of N still are effective in narrow focused beam ~ configuration (24 dBi SPG antennas) over G. Maybe use antennas that ~ have broader coverage if MIMO can be taken advantaged at that ~ distance. ~ ~ 4. Full-duplex (Not to spec, I know) / transmit on 1 antenna, receive ~ on another (with difference polarization). Or use multiple radios, ~ one that transmit on 5 ghz, but receives on 2.4 ghz (is that even ~ possible?) ~ ~ I'd like to hear of some (better) ideas, especially what has actually ~ worked. I can probably spend a $1000 on each end for the radios if I ~ can get better speeds. ~ ~ Thanks, ~ ~ Michael | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Jeff Liebermann on May 16, 2008, 7:16 pm
Please log in for more thread options On Fri, 16 May 2008 12:26:53 -0700 (PDT), milkspill@gmail.com wrote:
That's about 2100 ft. >I've set up past links using Buffalo WHR-HP-G54s running Tomato
>Firmware. I get low latency with 25Mbps max of throughput (with semi- >parabolic grid antennas - 24dBi). Given that Buffalo can't sell >wireless equipment due to an injunction, I cannot go that route >again. Besides, I'd like to go faster. You can squeeze out a bit more using the various 108 or 125Mbit/sec consumer routers. For example the Buffalo WHR-G125. >1. Channel bond A & G radios in a dual-radio bridge, such as the
>Cisco Aironet 1240 (no success there yet). I haven't seen anything like that in a single box. It can be done with two boxes, but not easily. >2. Run two bridge links and bond the two links at each end with a
>capable switch (Cisco calls it "EtherChannel). <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EtherChannel>
Look for 802.3ad or Link Aggregation Control Protocol
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation> I've used two parallel 2.4GHz bridges for redunancy and reliability. As an added bonus, the total thruput was considerably higher than with a single link. I tried something cute that didn't work. I initially had an ordinary ethernet switch at each end. I just plugged two wireless links into both ends expecting thruput to be roughly twice that of a single link. It was faster, but not quite twice. The ethernet switches did not provide the necessary load balancing. SNMP showed that most of the traffic was going via one or the other wireless link, while the other port just sat there. >3. Bridge with 802.11n (Draft 2.0). I understand that some of the
>new technologies of N still are effective in narrow focused beam >configuration (24 dBi SPG antennas) over G. Maybe use antennas that >have broader coverage if MIMO can be taken advantaged at that >distance. I've been thinking of going into the antenna business. I hope you like that way 3 antennas look at each end. 24dBi is overkill for 2000ft range. Methinks about 12dBi would be quite sufficient. >4. Full-duplex (Not to spec, I know) / transmit on 1 antenna, receive
>on another (with difference polarization). Or use multiple radios, >one that transmit on 5 ghz, but receives on 2.4 ghz (is that even >possible?) Yes, it's possible with non-802.11 implimentations. For example, Proxim Lynx radios split the 5.7GHz band in half. One half goes in one direction, while the other band goes in the other. Real full duplex (with a cavity duplexer on the back of the Lynx radios). The way it works with 802.11 is that you can simulate a full duplex connection by going twice as fast on the wireless link. The radios switch direction depending on which packets are going in which direction. With buffering at each end, it looks just like full duplex at half the wireless rate. >I'd like to hear of some (better) ideas, especially what has actually
>worked. I can probably spend a $1000 on each end for the radios if I >can get better speeds. I don't think you can do it right for $1000/end. Maybe with used hardware. Look for 5.7GHz or higher frequency hardware. For example: <http://www.winncom.com/products/category/WPP/list.html>
Orthogon (Motorola) will go at 44Mbits/sec ethernet thruput up to
about 3 miles: <http://www.motorola.com/ptp>
If you go to 22Ghz or 60GHz, the available speeds are even faster.
<http://www.winncom.com/pdf/DS_OS-Gemini_OS-Gemini_Lite_US.pdf> 125Mbits/sec ethernet thruput is possible: <http://www.winncom.com/products/manuf/10110/list.html>
Just, don't ask the prices.
After you've done the requisite window shopping, look on eBay for various Buffalo wireless products. Search for "buffalo wireless". There are plenty available (at rediculously high prices). -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831-336-2558 jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com # http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by on May 19, 2008, 3:06 pm
Please log in for more thread options I appreciate all of the replies and various Ideas.
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 12:26:53 -0700 (PDT), milksp...@gmail.com wrote:
> >Maybe someone can direct me to a previous post, but simply, I'm
> >looking for the fastestwirelesslink I can set up (bridging). =A0I have > >two LANs (separate buildings) that are 0.4 miles apart that I want to > >bridge together. >
> That's about 2100 ft. > > >I've set up past links using Buffalo WHR-HP-G54s running Tomato
> >Firmware. =A0I get low latency with 25Mbps max of throughput (with semi- > >parabolic grid antennas - 24dBi). =A0Given that Buffalo can't sell > >wirelessequipment due to an injunction, I cannot go that route > >again. =A0Besides, I'd like to go faster. >
> You can squeeze out a bit more using the various 108 or 125Mbit/sec > consumer routers. =A0For example the Buffalo WHR-G125. > > >1. =A0Channel bond A & G radios in a dual-radio bridge, such as the
> >Cisco Aironet 1240 (no success there yet). >
> I haven't seen anything like that in a single box. =A0It can be done > with two boxes, but not easily. > > >2. =A0Run two bridge links and bond the two links at each end with a
> >capable switch (Cisco calls it "EtherChannel). >
links into both ends expecting thruput to be roughly twice
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EtherChannel> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation> > Look for 802.3ad or Link Aggregation Control Protocol > > I've used two parallel 2.4GHz bridges for redunancy and reliability. > As an added bonus, the total thruput was considerably higher than with > a single link. =A0I tried something cute that didn't work. =A0I initially > had an ordinary ethernet switch at each end. =A0I just plugged twowireless= > that of a single link. =A0It was faster, but not quite twice. =A0The
, while the other port just sat there.
> ethernet switches did not provide the necessary load balancing. =A0SNMP > showed that most of the traffic was going via one or the otherwirelesslink= Was this with LACP? >
> >3. =A0Bridge with 802.11n (Draft 2.0). =A0I understand that some of the
> >new technologies of N still are effective in narrow focused beam > >configuration (24 dBi SPG antennas) over G. Maybe use antennas that > >have broader coverage if MIMO can be taken advantaged at that > >distance. >
> I've been thinking of going into the antenna business. =A0I hope you > like that way 3 antennas look at each end. =A024dBi is overkill for > 2000ft range. =A0Methinks about 12dBi would be quite sufficient. > > >4. =A0Full-duplex (Not to spec, I know) / transmit on 1 antenna, receive
> >on another (with difference polarization). =A0Or use multiple radios, > >one that transmit on 5 ghz, but receives on 2.4 ghz (is that even > >possible?) >
> Yes, it's possible with non-802.11 implimentations. =A0For example, > Proxim Lynx radios split the 5.7GHz band in half. =A0One half goes in > one direction, while the other band goes in the other. =A0Real full > duplex (with a cavity duplexer on the back of the Lynx radios). > > The way it works with 802.11 is that you can simulate a full duplex > connection by going twice as fast on thewirelesslink. =A0The radios > switch direction depending on which packets are going in which > direction. =A0With buffering at each end, it looks just like full duplex > at half thewirelessrate. > > >I'd like to hear of some (better) ideas, especially what has actually
> >worked. =A0I can probably spend a $1000 on each end for the radios if I > >can get better speeds. >
> I don't think you can do it right for $1000/end. =A0Maybe with used > hardware. =A0Look for 5.7GHz or higher frequency hardware. =A0For example:= > <http://www.winncom.com/products/category/WPP/list.html>
> Orthogon (Motorola) will go at 44Mbits/sec ethernet thruput up to > about 3 miles: > <http://www.motorola.com/ptp> > <http://www.winncom.com/pdf/DS_OS-Gemini_OS-Gemini_Lite_US.pdf> > If you go to 22Ghz or 60GHz, the available speeds are even faster. > 125Mbits/sec ethernet thruput is possible: > <http://www.winncom.com/products/manuf/10110/list.html> > Just, don't ask the prices. > I'm looking at Trango's TrangoLINK-45 -- they claim 45Mbps of throughput for a set of radio for $2000 (promo right now) w/integrated 23dBi antenna. http://www.trangobroadband.com/wireless_products/TrangoLINK_45_usa.shtml > After you've done the requisite window shopping, look on eBay for
> various Buffalowirelessproducts. =A0Search for "buffalowireless". > There are plenty available (at rediculously high prices). > -- > # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 > # 831-336-2558 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us > #http://802.11junk.com=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 je...@cruzio.com > #http://www.LearnByDestroying.com=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 AE6KS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Jeff Liebermann on May 19, 2008, 10:36 pm
Please log in for more thread options On Mon, 19 May 2008 12:06:08 -0700 (PDT), milkspill@gmail.com wrote:
>Was this with LACP?
No. It was with two junk ethernet switches that did not have 802.3ad features: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_Aggregation_Control_Protocol>
It might have worked if I had fancier switches available.
>I'm looking at Trango's TrangoLINK-45 -- they claim 45Mbps of
>throughput for a set of radio for $2000 (promo right now) w/integrated >23dBi antenna. >http://www.trangobroadband.com/wireless_products/TrangoLINK_45_usa.shtml I've use other Trango products. Crude documentation, limited monitoring (SNMP), marginal support, some quality control problems. I wasn't thrilled, but it eventually did work for me. Well, you could get 50Mbits/sec using two "aggregated?" 802.11g links at 25Mbits/sec each. The cost would be much less than $2,000, but would be rather messy with two antennas at each end. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831-336-2558 jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com # http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Fastest Bridging Configuration | May 16, 2008, 3:26 pm |
| What is the Fastest wireless channel? | May 19, 2007, 5:44 am |
| PcMag: Fastest Wireless Routers (MIMO Technology) | June 21, 2007, 2:09 am |
| Swedish Granny Sets Fastest Internet Record | July 20, 2007, 9:36 am |
| Bridging | November 28, 2005, 8:11 pm |
| Bridging | September 3, 2006, 9:48 pm |
| ICS or Bridging? | July 13, 2008, 3:00 pm |
| Bridging question | November 7, 2005, 6:34 pm |
| Wireless bridging | November 14, 2005, 9:28 am |
| 802.11g/n bridging routers? | May 1, 2006, 1:06 pm |
| Wireless Bridging / WDS | January 24, 2007, 12:14 pm |
| WG802v2 bridging problem | December 1, 2004, 9:33 am |
| Bridging wrt54g to wgt624 | December 12, 2004, 6:54 pm |
| Linksys WRT54G & ?Bridging? | February 6, 2005, 8:16 pm |
| Bridging D-Link Wireless | August 9, 2005, 6:41 pm |
>looking for the fastest wireless link I can set up (bridging). I have
>two LANs (separate buildings) that are 0.4 miles apart that I want to
>bridge together.