Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3 ------ ------ ------ ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Thanks, Shane
Now, is this CPU bottleneck because of batman and routing or something else? (cannot forward packets fast enough?) 11mbits isn't really that much and I still have to see my setup hit that figure between only two nodes, let alone multi-hop.
Now that we've played around a bit can someone please provide some benchmarks of a 5-node network (with some multi-hop paths) with batman and with just the whole network bridged and on the same subnet.
What sort of performance should you expect in either scenario?
As I said before, I used to get 1MB/s with non-routed bridged network of two atheros devices but ever since I started using batman, 300KB/s is the most I was ever able to achieve between the same two nodes. 2 hops and it goes down to 40KB/s.
-----Original Message----- From: b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open-mesh.net [mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open- mesh.net] On Behalf Of Shane Chao Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 1:34 AM To: b.a.t.m.a.n@open-mesh.net Subject: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Multiple radios to improve throughput
Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Thanks, Shane _______________________________________________ B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
I too would like to see this benchmark setup. I have a private mesh that I've been using batman and olsr on that consists of about 8 nodes that end up spread out of about a 2000m x 2000m area and right now I'm only using one radio for the mesh. I'm pushing video from about 4 of these nodes and if I try to do more than 2 hops with the video I see drastic drops in the video performance.
I use Avila Gateworks boards that have 533 MHz Intel Xscale processors and I've never seen the cpu even close to taxed by batman, olsr, or the radios, as a point of reference for the original poster. They also have a newer board with a 633 Mhz cpu.
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:24 +0200, Predrag Balorda wrote:
Now, is this CPU bottleneck because of batman and routing or something else? (cannot forward packets fast enough?) 11mbits isn't really that much and I still have to see my setup hit that figure between only two nodes, let alone multi-hop.
Now that we've played around a bit can someone please provide some benchmarks of a 5-node network (with some multi-hop paths) with batman and with just the whole network bridged and on the same subnet.
What sort of performance should you expect in either scenario?
As I said before, I used to get 1MB/s with non-routed bridged network of two atheros devices but ever since I started using batman, 300KB/s is the most I was ever able to achieve between the same two nodes. 2 hops and it goes down to 40KB/s.
-----Original Message----- From: b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open-mesh.net [mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open- mesh.net] On Behalf Of Shane Chao Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 1:34 AM To: b.a.t.m.a.n@open-mesh.net Subject: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Multiple radios to improve throughput
Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Thanks, Shane _______________________________________________ B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Mark Kelly mark.kelly@cadre5.com wrote:
I too would like to see this benchmark setup. I have a private mesh that I've been using batman and olsr on that consists of about 8 nodes that end up spread out of about a 2000m x 2000m area and right now I'm only using one radio for the mesh. I'm pushing video from about 4 of these nodes and if I try to do more than 2 hops with the video I see drastic drops in the video performance.
I use Avila Gateworks boards that have 533 MHz Intel Xscale processors and I've never seen the cpu even close to taxed by batman, olsr, or the radios, as a point of reference for the original poster. They also have a newer board with a 633 Mhz cpu.
I would like to see some test of performance with mesh with 2 radios.
Hopping on the same radio as most freifunk network does is a disaster in terms of performance, because the radio is not full-duplex.
I have bought 12 foneras to make a test with 6 nodes (2 foneras per node), to see if OLSR chooses the fastest route in terms of throughput, and it does not. I have to try to play with LinkQualityMult on the ethernet link.
Does someone has an firmware image with batman for lafonera I can use with ap51?
-- Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org> FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403
On Jun 5, 2008, at 3:17 PM, Benjamin Henrion wrote:
I have bought 12 foneras to make a test with 6 nodes (2 foneras per node), to see if OLSR chooses the fastest route in terms of throughput, and it does not. I have to try to play with LinkQualityMult on the ethernet link.
Not *yet* :)
With ETT metric this will be the case.
With MIC metrics we will even be able to avoid collisions much more.
Stay tuned or help in making this possible :)
a.
--- there's no place like 127.0.0.1
I believe the new routerboard 433 is supposed to handle that with its 600 (or was it 800?) MHz cpu (atheros). But then you never know...
-----Original Message----- From: b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open-mesh.net [mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-bounces@open- mesh.net] On Behalf Of Shane Chao Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 1:34 AM To: b.a.t.m.a.n@open-mesh.net Subject: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Multiple radios to improve throughput
Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Thanks, Shane _______________________________________________ B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
Shane Chao schao@changind.com [080603]:
Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Make a test with 2 atheros minipci cards on a Alix 3C3 (500mhz) and try to find out if the CPU is saturated.
-- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion@ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403
What's the highest speed you get when you upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board.
I did the similar experiments on three soekris box. I found if you run the iperf on the first or last node, the iperf consume a lot cpu time.
Jing
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Benjamin Henrion bh@udev.org wrote:
Shane Chao schao@changind.com [080603]:
Elektra,
Thank you for pointing out in May 08 that most embedded boards do not have enough CPU power to saturate the capacity of single radio link. I was experimenting Batman in a straight line, three node configuration with the middle node having two radios so it doesn't have to switch between node 1 and node 3. My configuration is as follows:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
When I ran iperf between node 1 and 3, I did not see any throughput improvements with either one or two radios in node 2. I even stopped Batman and manually setup the routes and the performance remains the same. However, when I upgrade node 2 from a 200MHz CPU board to a 500MHz CPU board, the bandwidth went up 50%. So thanks again for pointing out my bottleneck:)
Lastly, can someone suggest some embedded boards fast enough to push wifi radios to its limits?
Make a test with 2 atheros minipci cards on a Alix 3C3 (500mhz) and try to find out if the CPU is saturated.
-- Benjamin Henrion bhenrion@ffii.org FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 _______________________________________________ B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@open-mesh.net https://list.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
Hi all,
I ran another iperf test with the following scenario below:
node 1 node 2 node 3 ------ ------ ------ ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
Both nodes 1 and 3 are still using WRAP board w/ 266MHz cpu with single radio inside but this time I replaced node 2 with a desktop PC w/ 1GHz cpu and 2 radios. The PC is running Ubuntu Linux and Madwifi drivers. The result of iperf from node 1 to 3 isn't any better than when node 2 was using WRAP w/ 2 radios. I was expecting higher throughput from node 1 to 3 due to a faster cpu on node 2 to forward packets between the 2 radios inside but I am now confused.
I am currently not running Batman and instead manually creating the route table in trying to isolate the throughput problem.
Maybe there is some configuration parameters that need to be set on node 2? Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks, Shane
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:53 AM, Shane Chao schao@changind.com wrote:
Hi all,
I ran another iperf test with the following scenario below:
node 1 node 2 node 3
ath0 <--ch 1--> ath0 ath1 <--ch 11-> ath0
Both nodes 1 and 3 are still using WRAP board w/ 266MHz cpu with single radio inside but this time I replaced node 2 with a desktop PC w/ 1GHz cpu and 2 radios. The PC is running Ubuntu Linux and Madwifi drivers. The result of iperf from node 1 to 3 isn't any better than when node 2 was using WRAP w/ 2 radios. I was expecting higher throughput from node 1 to 3 due to a faster cpu on node 2 to forward packets between the 2 radios inside but I am now confused.
I am currently not running Batman and instead manually creating the route table in trying to isolate the throughput problem.
Maybe there is some configuration parameters that need to be set on node 2? Any advice would be appreciated.
Try to scan if you don't have any ap on the same channel or overlapping channels in the neighborhood. Then, put the ch1 on 1 and the ch2 on 14. That would maximise the separation.
And try this outdoor in order to avoid reflexions indoor.
-- Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org> FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Aaron Kaplan -
Benjamin Henrion -
cao jing -
Mark Kelly -
Predrag Balorda -
Shane Chao