<p dir="ltr"><br>
On 12 Jun 2016 01:54, "Mitar" <<a href="mailto:mitar@tnode.com">mitar@tnode.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi!<br>
><br>
> I am thinking that I would like to try if there is better performance if<br>
> instead of one 80 MHz wide WiFi point-to-point channel I would use 2<br>
> radios with 40 MHz wide channels. The idea is that throughput would be<br>
> the same, but because channels are narrower, there will be less noise<br>
> and less packet loss.<br>
><br>
> This would also allow higher throughput when using 80 MHz channels.<br>
><br>
> The question is how to achieve this? The problem is that link speed<br>
> fluctuates so round-robin multi-path seems that it will not work well<br>
> over wireless.<br>
><br>
> Any experience with this?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Yes, you can use mptcp and a transparent tcp intercepting socks proxy (iptables and SSH -d) to avoid tcp-over-tcp as mentioned in clauz presentation. For the non-tcp traffic, you can use a tcp VPN such as vtun, openvpn or SSH.</p>
<p dir="ltr">><br>
><br>
> Mitar<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> <a href="http://mitar.tnode.com/">http://mitar.tnode.com/</a><br>
> <a href="https://twitter.com/mitar_m">https://twitter.com/mitar_m</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Battlemesh mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Battlemesh@ml.ninux.org">Battlemesh@ml.ninux.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh">http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh</a><br>
</p>