[Battlemesh] recommendations for 40Km Link / OpenWRT on ubnt ath9k hw ? / AirMax

fboehm fboehm at aon.at
Tue Mar 25 14:53:45 CET 2014

Sounds like a perfect example for a hidden-node(s) situation. It totally 
makes sense that AirMax is faster in that case. Every other MAC Layer 
based on polling clients or allocating timeslots would be better than 
plain CSMA/CA.


Am 25.03.14 14:35, schrieb Musti:
> The setup we had running with AirMax for about a year:
> AP on a mountain, about 5 clients around in 20km radius. With AirMax throughput was about 10times what we get now with openwrt, with significantly more packet loss. Prior to that we found out that AirOS without AirMax is comparable to openwrt.
> Regards,
> Musti
> On 25 Mar 2014, at 14:18, Laurent GUERBY <laurent at guerby.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 13:52 +0100, Musti wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> in wlan slovenia network we are slowly looking at migrating from AirOS
>>> to openwrt for UBNT devices, however the tests for now show that ath9k
>>> performs worse then UBNT AirMax. The difference is rather small in PtP
>>> links, however fails horribly at PtM as there is no TDMA.
>> Hi,
>> We tested with and without AirMax and found out not much differences
>> except in certain case (colocation of close antennas) AirMax
>> wasn't working at all (horrible bandwidth performance, slow to access
>> web admin). In the end we've been running AirOS without AirMax for a
>> while now both PtP and PtM
>> Do you have detailed performance results with and without AirMax ?
>> Sincerely,
>> Laurent
>> _______________________________________________
>> Battlemesh mailing list
>> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh
> _______________________________________________
> Battlemesh mailing list
> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh

More information about the Battlemesh mailing list