91–100 of 184 posts
The only thing I can think of is that they don't have enough high-frequency spectrum (1700/1800/2ghz+) which means lower theoretical data speeds.
Here is the actual study - it is an interesting read: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001078145 In a nutshell; the LTE transmission cycles on and off on a regular cadence without sensing if the channel is clear. This tramples over the 802.11 frames and results in higher utilization of the medium than that which is claimed by Qualcomm
Well the good news is that LTE-U appears to be for the 5 GHz band, not 2.4 GHz. You would think that it would be easier to put micro cells in the home gateways (using the bands they already own) vs. rolling out a new capabilities on the 5 GHz band in the client (I mean won't they have to wait for Apple/Android to switch to a new generation of chips?). I guess the bad feeling is that the unlicensed bands would be used…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes things look more crowded, but unless people are actually using the Comcast WiFi it isn't actually adding to congestion. The periodic SSID beacons are an annoyance but they use negligible bandwidth. That said, don't ever use an ISP provided access point.
> That said, don't ever use an ISP provided access point. Why not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would assume that the bandwidth used by those beacons is pretty small and negligible when compared to the total available bandwidth.
20 or so SSIDs beaconing adds up to a lot of airtime. Consider: * beacons are sent at a low "common" rate, perhaps 6mbps * beacons still include the preamble and the DIFS before that * 802.11n/ac get high bandwidth from aggregating multiple frames So all those trivially small beacons take little bandwidth but a significant amount of airtime (which is a significant amount of potential bandwidth for faster clients with…
Here [1] somebody collected measurements of time eaten by beacons at few configurations. Not a complete disaster, but still somewhat significant. For example, at the place where I am now, I'm receiving 67 beacons per second (all at 1Mbps), which, according to those calculation, wastes 17% of airtime.
[1] http://wifinigel.blogspot.com/2013/08/its-well-known-rule-of...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The average home user, sure, the ISP AP may be fine. But for the average reader of HN I suspect it would not be. I can't use an AP that does not allow me to fine-tune QoS and just tinker in general if packets are not flowing in the way that I desire.
I'd be interested to know how much the average HN user cares about this. I certainly don't. I'm not even entirely sure how fast my home internet connection is - it's certainly fast enough for me to stream Netflix etc as well as connect to a VPN for working from home. I don't really care about anything else. (not that my internet connection is always great - it isn't - but that lies with my internet provider, who I ha…
I think there are a lot of smart people on HN, but that doesn't mean they're all interested in all the same things. Tweaking wifi settings just seems like a waste of time to me, and boring to top it off. My interaction with my AP stopped at setting the ssid and passphrase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your link doesn't work by the way.
works fine here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
20 or so SSIDs beaconing adds up to a lot of airtime. Consider: * beacons are sent at a low "common" rate, perhaps 6mbps * beacons still include the preamble and the DIFS before that * 802.11n/ac get high bandwidth from aggregating multiple frames So all those trivially small beacons take little bandwidth but a significant amount of airtime (which is a significant amount of potential bandwidth for faster clients with…
That's true. Most 2.4GHz networks beacon at 1Mbps, which is because they are typically configured for compatibility down to 802.11b and beacons are transmitted at the lowest enabled speed. Here [1] somebody collected measurements of time eaten by beacons at few configurations. Not a complete disaster, but still somewhat significant. For example, at the place where I am now, I'm receiving 67 beacons per second (all at…
By just counting the literal airtime of the beacons, I think it underestimates the effects a bit, because it doesn't account for the contention of the remaining air time, which would be reflected in increased collisions and small delays which (sorry to be hand-wavy again) can add up. I think if he ran some application-level tests at the same time (perhaps iperf, perhaps something more sophisticated) he would see a bigger impact to "good-put".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say it's more like a street food vendor setting up a stall on a public sidewalk. Sometimes that's really convenient for both of you and it's exactly what you want, and sometimes the area is too congested so he's just in your way and it's super obnoxious. (And obviously it makes a big difference whether you're out in the suburbs or you're just off Times Square.)
And guess what? At least in NYC, there are rules about where and for how long those food vendors set up. (Not that all of them follow the rules, of course, but not having your permit is rather costly, I understand.) "Let the market decide" doesn't work with commons. It's a tragedy, I tell you.
It sure was for Eric Garner…