Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
![]() |
World Community Grid Forums
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
No member browsing this thread |
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 9
|
![]() |
Author |
|
Hypernova
Master Cruncher Audaces Fortuna Juvat ! Vaud - Switzerland Joined: Dec 16, 2008 Post Count: 1908 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I am experimenting some communication problems with my devices. In a room 13 of them are hooked each one via WLan usb key. The main Lan base station situated in another room is capable of 300 Mbit bandwith in theory. So 13 devices should not be an issue. But the devices are compact and very near to each other like 15 to 20 cm in average. This means that there are 13 emitter/reciever USB WLan keys very near to each other.
----------------------------------------Does anyone have an idea if all the units will interfere and hamper good transmission which could be the origin of connection disruptions I am having. A few devices do indeed crunch CEP2. Maybe this is an additional load with negative effects. ![]() |
||
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Hi Hypernova
----------------------------------------Wifi is just like any other Ethernet device before the arrival of Switches Think of your room as one big hub They basically listen to see if anyone else is transmitting and if not they will start sending their packet. If another wifi device is transmitting they back off for an increasing amount of time (if they clash again the back off timer is increased and so on) until they muscle their way into a free slot See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_sense_mu..._with_collision_avoidance This is a variation on wired ethernet which uses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_sense_mu..._with_collision_detection It could be causing problems but no so you would notice. I'm living in a flat with 10 other flats you should see the number of wifi networks in this building! The most likely culprit is going to be DHCP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhcp Do you know if the so called DHCP Scope is set wide enough to allocate an address to all the device wired or wirelessly connected to the router? Another possibility is drivers and hardware compatability. Some router wifi chipsets prefer similar hardware in the wifi card/dongle attached to your PC otherwise they won't play nicely If the signals were analogue then the preamp on the receiving radio might saturate with the transmitters so near but this is the digital world and saturation is just a 1. Plus Wifi manages the transmit power levels to keep them to the bare minimum required to maintain the data link. So this is unlikely to be the cause. Not to worry anyone but they do operate in the same frequency band as your Microwave Oven 2.45Ghz - just on a lot lot lot lot lot lower power level in the same ISM band http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band - as does that bluetooth headset and dongle ![]() Another posibility are the flavours of 802.11 It started off with 802.11b which transmitted at 11, 5.5 and 2Mbits Then they changed the method and added 802.11g at 54Mbits Then we have 802.11N on 150Mbits and N+ with the claimed 300Mbits There's so much locking on and clock extraction gubbins going on each packet that these figures are just a technical myth that help sell product but each version is faster, just not as fast as claimed on the box. The thing with 802.11 (apart from the a version which had to be different and transmit in the 5Ghz band) is that they are all backwards compatible so a N+ dongle should interwork sucessfully with even a "only b" router by changing down the gears and transmission method back down to even 2meg but.... back in the real world it's probably best to choose the lowest common denominator between all of your wifi kit and set them all the same to get your wifi to play ball nicely So if you don't have any old b gear a couple of N+'s and the rest 54Mbit g then set all the drivers and your router to g then none of the kit has to think and negotiate a supported speed before they send the packets back to the WCG. They just go hey I'm g I'll try this 54M speed first - job done Then there's Windows 7 which from bitter experience is a law unto it's own when it comes to wifi - I ended up using Homeplug instead - looking forward to service pack 1 My netbook will only wifi to my router if I allocate it a fixed IP address, outside the DHCP scope in the same subnet - that's the hardware compatibility again The best way and probably the cheapest option, with Ethernet now built into most motherboards, is probably to invest in a cheap as chips switch and a bunch of cat5 RJ-45 leads and then plug just one cable over into your router. If you don't want to drill through a wall get a homeplug set to bridge the gap The stress levels are much lower that way I know ![]() Dave ![]() |
||
|
ebattleon
Cruncher Joined: Oct 28, 2010 Post Count: 20 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
He could just give all the devices fixed IP addresses and should alleviate the problem. It could also be the Router's processor not being fast enough you did not give much details. But i think David is right a 16 port switch and some Cat6 cables and you be in business...:)
----------------------------------------[Edit 1 times, last edit by ebattleon at Nov 20, 2010 8:09:27 PM] |
||
|
nanoprobe
Master Cruncher Classified Joined: Aug 29, 2008 Post Count: 2998 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
CEP2 is an upload bandwidth hog. The only way I was able to get things to upload consistently was to limit the upload bandwidth to 80% of my total upload capability. With multiple machines running you may need to additionally limit the upload from each machine so 80% is not exceeded if they were all uploading simultaneously.
----------------------------------------Davids' suggestion to hard wire everything is also a good idea IMHO.
In 1969 I took an oath to defend and protect the U S Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and Domestic. There was no expiration date.
----------------------------------------![]() ![]() [Edit 2 times, last edit by nanoprobe at Nov 20, 2010 2:44:41 PM] |
||
|
Hypernova
Master Cruncher Audaces Fortuna Juvat ! Vaud - Switzerland Joined: Dec 16, 2008 Post Count: 1908 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thanks for your replies. My system is a N+ system that uses in parallel 2.5 and 5 Ghz to increase bandwith. But I suppose that CEP2 was the killer here. What I did not mention is that besides the 13 units there are also family laptops, Iphones, XBox console, TV set and god knows what else that is also hooked up. So no surprise that the electromagnetic spectrum is becoming very crowded. I would be afraid to measure the electromagnetic emissions in my house.
----------------------------------------![]() So I decided to drill a hole in the wall to have physical access to the router. I bought a 16 port Gigabit Switch. I will cable 13 units physically. Another 3 will remain wireless but they are in another room and on a separate WLan network. The remaining last three (total 19)are already physically cabled. I have in fact two distinct WLan in my house so as to have allways a strong signal wherever you are (there are three floors). ![]() |
||
|
Hypernova
Master Cruncher Audaces Fortuna Juvat ! Vaud - Switzerland Joined: Dec 16, 2008 Post Count: 1908 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I did the change. All units save three are now connected by cable. All seems stable and more reliable now.
----------------------------------------I had also a discussion with my internet connection provider. And he had excellent news for me. By mid december they will offer a 100 Mbyte/sec connection for a slight additional cost over my existing contract. At the moment I had the maximum that they could offer me as a private user that was 25 Mbyte/sec connection with 2 Mbyte/sec upload. This will change to 100 Mbyte/sec download and 7 Mbyte/sec upload. That is excellent for projects like CEP2 that are upload intensive. ![]() ![]() |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Wait until the DDDT-2 C type start floating in by torrents... 16MB a download-pop and the Sx types just 1-2 hours on your farm ;-)
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
Hypernova
Master Cruncher Audaces Fortuna Juvat ! Vaud - Switzerland Joined: Dec 16, 2008 Post Count: 1908 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Wait until the DDDT-2 C type start floating in by torrents... 16MB a download-pop and the Sx types just 1-2 hours on your farm ;-) Sek I am dreaming of DDDT2 WU's coming by torrents. I have already suffered terribly from thirst since many months, in this desertic environment, expecting rain hallelujah. Fortunately a few drops here and there come just to have me survive with hope for a better future. ![]() Nevertheless I am alive and my farm gears up for big uploads, so it is time to change the status of "persona non grata" ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
|
KWSN - A Shrubbery
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 8, 2006 Post Count: 1585 Status: Offline |
So I assume by now you've run out of both planets and planetesimals. Have you resorted to naming your systems after large asteroids and objects in the Kuiper belt?
----------------------------------------![]() Distributed computing volunteer since September 27, 2000 |
||
|
|
![]() |