[HamWAN PSDR] HamWAN PSDR Internet performance
Bart Kus
me at bartk.us
Tue Apr 5 09:35:00 PDT 2016
Thanks for the excellent data. If you'd like to have more fun, I'd also
like to point out that all of our routers should be running
bandwidth-server instances. This means you can make actual RF
throughput measures on a per-hop basis. Try it to your first hop:
[eo at WA6PXX-MercerIs] /tool bandwidth-server> /tool traceroute 8.8.8.8
# ADDRESS LOSS SENT LAST AVG BEST
WORST STD-DEV STATUS
1 44.24.240.33 0% 1 7.6ms 7.6 7.6
7.6 0
2 44.24.240.6 0% 1 3.6ms 3.6 3.6
3.6 0
3 44.24.240.66 0% 1 24.2ms 24.2 24.2
24.2 0
4 44.24.241.113 0% 1 56.8ms 56.8 56.8
56.8 0
5 0% 1 0ms
[eo at WA6PXX-MercerIs] /tool bandwidth-server> /tool bandwidth-test
direction=receive 44.24.240.33
status: running
duration: 12s
rx-current: 7.1Mbps
rx-10-second-average: 7.0Mbps
rx-total-average: 6.9Mbps
lost-packets: 143
random-data: no
direction: receive
rx-size: 1500
and so on... By the third hop, you may begin to notice the problems:
[eo at WA6PXX-MercerIs] /tool bandwidth-server> /tool bandwidth-test
direction=receive 44.24.240.66
status: running
duration: 7s
rx-current: 204.0kbps
rx-10-second-average: 921.8kbps
rx-total-average: 921.8kbps
lost-packets: 34
random-data: no
direction: receive
rx-size: 1500
Of course your throughput will be limited by existing network load. You
can monitor that using our public traffic graphs:
http://monitoring.hamwan.net/cacti/
The login / password is hamwan / hamwan. (I though I had gotten rid of
it, but it persists.) These only update once every 5 minutes, so
they're not as handy as they could be for manual testing. In most cases
though, the network is idle enough that you won't need them, and
bandwidth-test results will be highly indicative of link speed. Be sure
to give the links at least 30 seconds to come up to speed. They default
to sitting at a lower speed when they're not being asked to move lots of
data, and then they train up on higher speeds as required. This is to
maximize their reliability when only low data rates are required.
Oh, and you will not be able to do a bandwidth-test to the edge
routers. These have firewall rules that prevent bandwidth-testing. We
should really fix that at some point.
Speaking of fixing, I've started writing some software last night to
help us optimize the QA-CP and QA-Westin links. Both of these sometimes
affect your connection. As Tom mentioned, QA-CP is affected by a poor
path to the side of a dish, but QA-Westin is affected by Amazon
constructing a new building right in the signal path. You can view the
path obstacle here:
http://cam.westin.hamwan.net/
If we can't get either of these links to perform acceptably, we can
manually give them a lower priority on the network. The QA-CP link
might be helped a lot just by installing a higher gain modem @ QA and/or
rotating/upgrading the dish @ CP. The QA-Westin problem is a little
harder. So far we've reduced the bandwidth of QA-Westin to help it out,
and you can see the signal increase in the associated graph:
http://monitoring.hamwan.net/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=439&rra_id=all
But it doesn't seem to have helped speeds at all, so now we need to do
some interference-avoidance work. I hope to have that software finished
this week.
The last problem we should address here is the apparent route flapping
inside the network. We don't have any good tools in place to monitor
that, and it looks to be affecting your path. While this shouldn't
result in outages for you, it does indicate marginal network stability,
so it's a problem we need to look into. I do have designs to monitor
this and mitigate it, but they're slightly longer-term.
--Bart
On 4/4/2016 10:42 PM, David Giuliani wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions today, guys. I used WinMTR to monitor
> routes, and ran some speed tests during the day. 5.9GHz link has
> remained strong at about 50dB SNR aimed at CapitolPark. Here’s a
> performance report:
>
> ~12 noon: had one recording of 6.5Mbps download - cool!
> 2pm-3:15pm
> ping 42-55mS
> down: 1.3-1.74 Mbps
> up: 1.45-1.6 Mbps
> 3:20: no connection possible
> 3:23-3:35 similar performance to 2-3:15
> 4:10: performance faltered, and within a couple minutes the routing
> adjusted and restored performance. (Note time in file name)
>
> 7:35pm: ping: 53mS, down = 1.06Mbps, up =0.9Mbps = lowest so far today
>
>
> 8:44pm: ping: 86mS, down=0.8Mbps and erratic; up=1.1Mbps
>
> 10:22pm: ping=24mS (fast!), down=1.46Mbps, up=2.0Mbps
> Note the two “no response” entries, but similar link performance as
> earlier in the day, plus faster ping.
>
> I hope this helps you guys figure out how the system’s working. As
> far as I’m concerned, the 1.5Mbps speeds are find for WINLINK, it’s
> just the availability reliability that’s concerning.
>
> WA6PXX, Mercer Island
>
>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Bart Kus <me at bartk.us
>> <mailto:me at bartk.us>> wrote:
>>
>> This answer lacks a resolution for David's problem. Let us come back
>> to you with a better response.
>>
>> --Bart
>>
>>
>> On 4/4/2016 1:53 PM, Tom Hayward wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:01 PM, David Giuliani <David at giuliani.org
>>> <mailto:David at giuliani.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi - I’m new to the PSDR, and could use some help getting my
>>> HamWAN connection going. I installed a Poynting + Mikrotik
>>> Router Board system on my roof, and configured using the Wiki,
>>> no problems. I’m getting strong signals between my QTH at north
>>> Mercer Island and the Capitol Park station:
>>>
>>> Connected to ess, CapitolPark-S2/AE7SJ
>>> nv2
>>> Signal: -68dBm
>>> SNR 51dB
>>> Tx: 16.2Mbps, 96% ccq, 16.2Mbps
>>> Rx: 16.2Mbps, 96% ccq, 16.2Mbps
>>>
>>> However, I get sporadic Internet performance, measured using
>>> Speedtest.net <http://speedtest.net/>. Here are a few readings
>>> this morning:
>>>
>>> *ping down up*
>>> 21ms 3.9 2.8
>>> 35ms <0.1 stopped
>>> 77ms 0.27 0.46
>>> 42ms 2.0 0.1
>>>
>>> I did check my cabling between the radio and the computer by
>>> substitution - no change.
>>>
>>> Two things:
>>> 1. Anybody have any suggestions? What data rate are others of
>>> you getting?
>>> 2. Is there a place to go to get help on subjects like this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Nice to see you have had some success with HamWAN! -68 dBm is a
>>> great signal strength and I'm sure many others here envy your clear
>>> line-of-sight to a HamWAN site.
>>>
>>> I took a look at this and the slow hop between you and the Internet
>>> is between our Capitol Park and Queen Anne sites. That link is
>>> sub-optimal because it's connected off the sidelobe of a dish that
>>> is pointed at the SnoDEM site. It's enough to work, but as you've
>>> found it's not the fastest. There's nothing you can do about it.
>>>
>>> The way I investigated this is by doing speed tests to each of the
>>> hops in your path. You can find the path like this (from your modem):
>>>
>>> /tool traceroute use-dns=yes 8.8.8.8
>>>
>>> (8.8.8.8 is Google public DNS servers. It's likely to always be up.
>>> Feel free to use any other target depending on the nature of your test.)
>>>
>>> To run a speed test (this should work to all HamWAN routers--let me
>>> know if it doesn't):
>>>
>>> /tool bandwidth-test protocol=tcp CapitolPark-S2.hamwan.net
>>> <http://capitolpark-s2.hamwan.net/>
>>>
>>> This will test speed between your modem and
>>> CapitolPark-S2.hamwan.net <http://capitolpark-s2.hamwan.net/>. You
>>> can test the other direction by adding direction=transmit to the
>>> command.
>>>
>>> This is a perfect forum to ask questions like this.
>>>
>>> Tom KD7LXL
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PSDR mailing list
>>> PSDR at hamwan.org
>>> http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PSDR mailing list
>> PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org>
>> http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 20596 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 18583 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0007.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 19446 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0008.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 17775 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0009.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 18647 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0010.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 17686 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160405/fd530899/attachment-0011.png>
More information about the PSDR
mailing list