OSBRiDGE 5GXt deployment, Case Scenario 2 The devices were deployed on a 6 kilometers distance. One of the devices is deployed on a 40 meters tall tower, the other one is deployed on the rooftop of a building, 3 meters above the roof. There actually is a line of sight between these two points but fresnel zone is severely obstructed, which seriously impacts performance in one direction - compared to the performance (H-Polarization) in the other direction. Pictures of the instalation on the tower: Pictures of the installation on the rooftop, on second side of our link: Here we can see this big builiding that is breaking our V-polarized Fresnel Zone
System Information screen from the first device (OSBRiDGE 5GXt): and System Information screen from the second device (OSBRiDGE 5GXt-HP): Iperf was used to test the link throughput, first using TCP/IP: # iperf -c 192.168.20.5 -i 5 -t 30 -r ------------------------------------------------------------ Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.20.5, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 6] local 192.168.20.1 port 32818 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 5001 [ 6] 0.0- 5.0 sec 14.7 MBytes 24.7 Mbits/sec [ 6] 5.0-10.0 sec 25.2 MBytes 42.3 Mbits/sec [ 6] 10.0-15.0 sec 26.4 MBytes 44.3 Mbits/sec [ 6] 15.0-20.0 sec 26.3 MBytes 44.1 Mbits/sec [ 6] 20.0-25.0 sec 26.5 MBytes 44.5 Mbits/sec [ 6] 25.0-30.0 sec 26.3 MBytes 44.2 Mbits/sec [ 6] 0.0-30.0 sec 145 MBytes 40.7 Mbits/sec [ 6] local 192.168.20.1 port 5001 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 1143 [ 6] 0.0- 5.0 sec 32.5 MBytes 54.5 Mbits/sec [ 6] 5.0-10.0 sec 34.1 MBytes 57.1 Mbits/sec [ 6] 10.0-15.0 sec 34.5 MBytes 57.9 Mbits/sec [ 6] 15.0-20.0 sec 33.1 MBytes 55.5 Mbits/sec [ 6] 20.0-25.0 sec 34.5 MBytes 57.9 Mbits/sec [ 6] 25.0-30.0 sec 33.5 MBytes 56.3 Mbits/sec [ 6] 0.0-30.0 sec 202 MBytes 56.5 Mbits/sec firewall: -root- # As you can see the link was capable of running 44 Mbps real TCP/IP traffic in one direction and 56 Mbps real TCP/IP traffic in the other direction. The full duplex test follows: # iperf -c 192.168.20.5 -i 5 -t 30 -d ------------------------------------------------------------ Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.20.5, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 6] local 192.168.20.1 port 32821 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 5001 [ 7] local 192.168.20.1 port 5001 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 1147 [ 6] 0.0- 5.0 sec 12.6 MBytes 21.1 Mbits/sec [ 7] 0.0- 5.0 sec 20.4 MBytes 34.3 Mbits/sec [ 6] 5.0-10.0 sec 10.5 MBytes 17.7 Mbits/sec [ 7] 5.0-10.0 sec 18.5 MBytes 31.0 Mbits/sec [ 6] 10.0-15.0 sec 10.3 MBytes 17.4 Mbits/sec [ 7] 10.0-15.0 sec 15.8 MBytes 26.5 Mbits/sec [ 6] 15.0-20.0 sec 9.25 MBytes 15.5 Mbits/sec [ 7] 15.0-20.0 sec 18.4 MBytes 30.9 Mbits/sec [ 6] 20.0-25.0 sec 10.3 MBytes 17.2 Mbits/sec [ 7] 20.0-25.0 sec 17.0 MBytes 28.6 Mbits/sec [ 7] 25.0-30.0 sec 15.5 MBytes 25.9 Mbits/sec [ 6] 25.0-30.0 sec 10.3 MBytes 17.3 Mbits/sec [ 6] 0.0-30.0 sec 63.3 MBytes 17.7 Mbits/sec [ 7] 0.0-30.0 sec 106 MBytes 29.5 Mbits/sec firewall: -root- # Here we can see first side effects of vertical polarization fresnel zone being obstructed. However we still were able to achieve 18/29 Mbps full duplex real TCP/IP traffic. UDP throughput test was performed too: # iperf -c 192.168.20.5 -i 5 -t 30 -r -u -b 100M ------------------------------------------------------------ Server listening on UDP port 5001 Receiving 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 105 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.20.5, UDP port 5001 Sending 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 105 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 6] local 192.168.20.1 port 32768 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 5001 [ 6] 0.0- 5.0 sec 56.1 MBytes 94.1 Mbits/sec [ 6] 5.0-10.0 sec 56.1 MBytes 94.1 Mbits/sec [ 6] 10.0-15.0 sec 56.0 MBytes 94.0 Mbits/sec [ 6] 15.0-20.0 sec 55.9 MBytes 93.7 Mbits/sec [ 6] 20.0-25.0 sec 55.8 MBytes 93.7 Mbits/sec [ 6] 0.0-30.0 sec 336 MBytes 93.9 Mbits/sec [ 6] Sent 239515 datagrams [ 6] Server Report: [ 6] 0.0-30.3 sec 76.5 MBytes 21.2 Mbits/sec 0.475 ms 184911/239505 (77%) [ 6] 0.0-30.3 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order [ 5] local 192.168.20.1 port 5001 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 1024 [ 5] 0.0- 5.0 sec 35.8 MBytes 60.0 Mbits/sec 0.166 ms 13867/39393 (35%) [ 5] 5.0-10.0 sec 36.3 MBytes 60.9 Mbits/sec 0.093 ms 14751/40630 (36%) [ 5] 10.0-15.0 sec 35.3 MBytes 59.2 Mbits/sec 0.147 ms 15335/40526 (38%) [ 5] 15.0-20.0 sec 34.1 MBytes 57.3 Mbits/sec 0.125 ms 16359/40713 (40%) [ 5] 20.0-25.0 sec 36.3 MBytes 60.8 Mbits/sec 0.145 ms 14766/40637 (36%) [ 5] 25.0-30.0 sec 35.9 MBytes 60.3 Mbits/sec 0.141 ms 14885/40506 (37%) [ 5] 0.0-30.2 sec 215 MBytes 59.6 Mbits/sec 5.149 ms 90550/243803 (37%) [ 5] 0.0-30.2 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order firewall: -root- # Results: 21.2 Mbps (Fresnel Zone!) in one direction and 59.6 Mbps in the other direction UDP throughput. Full Duplex UDP test: # iperf -c 192.168.20.5 -i 5 -t 25 -d -u -b 70M ------------------------------------------------------------ Server listening on UDP port 5001 Receiving 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 105 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 192.168.20.5, UDP port 5001 Sending 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 105 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 6] local 192.168.20.1 port 32768 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 5001 [ 5] local 192.168.20.1 port 5001 connected with 192.168.20.5 port 1024 [ 6] 0.0- 5.0 sec 41.7 MBytes 70.0 Mbits/sec [ 5] 0.0- 5.0 sec 18.1 MBytes 30.3 Mbits/sec 0.132 ms 16121/29008 (56%) [ 6] 5.0-10.0 sec 41.7 MBytes 70.0 Mbits/sec [ 5] 5.0-10.0 sec 33.0 MBytes 55.4 Mbits/sec 0.103 ms 6200/29747 (21%) [ 6] 10.0-15.0 sec 41.7 MBytes 70.0 Mbits/sec [ 5] 10.0-15.0 sec 33.0 MBytes 55.3 Mbits/sec 0.154 ms 6233/29761 (21%) [ 6] 15.0-20.0 sec 41.7 MBytes 70.0 Mbits/sec [ 5] 15.0-20.0 sec 33.1 MBytes 55.6 Mbits/sec 0.159 ms 6139/29768 (21%) [ 6] 0.0-25.0 sec 209 MBytes 70.0 Mbits/sec [ 6] Sent 148810 datagrams [ 5] 20.0-25.0 sec 32.6 MBytes 54.6 Mbits/sec 0.162 ms 6373/29595 (22%) [ 5] 0.0-25.2 sec 151 MBytes 50.1 Mbits/sec 2.909 ms 41361/148806 (28%) [ 5] 0.0-25.2 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order [ 6] Server Report: [ 6] 0.0-25.3 sec 71.0 MBytes 23.5 Mbits/sec 0.469 ms 98186/148809 (66%) [ 6] 0.0-25.3 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order firewall: -root- # Results: 55/23 Mbps full duplex UDP throughput. And again, performance of one of the polarizations is affected by obstructions on the path though the results are quite good. Please note that all these tests are performed using uncompressable data, therefore they are pretty close to the real life traffic. This has nothing to do with so-called 'test' traffic which is highly compressable, may give better visual effects, but is hardly ever spotted in real-life deployment scenarios.
Last modified October 31, 2007 1:49 am
|