From: tnp@invalid.invalid
On 29/11/2024 13:45, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> On 2024-11-28, druck wrote:
>>> It's not different from having two completely separate clients connected to
>>> the same AP. Unless the channel is fully saturated, the available bandwith
>>> will be shared between the clients.
>>
>> Well if you are testing the speed you are saturating, and there will
>> always be more overhead with two competing clients, than one.
>
> Usually, you can't *completely* saturate a WLAN channel with one client and
> one TCP stream. I just did a test with two laptops on my WLAN, running
> iperf3 against a server on my LAN (so I am not limited by my internet
> connection).
>
> When I run iperf on both clients, the aggregated bandwith is actually a wee
> bit HIGHER than what a single client can achieve - regardless of direction.
> And with one client running iperf traffic as fast as it can, the other one
> can use the net just fine, without perceivable delays or losses. ping
> latency on the unloaded client rises from 2-4ms to 20-40ms - this is not
> really noticeable when browsing the web.
>
> With both clients transferring data, they share roughly 50/50.
>
> This is on an old 802.11ac (Wifi5) access point, with Intel AX200/AX210
> modules in the clients, so modern features like OFDMA that might help in
> this scenario are not available. And this is on a 2.4GHz channel in a
> residential area where I am not alone on that channel.
>
TCP/IP / 802 is well enough designed to make this sort of stuff work as
well as it can...
Smart chaps with beards and tweed jackets have spent their whole summers
trying to make it work like that, and it dies.
Shame they never get enough time to get laid and pass their genes on...
--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
