The officially official Devuan Forum!

You are not logged in.

#26 2024-03-26 07:25:16

Altoid
Member
Registered: 2017-05-07
Posts: 1,448  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Hello:

aluma wrote:

... set the local site (*.ar) in mtr ...

Yes, seem to be less.
There is also another host.

192.168.0.1                                0.0%
???                                      100.0% 
???                                      100.0%
???                                      100.0%
???                                      100.0%
host39.181-89-51.telecom.net.ar           68.0%    # % for 450 packets / 63.1% for 700 
host246.181-13-127.telecom.net.ar          0.0%
172.67.41.55                               0.0%

Best,

A.

Last edited by Altoid (2024-03-26 07:27:18)

Offline

#27 2024-03-26 17:13:52

chris2be8
Member
Registered: 2018-08-11
Posts: 267  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

traceroute will only learn the IP address if it gets a response from the system. So in this case it's only going to work intermittently.

I suspect your traffic may be routed through two or more paths, one via a system that generates timout responses and one or more that don't. So it's a matter of chance whether you get a response.

But it's not a worry because your traffic is always passed on to later sites.

Offline

#28 2024-03-26 19:12:27

Altoid
Member
Registered: 2017-05-07
Posts: 1,448  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Hello:

chris2be8 wrote:

... not a worry because your traffic is always passed on ...

Good to know, thanks.

That said, I am quite surprised with the performance of my home made tin-can waveguide antenna.
Properly pointed, I am getting no less than 94% signal and download speeds of 13.5 Mbps on a day when not every TD&H is on the cable.
That's roughly 8 / 9 mts. as the crow flies with a couple of 13cm. walls in between.

Fibre should be much better.

Thanks a lot for your input.

Best,

A.

Offline

#29 2024-03-27 04:11:25

aluma
Member
Registered: 2022-10-26
Posts: 535  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Properly pointed, I am getting no less than 94% signal and download speeds of 13.5 Mbps on a day when not every TD&H is on the cable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802. … Data_rates

Setting up WiFi is a separate big topic.
You can optimize by choosing a channel, its width, etc. depending on local conditions.

Quote from the article. If you need a browser translator-
https://github.com/FilipePS/Traduzir-paginas-web

The Regulatory domain plays an important role; the regulatory domain may require restrictions on transmitter power, on the ability to run an access point on the channel, on acceptable modulation technologies on the channel, and also require some “spectrum pacification” technologies, such as DFS (dynamic frequency selection), detection radar (which each regdomain has its own, say, in the Americas almost everywhere it is offered by the FCC, in Europe it is different, ETSI), or auto-bw.

The regulatory domain may not be specified, but then the system will be guided by the union of all restrictions, that is, the worst possible option.

https://habr.com/ru/articles/317220/

Regards.

Last edited by aluma (2024-03-27 04:33:02)

Offline

#30 2024-03-27 10:03:07

Altoid
Member
Registered: 2017-05-07
Posts: 1,448  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Hello:

aluma wrote:

Setting up WiFi ...
... optimize by choosing a channel, its width ...

Indeed ...
I had to jump through a lot of hoops with my first time experiments in WiFi almos 10 years ago.
In this case, I am only a guest with no access to the router so settings are not available to me.

As for the Regulatory domain, dmesg bitches about not being to load a regulatory.db.

~$ sudo dmesg | grep regulatory
[   23.720125] cfg80211: Loading compiled-in X.509 certificates for regulatory database
[   23.772719] platform regulatory.0: firmware: failed to load regulatory.db (-2)
[   23.798235] platform regulatory.0: Direct firmware load for regulatory.db failed with error -2
[   23.810883] cfg80211: failed to load regulatory.db
~$ 

and

[   24.988242] ath: EEPROM regdomain: 0x809c
[   24.988243] ath: EEPROM indicates we should expect a country code
[   24.988245] ath: doing EEPROM country->regdmn map search
[   24.988246] ath: country maps to regdmn code: 0x52
[   24.988248] ath: Country alpha2 being used: CN
[   24.988249] ath: Regpair used: 0x52

... the system will be guided by the union of all restrictions ...

Which is probably what is happening here:

~$ sudo iw reg get
global
country 00: DFS-UNSET
	(2402 - 2472 @ 40), (6, 20), (N/A)
	(2457 - 2482 @ 20), (6, 20), (N/A), AUTO-BW, PASSIVE-SCAN
	(2474 - 2494 @ 20), (6, 20), (N/A), NO-OFDM, PASSIVE-SCAN
	(5170 - 5250 @ 80), (6, 20), (N/A), AUTO-BW, PASSIVE-SCAN
	(5250 - 5330 @ 80), (6, 20), (0 ms), DFS, AUTO-BW, PASSIVE-SCAN
	(5490 - 5730 @ 160), (6, 20), (0 ms), DFS, PASSIVE-SCAN
	(5735 - 5835 @ 80), (6, 20), (N/A), PASSIVE-SCAN
	(57240 - 63720 @ 2160), (N/A, 0), (N/A)
~$ 

Maybe I am getting good reception because it is set to 00 although I doubt it.

Just to try, I have set it to my own country code and now get this;

~$ sudo iw reg get
global
country AR: DFS-FCC
	(2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20), (N/A)
	(5170 - 5250 @ 80), (N/A, 17), (N/A), AUTO-BW
	(5250 - 5330 @ 80), (N/A, 24), (0 ms), DFS, AUTO-BW
	(5490 - 5730 @ 160), (N/A, 24), (0 ms), DFS
	(5735 - 5835 @ 80), (N/A, 30), (N/A)
~$ 

I'll give it a run and see if it sticks and if it does, then what goes on.
If it does not work as before, then I will set it back to 00.

Thanks for your input.

Best,

A.

Offline

#31 2024-03-27 16:42:08

Altoid
Member
Registered: 2017-05-07
Posts: 1,448  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Hello:

Altoid wrote:

... see if it sticks ...
... then what goes on.

Update:
For whatever reason, my WiCD applet now shows me a full green scale and hovering over it I get this:

Connected to "READHEAD 2.4GHz" at [95% to 100%] (IP: 192.168.0.29)

This is almost all the time the link is up.
Used to be ~ 15% to 20% less than that.

Of course, I am quite aware that there are many factors at play with WiFi reception, but maybe country AR: DFS-FCC instead of country 00: DFS-UNSET actually made a difference?

Best,

A.

Offline

#32 2024-03-27 16:45:01

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 3,162  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Has to be gremlins in the machine . . .

Online

#33 2024-03-27 17:05:18

Altoid
Member
Registered: 2017-05-07
Posts: 1,448  

Re: [SOLVED] CLI throughput test for Linux

Hello:

golinux wrote:

.. gremlins ...

Could well be.  8^D - you never really know.

From what I have read, it would seem that with DFS-FCC (instead of DFS-UNSET, electromagnetic spectrum interference is prevented by avoiding same channel operation with other pre-WiFi equipment such as comm satellites, weather radar, etc.

But the best of it all is that 95% to 100% figure that brings a grin to my face.

Best,

A.

Offline

Board footer