[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Friday 30 January 2009 17:25, Gordon Henderson wrote: ..... > equipment, but what we found was that when the packet size got to below > about 130 bytes, then the access points gave up because the link > tun-around time was longer than the packet transmission time. > > Wi-Fi really is optimised to stream data, so big back to back 1500 byte > packets in one direction and small ACK packets in the other. Mix just one > file copy with VoIP and you'll find your average AP will struggle and VoIP > quality will suffer. ... Thats extremely noisy stuff there! I'd never call 1500 bytes a big packet and I've never really understood why VOIP is so bitty and horrible when I can get several hundred kbps HTML on the same link - I'm fairly convinced that badly setup VOIP (point->exchange->point) is the real problem here - and I bet Skype squeeze free calls even further. Or perhaps VOIP and basic packet switching needs reviewing. Even on the end of the long piece of string BT get me here I can get many megabytes without a single error and thats a lot of wasted packet headers. I don't think theres anything in TCP/IP that says you have to have inefficient protocols. Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html