Forum

dave1234 Escribi?3:

Quote:
Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

I'm not an antenna guy but I think it's more a question of SNR.

Dave

Of course you are correct Dave.

Let me ask this question to all: In the average enterprise, what is the biggest source of noise? Ding! Ding! Ding! Not the microwave, not Bluetooth. Your own Wi-Fi network.

I do feel like I'm spouting off too much Ruckus kook-aid here in this thread, but here is some more. Up to 9 dB of signal gain and up to 17 dB of noise rejection.

The thing is, when your signal only goes in the direction it needs to go, less noise is produced by your own equipment.

GT

P.S. "not Grant" :) Actually it's Gene. Grant would have been a much cooler name.

Roma59 Escribi?3:

For further reading on the advantages of beam forming, take a look at this article from Tom's Hardware.

Come GT, not you. Let's be serious, even the less expert guys in CWNP forums is a Guru compared to tomshardware journalist. He is supposed to test the solution in an enterprise deployment but he uses only 1 AP and a couple of clients. What a joke. This just a cut and paste of a Ruckus white paper.

Frankly I think we should stop with the assumptions and guessings, let's go back to reality take an AP, 10/15 clients that you will position in different locations, not as same as in the JPA report (nobody commented on this one see erlier post) and you'll see that the impact is not small. I saw the same kind of test last week, very basic no tricky stuff add as I said in an earlier post (nobody commented on this one) the aggregated throughput was 54Mbps... we can argue for hours but reality is reality.

- In the bulk of enterprise deployments, downstream traffic represents significantly more than 50% of the traffic. I still contend that on a byte by byte basis, it is still more like 75+% downstream.

ok let's assume you're rigth

Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

I'm not an antenna guy but I think it's more a question of SNR

- Correctly deployed, true hidden STA problem won't exist.

Disagree, real tests with multiple client and Ruckus JPA report shows the opposite

- It will occur that the AP will be transmitting a beam to a STA and another STA won't hear that, thereby causing collisions. However, I contend that with 75+% of traffic heading downstream that this problem does exist, but the benefits of improved data rate far outweigh this issue

Disagree, not true in enterprise high density AP / clients deployments

From the JPA article: In the most difficult test, the Ruckus ZoneFlex system delivered an aggregate
TCP downstream throughput of 15.7 mbps to 20 Centrino clients at a distance
of over 150 feet, through five walls. The nearest competitive vendor delivered
7 mbps (see Chart 1) in the same test.

What the heck are we having this back and forth for? You site an article that shows that Ruckus gear outperforms everyone. :)

GT

Hi GT, no it's because you don't really read my posts, please read it again if I site this article it's because it exhibits the problems we are discussing about... If the only thing you see in this article is that they outperform the other vendors then we have a problem...

Hi Gene

Quote:
"Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

I'm not an antenna guy but I think it's more a question of SNR. "



That quote above was actually from Roma. I was actually responding to him.

Dave

Gene

My eyes must be falling apart. Just noticed the quote button. Must use that button in future.

As a neutral party like Switzerland, I don't want to get caught in the crossfire !

Actually this is a really good thread and a lot of useful info is being passed around.

Anyways, I'll put my helmet back on and duck back into the trenches to prepare for the next salvos !!

Bye the way did you see the pimpin tour video I found ?



Dave

Gene

- In the bulk of enterprise deployments, downstream traffic represents significantly more than 50% of the traffic. I still contend that on a byte by byte basis, it is still more like 75+% downstream.

- Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

- Correctly deployed, true hidden STA problem won't exist.

I agree with all of what you have said.

Apart from the technical aspects of the traffic distribution ratios, you can imagine what would happen if for some reason the AP was NOT providing most of the traffic in the downstream links. We would be waiting around all day for our web pages and downloads etc. Practical experience tells us that if we have a bunch of users downloading simultaneously, that the vast majority of the traffic MUST come from the AP.

I just watched the hidden node video and found it really interesting. Good Video. Must admit hadn't really thought about hidden AP's before.

Don't have a road show coming near where I live. Hope that when you complete the tour, you'll let us know how Ruckus get over that hidden AP problem without using RTS/CTS.

Cheers

Dave

dave1234 Escribi?3:

Hi Gene

Quote:
"Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

I'm not an antenna guy but I think it's more a question of SNR. "



That quote above was actually from Roma. I was actually responding to him.

Dave

Now that makes more sense. You are one of if not the best RF guys on the forum. Sorry about the lack of responses in this thread. I'm in Germany with very little Internet access and I'm typing on a slate tablet. Long story.

GT

dave1234 Escribi?3:

Gene

- In the bulk of enterprise deployments, downstream traffic represents significantly more than 50% of the traffic. I still contend that on a byte by byte basis, it is still more like 75+% downstream.

- Beam forming improves signals strength to STA's thereby improving data rate.

- Correctly deployed, true hidden STA problem won't exist.

I agree with all of what you have said.

Apart from the technical aspects of the traffic distribution ratios, you can imagine what would happen if for some reason the AP was NOT providing most of the traffic in the downstream links. We would be waiting around all day for our web pages and downloads etc. Practical experience tells us that if we have a bunch of users downloading simultaneously, that the vast majority of the traffic MUST come from the AP.

I just watched the hidden node video and found it really interesting. Good Video. Must admit hadn't really thought about hidden AP's before.

Don't have a road show coming near where I live. Hope that when you complete the tour, you'll let us know how Ruckus get over that hidden AP problem without using RTS/CTS.

Cheers

Dave

There will be a follow up video coming out the end of the month. I'm sure people will be waiting on pins and needles... :)

GT

Roma,

You are making great points. The problem I was having was trying to determine what "side" you were on. It seems you may not be on any side and are just posting your facts and opinions on the issue. We truely appreciate your participation. When I get a bit more time and a better Internet connection I'll look over everything again and compose my thoughts.

GT

Hi All,

I have been watching this topic for a long time and i feel that there are a few things that are either unoticed or biased .

It good to do a lot of talking but one will we able to evaluate things unbiased once we are no way associated to the product .



Here we go .....

1) How abt upstream throughput of a 802.11n Beamforming radio??


2) How does it Behave when you have one legacy client associated to the 11n AP which already has a handfull of 11n clients??

3) Does it provide Throughput to clients connected equally or it does Provide excellent throughput to the closest and DOS of to others???

4) test the clients in Diffrent directions and different rates .

I wish everyone in the forum to take a vendor nuetral standpoint .I know what iam questioning about .

If anyone wants to know the pitfalls of beamforming test what i mentioned above and get back .Always run the test with multiple clients in different directions .


If you have clients in one direction or one client coennected to the Ap, your test would yield good results. (But this is what biased testing is all about) Have legacy clients,Have one client at gud connection speed and other at different rates.Test both upstream and downstream throughput.(This is how testing needs to be done .Simulate the actual network scenario)


Please donot go by the reports present in the net .They are totally biased :(


Thanks
Wirelesswizard