Time for a new wireless router
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 0
From: Bracknell, Berks, UK
Have a read.....and you can see why my comment is unanswered.
Mike,
Here's something to make you jealous....
And no, I don't work at Google. 
Here's something to make you jealous....
Code:
traceroute to www.google.com (74.125.230.146), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 XXXXXXXXXXX (XXXXXXXXXX) 0.315 ms 0.308 ms 0.275 ms 2 209.85.255.78 (209.85.255.78) 0.455 ms 0.405 ms 0.391 ms 3 209.85.251.202 (209.85.251.202) 0.770 ms 0.796 ms 0.760 ms 4 74.125.230.146 (74.125.230.146) 0.554 ms 0.569 ms 0.536 ms
13 hops for me
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 80
From: Bedford, UK
0.5 mS ?
You are pulling my leg, I get 31mS to google. How's the weather in Palo Alto ? On another point, think the OP's observation on price was valid, I wish I could justify a Draytek too. Glad to hear that g/n isn't an issue. Still think a ferret around with netstumbler and some judicious choice of channel may be worth a try. The move to a more modern 'n' router certainly improved reliability of wireless connection but still not perfect (in old cottage). Perhaps power line stuff ?
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Mr Optimistic,
No leg pulling here.
Although strictly speaking it's data from a work environment, not my livingroom at home where I too get 30ms to the big G....but still....
A Google search suggests it's 9oC, mostly cloudy, wind SE @ 13mph.
Irrespective of where I may or may not usually lurk, all of the data I posted today is from a London perspective...
0.5 mS ? You are pulling my leg, I get 31mS to google.
Although strictly speaking it's data from a work environment, not my livingroom at home where I too get 30ms to the big G....but still....
Code:
$ ftp http://download.f-secure.com/webclub/fscs901-122.exe Trying 92.123.154.88... Requesting http://download.f-secure.com/webclub/fscs901-122.exe 59576152 bytes received in 1.64 seconds (34.68 MB/s) $ ping www.bbc.co.uk PING www.bbc.net.uk (212.58.246.90): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 212.58.246.90: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1.408 ms 64 bytes from 212.58.246.90: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=1.288 ms $ ping www.google.com PING www.google.com (74.125.230.145): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 74.125.230.145: icmp_seq=0 ttl=61 time=0.579 ms 64 bytes from 74.125.230.145: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=0.574 ms
How's the weather in Palo Alto
Irrespective of where I may or may not usually lurk, all of the data I posted today is from a London perspective...
Code:
Tracing route to www.pprune.org [98.158.194.181] 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms XXXXXXXXX 2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms XXXXXXXXX 3 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms XXXXXXXXX 4 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms XXXXXXXXX 5 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms XXXXXXXXX 6 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms level3-2.ar2.LON3.gblx.net [208.50.13.194] 7 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms ae-34-52.ebr2.London1.Level3.net [4.69.139.97] 8 70 ms 70 ms 70 ms ae-43-43.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.137.74] 9 70 ms 72 ms 72 ms ae-71-71.csw2.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.134.70] 10 70 ms 70 ms 70 ms ae-72-72.ebr2.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.148.37] 11 145 ms 144 ms 144 ms ae-2-2.ebr4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.135.185] 12 143 ms 143 ms 143 ms ae-5-5.ebr2.SanJose5.Level3.net [4.69.148.141] 13 143 ms 143 ms 142 ms ae-6-6.ebr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.148.201] 14 142 ms 142 ms 142 ms ae-82-82.csw3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.26] 15 143 ms 143 ms 143 ms ae-31-80.car1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.131] 16 148 ms 146 ms 145 ms INTERNET-BR.car1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.59.56.162] 17 144 ms 143 ms 144 ms rev-98-158-192-10.dvpne.com [98.158.192.10] 18 145 ms 145 ms 146 ms www.pprune.org [98.158.194.181]
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 480
Likes: 276
From: Sweden
Mr O
I downloaded Netstumbler, unfortunately my wireless card isn't supported....
Still think a ferret around with netstumbler and some judicious choice of channel may be worth a try.
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 80
From: Bedford, UK
Are you so sure you have a problem with the router ? You could check the wireless adapter settings on the gfriends laptop I suppose. I had a quick look for netstumbler equivalents but didn't like the look of them, too much wardriving stuff. Perhaps install netstumbler on the gfriends machine ? If it's her machine which is sluggish it's the least she should do.
So where exactly is www.google.com?
Hang on a minute. From memory the distance to Los Angeles is about 5400 nm, so say 5000 nm to SF. Call a nautical mile 1800m (I am a physicist and used to work for Ferranti so precision isn't in my nature), that makes say 9x10^6m from uptown Bedford to google. If the speed of light (even for Draytek owners) is 3x 10^8 m/s, doesn't that make 30mS even for a TEM wave ?
So where exactly is www.google.com?
Hang on a minute. From memory the distance to Los Angeles is about 5400 nm, so say 5000 nm to SF. Call a nautical mile 1800m (I am a physicist and used to work for Ferranti so precision isn't in my nature), that makes say 9x10^6m from uptown Bedford to google. If the speed of light (even for Draytek owners) is 3x 10^8 m/s, doesn't that make 30mS even for a TEM wave ?
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
From: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Avionker
Try Vistumbler ( Vistumbler.net - Home ) instead. Netstumbler doesn't support the wifi on this machine either, it's an Atheros wifi adapter, but Vistumbler had no problems whatsoever.
I downloaded Netstumbler, unfortunately my wireless card isn't supported....
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 480
Likes: 276
From: Sweden
Thanks hellsbrink, I'll give that a go. Got an Atheros on here as well. 
Interesting. Even virtually sitting on top of the router no better than 88% signal strength....
Interesting. Even virtually sitting on top of the router no better than 88% signal strength....
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 480
Likes: 276
From: Sweden
Ok, after a bit of twisting and turning and upping and downing of the laptop I got a 100% signal from my router. Now, even with 100% signal strength and ensuring I was the only user on the network the throughput was.-
Considering that I have a 97Mb/s internet connection feeding this router, and that its theoretically capable of providing a 54Mb/s wireless connection I can't help feeling that something is not performing as it should.
I have only one other router within range on the same channel as mine, and that signal is very weak. It's also an 802.11n device, although whether or not that would reduce the likelihood of it causing me problems or not, I don't know. Perhaps someone could clarify that for me?
Sitting in my usual spot at the kitchen table I am getting around about 70% signal strength as an average. Obviously some playing around with the router position could improve this however that's hardly likely to improve my throughput significantly. The best result I have seen on the wireless connection is about 20Mb/s, and obviously this will vary depending on the loading on my network and on my ISP, but it is still short of what I feel I should be achieving.
Does anyone have any other ideas or am I correct in thinking that a new router is the next logical step?
Considering that I have a 97Mb/s internet connection feeding this router, and that its theoretically capable of providing a 54Mb/s wireless connection I can't help feeling that something is not performing as it should.
I have only one other router within range on the same channel as mine, and that signal is very weak. It's also an 802.11n device, although whether or not that would reduce the likelihood of it causing me problems or not, I don't know. Perhaps someone could clarify that for me?
Sitting in my usual spot at the kitchen table I am getting around about 70% signal strength as an average. Obviously some playing around with the router position could improve this however that's hardly likely to improve my throughput significantly. The best result I have seen on the wireless connection is about 20Mb/s, and obviously this will vary depending on the loading on my network and on my ISP, but it is still short of what I feel I should be achieving.
Does anyone have any other ideas or am I correct in thinking that a new router is the next logical step?
Last edited by Avionker; 24th February 2011 at 06:20.
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2001
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 8,121
Likes: 686
From: Twickenham, home of rugby
Is your WAP set to both b and g? If so, set it to g only.
You will find that 50-60% of theoretical max throughput is considered good, due to contention (it's a shared access medium), protocol and security overhead.
As a test, try removing security (WPA) and seeing the effect. If your D-Link (and / or your WNIC) is not very fast at encryption, you will notice a difference. I'm not suggesting that you leave encryption off permanently, BTW!
SD
You will find that 50-60% of theoretical max throughput is considered good, due to contention (it's a shared access medium), protocol and security overhead.
As a test, try removing security (WPA) and seeing the effect. If your D-Link (and / or your WNIC) is not very fast at encryption, you will notice a difference. I'm not suggesting that you leave encryption off permanently, BTW!
SD
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 480
Likes: 276
From: Sweden
SD
The router is set to g only. I tried removing security as suggested but I saw only a minimal difference.
With encryption on:-
With encryption off:-
I appreciate that I am not going to see 54Mbps but I would hope for at least 30 to 35 Mbps at times that I am the only user on the network. My laptop is I think, relatively high performance, it's certainly not an old clunker. The wireless adaptor is an Atheros AR9285 which should support up to 150Mbps (on an 11n device at any rate) , its got a 2Ghz AMD Athlon dual core processor, 4MB of RAM and it's running Windows 7 Home Premium.
Does my router have a problem? Am I missing something in the set up? Are my expectations too high as regards the performance of the router?
I really think the only way to be sure is to get connected to an 802.11n router and see what happens, this basically means going ahead and buying one anyway. Another option would be attempting to get hold of another 11g router and setting it up on my internet connection, unfortunately I can't think of anyone I know who has one I could borrow....
The router is set to g only. I tried removing security as suggested but I saw only a minimal difference.
With encryption on:-
With encryption off:-
I appreciate that I am not going to see 54Mbps but I would hope for at least 30 to 35 Mbps at times that I am the only user on the network. My laptop is I think, relatively high performance, it's certainly not an old clunker. The wireless adaptor is an Atheros AR9285 which should support up to 150Mbps (on an 11n device at any rate) , its got a 2Ghz AMD Athlon dual core processor, 4MB of RAM and it's running Windows 7 Home Premium.
Does my router have a problem? Am I missing something in the set up? Are my expectations too high as regards the performance of the router?
I really think the only way to be sure is to get connected to an 802.11n router and see what happens, this basically means going ahead and buying one anyway. Another option would be attempting to get hold of another 11g router and setting it up on my internet connection, unfortunately I can't think of anyone I know who has one I could borrow....
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Avionker,
A quote from wikipedia re 802.11g.....
The marketing people take care not to discuss sustained transfer rates. That's why physical cable is and always will be better than wireless.
A quote from wikipedia re 802.11g.....
It operates at a maximum physical layer bit rate of 54 Mbit/s exclusive of forward error correction codes, or about 22 Mbit/s average throughput
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 80
From: Bedford, UK
reviews on current routers
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 480
Likes: 276
From: Sweden
Time to resurrect a long dormant thread.
Despite my best efforts 11 months ago, a new router was not forthcoming. SWMBO decided that it was not really required and after all the playing around with Vistumbler, as described earlier in the thread, the connection was far more reliable although still on the slow side.
However, last night the old router finally gave up the ghost. As SWMBO has upgraded laptops recently an 802.11n router was the obvious replacement. So, to cut a long story short I am now connected via a D-Link DIR-635 which I picked up for 399 Swedish Kronor, approximately 37 Sterling.
After I've had a chance to run Vistumbler I'll post some connection speeds. Will be interesting to see if there is any appreciable improvement in speed.
Despite my best efforts 11 months ago, a new router was not forthcoming. SWMBO decided that it was not really required and after all the playing around with Vistumbler, as described earlier in the thread, the connection was far more reliable although still on the slow side.
However, last night the old router finally gave up the ghost. As SWMBO has upgraded laptops recently an 802.11n router was the obvious replacement. So, to cut a long story short I am now connected via a D-Link DIR-635 which I picked up for 399 Swedish Kronor, approximately 37 Sterling.
After I've had a chance to run Vistumbler I'll post some connection speeds. Will be interesting to see if there is any appreciable improvement in speed.
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: UK
Broadband envy
In the Czech Republic over Christmas as usual, I got chatting with a friend who lives in the city of Ostrava and who recently switched to a fibre connection to his apartment. We tested 98.8 Mb/s download and 24.5 Mb/s upload for the princely equivalent sum of thirteen quid a month! Am I envious or am I envious?
My reliable 6.8-7.2 Mb/s download during the day and at night (3.5 Mb/s at peak evening times) is just about enough for the work that I do from home, but a peak of 448 Kb/s upload (and typically 335 Kb/s dropping to 100 Kb/s at peak times) is a right royal PITA.
WiFi Channels
Regarding WiFi channels; for users of Android smartphones I recommend the App called "Wifi analyzer". It is excellent for showing all detected networks, their strength, and their competition with each other in a very clear manner that does not require a degree in rocket science. It also shows the recommended channel you should move your network to for best performance.
I've used it to help many friends out but most recently used it to help myself; on the aforementioned holiday I was free-loading on the back of a friend's network down the street but it kept dropping out. After following the WiFi Analyzer advice to switch from channel 7 to channel 11 not only did performance jump dramatically but it didn't drop out once in the remaining week and a half. The owner of the network experienced no change.
In the Czech Republic over Christmas as usual, I got chatting with a friend who lives in the city of Ostrava and who recently switched to a fibre connection to his apartment. We tested 98.8 Mb/s download and 24.5 Mb/s upload for the princely equivalent sum of thirteen quid a month! Am I envious or am I envious?
My reliable 6.8-7.2 Mb/s download during the day and at night (3.5 Mb/s at peak evening times) is just about enough for the work that I do from home, but a peak of 448 Kb/s upload (and typically 335 Kb/s dropping to 100 Kb/s at peak times) is a right royal PITA.
WiFi Channels
Regarding WiFi channels; for users of Android smartphones I recommend the App called "Wifi analyzer". It is excellent for showing all detected networks, their strength, and their competition with each other in a very clear manner that does not require a degree in rocket science. It also shows the recommended channel you should move your network to for best performance.
I've used it to help many friends out but most recently used it to help myself; on the aforementioned holiday I was free-loading on the back of a friend's network down the street but it kept dropping out. After following the WiFi Analyzer advice to switch from channel 7 to channel 11 not only did performance jump dramatically but it didn't drop out once in the remaining week and a half. The owner of the network experienced no change.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
From: Find me a sewer.
Avoniker,
Your speeds are definitely better on the new router, and pretty good for a wireless link. My apartment building, in the internet ghetto called China, was wired with cheap ethernet cables and provides marginal performance. Running wi-fi through two walls provides this result from speedtest.net:
(on stock antenna) down 3.94 Mbps Up 6.11 Mbps ping 70 ms
With a 20 element wi fi yagi on the router, beaming through the walls, I get a full 100% signal and these speeds:
(on stock antenna) down 4.97 Mbps Up 6.97 Mbps ping 36 ms
So with a better RF signal, I seem to have hit the limit of my local ethernet and router combo. You are likely to see a similar effect on your wireless connection, but with higher numbers than here! Fiber to the home and quality ethernet cable direct to your computer would provide the fastest possible speed.
Your speeds are definitely better on the new router, and pretty good for a wireless link. My apartment building, in the internet ghetto called China, was wired with cheap ethernet cables and provides marginal performance. Running wi-fi through two walls provides this result from speedtest.net:
(on stock antenna) down 3.94 Mbps Up 6.11 Mbps ping 70 ms
With a 20 element wi fi yagi on the router, beaming through the walls, I get a full 100% signal and these speeds:
(on stock antenna) down 4.97 Mbps Up 6.97 Mbps ping 36 ms
So with a better RF signal, I seem to have hit the limit of my local ethernet and router combo. You are likely to see a similar effect on your wireless connection, but with higher numbers than here! Fiber to the home and quality ethernet cable direct to your computer would provide the fastest possible speed.