Helderberg:20110115-Triton1NV2
Contents
Triton1 upgraded to RouterOS 4.16, sector protocol switched to Nv2
Triton1's sector was not performing well, and this was previously diagnosed as being due to a single user close (<1km) to Triton, and the rest being far (>4km) away aka the Near-far problem. To solve this, we wanted to upgrade Triton1 to RouterOS 4.16, and change the sector wireless protocol to Nv2.
Participants
Pretty much everyone on the Triton1 sector.
Plan
We had previously upgraded a number of client rbs to RouterOS 5 rc6, but then it was pointed out that RouterOS 4.13 and upwards also have Nv2. This is a far less risky upgrade (than ROS 4 -> ROS 5), so after chatting to Wetkit, we upgraded Triton1 to RouterOS 4.16 and enabled the Nv2 module.
All clients, with the exception of one user (who had not connected for several weeks/months) had been upgraded to either ROS 5 rc6 or ROS 4.16, had the Nv2 package enabled, and wireless protocol set to 'nv2 nstreme 802.11', which allowed them to stay connected before the sector upgrade, but also connect via Nv2 after the upgrade.
Unfortunately the wireless protocol was not set on Bleep's rb, so he did not connect after Nv2 was enabled. To fix this Triton1 was changed back to 802.11, his settings fixed and then we switched back to Nv2.
The following day the close user was moved back onto the Triton1 sector.
Results
Improvements were immediate - every client rb connected at 54Mbps with 80-100% rx/tx CCQ, and bandwidth tests (on both) to individual rbs were in the 12Mbps/12Mbps range.
Generally speaking, upload speeds from clients to the WUG are much better, going from 1Mbps up to 5-7Mbps and downloads have gone from 7Mbps up to 14-15Mbps.
We also noticed no perceivable difference to the sector performance after the close user was added back to the sector. We have recently added another very close user to the sector, with bad CCQ (40/20), and again this has not affected the sector performance. It would appear that Nv2's use of TDMA means that generally speaking one user's CCQ does not affect another's CCQ.
