<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330916#M167363</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Switch ports are set to auto already, and have tried various frequencies, with no difference in performance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have run carrier busy tests to select a clear channel, but I'm still seeing significant "energy detect defers"; doesnt' this indicate interference?  Why wouldn't it show up in the carrier busy test?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:04:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ED CARMODY</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-11-03T14:04:08Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330913#M167360</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, I have two 1410 bridges installed 3 kilometers apart, using integrated antennae.  I have measured the throughput across the link using two PCs running Qcheck that are directely connected to the bridges, and am only seeing ~15 mbps towards the root bridge and anywhere from 4-12 mbps away from the root.  I've flipped the root/non-root configs on the bridges, and the slowness went in the other direction&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both bridges have consistent RSSI at -54 or better.  Both bridges' carrier busy tests show pretty clean, with only one location showing utilization on 5745 @ 13%, so I set the bridges to use 5785.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I do see that the link seems to be stepping down from the 54 mbps data rate, down to 48, 36, and 24, with what I percieve to be high data and RTS retries on one of the radios, which makes me suspect interference, but carrier busy is clean.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Experimenting, I have tried hard-setting the data rates on the radios, and have found that the radios cannot maintain the link when I hard-set the speed to anything above basic-24.0 (i.e. at basic-36.0, the link bombs).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any ideas on why throughput might be so low, and why the link is faster towards the root than away from the root?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What should concatenation be set to?  What should CCA be set to? RTS threshold?  My customer is trying to move 10MB graphics files over the link in rapid succession (PACS).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 17:07:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330913#M167360</guid>
      <dc:creator>ED CARMODY</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-04T17:07:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330914#M167361</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just an FYI.  I am having the same exact problem and have tried the same hard-settings with the same results.  Will let you know if I have any luck on my end!!!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:55:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330914#M167361</guid>
      <dc:creator>steve20</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-11-02T13:55:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330915#M167362</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do you have the FastEthernet and switches set to 100MB/Full?  If so, change to auto on both.  Seemed to fix my problem.  Also try different frequencies.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:54:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330915#M167362</guid>
      <dc:creator>steve20</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-11-03T12:54:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330916#M167363</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Switch ports are set to auto already, and have tried various frequencies, with no difference in performance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have run carrier busy tests to select a clear channel, but I'm still seeing significant "energy detect defers"; doesnt' this indicate interference?  Why wouldn't it show up in the carrier busy test?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:04:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330916#M167363</guid>
      <dc:creator>ED CARMODY</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-11-03T14:04:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330917#M167364</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hey E,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a dozen links supported by 1410's.  They vary in length from 3 to 8 miles.  I do not use integrated antennas, in favor of parabolics, because I believe that the coming congestion at 5.8 will kill anything but the most tightly focused xmit signal.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here is a link to a cisco doc on 1410 configuration:  &lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/customer/products/hw/wireless/ps5279/prod_release_note09186a00802146c0.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/customer/products/hw/wireless/ps5279/prod_release_note09186a00802146c0.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It says that the default settings for CCA are 0 and 62, although I have never had anything go to 62.  TAC has told me that 61 should be the default on all bridges (1310,1410) so I have it coded.  I haven't messed with concat or RTS threshholds.  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have experienced your problem and found that going to a different pole (vertical or horiz) to be the best solution.  Since getting real hands-on support is such a challenge here, feel free to email me at &lt;A href="mailto:abrahamj@saccounty.net"&gt;abrahamj@saccounty.net&lt;/A&gt; if you ever need any help.  I have about 50 bridged links in and around Sacramento, CA - using Cisco, WMUX, Proxim and Orthogon - and will be happy to offer help where I can.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:14:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330917#M167364</guid>
      <dc:creator>abrahamj</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-11-08T17:14:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1410 bridges - poor throughput</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330918#M167365</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hiya,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am running/testing 2x 1310G in a bridge set up here. Putting the 2 antennae next to each other I managed to get approx 22/24 mbs at max. I then decided to place them in position. 1 in the main building and the 2 in the opposite building ( 30 metres away) and the rate dropped to 3mb at max!!! which really is a big difference. We are using 8db antenae and just brought 12db ones which were worse &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":disappointed_face:"&gt;😞&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any ideas how to improve this or the cause?? The Windows maybe in between buildings?? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. What is the maximum data rate I should be getting from these say if i put them next to each other. Am using iperf to test this. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We had a wireless survey done by specialists and was found the site to be good for wireless connectivity due to the close proximity and DLS.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any ideas would be appreciated??&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;IP-bod&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:05:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1410-bridges-poor-throughput/m-p/330918#M167365</guid>
      <dc:creator>ipbod1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-11-28T18:05:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

