Re: Number of WL clients with WRT54GS

"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i melding
news:u9fte1pptnnh192lv02l7qio6g9v19oedo@xxxxxxxxxx

> I don't understand. What units of measure do you expect for measuring
> "overhead"? Percentage CPU utilization? Also, overhead is normally
> defined in a before and after senario, such as with and without
> encryptions, WEP versus WPA, or with and without a VPN tunnel. So,
> could you rephrase your question in term of:

Sorry for using the wrong expression. Say I have a teoretical WL link
bandwidth of 54 Mbps (maybe more because of the GS version) and expect 8
users to be connected simultaneously using WPA encryption. In my original
question I wondered how much of those 54 Mbps will be eaten up by
handshaking, encryption, timeslicing etc,etc.

You mention that one bittorrent user will choke all the others, does this
mean that the wless protocol does not have any load-balancing between
clients other than setting priority by IP or MAC address from the WRT's
config utility? Even if there are network transport request from other
users during one client's file transfer the others will not be granted
bandwidth before the transfer is terminated?

Do different wl routers / access points handle this differently that the
WRT54? I'm not thinking of expensive Cisco eqpmnt but boxes in the sub $500
'area'.

The scenario is one office network connected to a WRT54GS in AP/bridge mode.
6 users will each have a WRT54GS (in client mode) connected to their
computer at home. They will do casual business tasks and internet access.
Filesharing and other high-demand bandwidth ports are closed at the office's
firewall. Would the linksys boxes do sufficiently in this case? If
marginal, do you have other suggestions?

regards

Doug


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: only 11Mb/s with bcm43xx on F5?[Scanned]
    ... But because there is the overhead of encryption and decryption, ... but I do not expect it to be as fast as the wired connection. ... overhead with the wireless connection if you are using WEP or WPA. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: only 11Mb/s with bcm43xx on F5?[Scanned]
    ... But because there is the overhead of encryption and decryption, ... but I do not expect it to be as fast as the wired connection. ... overhead with the wireless connection if you are using WEP or WPA. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Is encrypting a /home directory suggested?
    ... banking data or credit card info stored. ... I can see your documents, bank stuff, etc being worthy of encryption. ... but I can imagine zipping and unzipping megabytes worth of just one video and it seems that would some large system overhead... ... ..the Sin of Ignorance, ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: [OT] PC help needed
    ... There is an additional overhead with WEP encryption. ... With WPA-PSK encryption, which is the one I have running on mine, there's no overhead and also the encryption/decryption is all handled by the network card, rather than with WEP where it is often handled by the CPU. ... significant issues downloading big files over wireless vs. wired (desktop machine with 100BaseT). ... At the end of the day you /could/ overload a 54Mb wireless lan if you had enough machines on it talking to each other, but you're unlikely to max it out if they're all trying to talk to the internet via a 2Mb broadband connection. ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)