internally in my svn i implemented a new feature which allows you to bond all wireless adapters in your system to a big network adapter which will increase the overall speed and will also add failure safty.
this right now works as bridge between 2 units. i already tested today 4 wireless cards per unit and configured all to turbo mode and different channels. the overall transfer rate was, lets say. amazing. i dont want to post benchmarks here since i will wait for user responses.
but now to the point.
since we all know, there are several special wireless technics on the market with something freaky names like nstream, nstream dual etc. (mikrotik), also if there is nothing special behind the protocol except that its not compatible to standard 802.11a/b/g and would maybe also violate the fcc and etsi regulatory. but thats another story.
now i'm searching for another nice name for my system. more than just "wireless bonding" or something like that.
so post whatever you think about it _________________ "So you tried to use the computer and it started smoking? Sounds like a Mac to me.." - Louis Rossmann https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL_5YDRWqGE&t=60s
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:12 Post subject: Re: Name for new feature wanted!!!!
BrainSlayer wrote:
internally in my svn i implemented a new feature which allows you to bond all wireless adapters in your system to a big network adapter which will increase the overall speed and will also add failure safty.
this right now works as bridge between 2 units. i already tested today 4 wireless cards per unit and configured all to turbo mode and different channels. the overall transfer rate was, lets say. amazing. i dont want to post benchmarks here since i will wait for user responses.
but now to the point.
since we all know, there are several special wireless technics on the market with something freaky names like nstream, nstream dual etc. (mikrotik), also if there is nothing special behind the protocol except that its not compatible to standard 802.11a/b/g and would maybe also violate the fcc and etsi regulatory. but thats another story.
now i'm searching for another nice name for my system. more than just "wireless bonding" or something like that.
so post whatever you think about it
I think that sounds freakin awesome.
Just call it that;
"DD-WRTx86 with new Freakin Awesome® wireless bonding technology." :)
I am curious to know how this would/why this violates FCC regs?
I don't see how it would violate FCC regs myself. They're regulations tend to line up with power limits and noise limits on the sidebands. If you broadcast in all channels on the 2.4GHz spectrum, you just have to make sure you don't overlap too far by using a noisy radio or too much power.
Atheros turbo mode uses two channels, correct? Whats the difference if you're using multiple cards? Turbo is legal in the US. _________________ mmm... forbidden donut....
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 Posts: 68 Location: Earth 33 43 50 N 117 58 33 W 33.7306m -117.9759m
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:47 Post subject:
How about WiFi Teaming? Or even better DD-WRT Fusion. You should patent the process or idea if you can. _________________ WRT350NV1 Firmware: v24
(Current) std
Actiontec MI424WR: Future?
Joined: 06 Jun 2006 Posts: 7492 Location: Dresden, Germany
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:49 Post subject:
0ldman wrote:
Freakin Awesome sounds good to me... lol
I don't see how it would violate FCC regs myself. They're regulations tend to line up with power limits and noise limits on the sidebands. If you broadcast in all channels on the 2.4GHz spectrum, you just have to make sure you don't overlap too far by using a noisy radio or too much power.
Atheros turbo mode uses two channels, correct? Whats the difference if you're using multiple cards? Turbo is legal in the US.
take 2 cards. both are running in turbo mode. this should give you real 100 mbit. not just 50 - 60 like in normal turbo mode. the bonding feature uses both cards and combines them together. this doubles also the bandwith almost and if both are running in turbo, you have now a super turbo mode _________________ "So you tried to use the computer and it started smoking? Sounds like a Mac to me.." - Louis Rossmann https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL_5YDRWqGE&t=60s
Joined: 06 Jun 2006 Posts: 7492 Location: Dresden, Germany
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:51 Post subject:
0ldman wrote:
Seriously, I like DD-X. It just fits.
What does the DD in DD-WRT stand for anyway?
some times asked, all times answered. in germany like in many other countries each town has a own carplate prefix. so HH = hamburg, M = munich and DD = Dresden, my hometown. search for the pictures of my old golf in the forum and you will find it _________________ "So you tried to use the computer and it started smoking? Sounds like a Mac to me.." - Louis Rossmann https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL_5YDRWqGE&t=60s
I don't see how it would violate FCC regs myself. They're regulations tend to line up with power limits and noise limits on the sidebands. If you broadcast in all channels on the 2.4GHz spectrum, you just have to make sure you don't overlap too far by using a noisy radio or too much power.
Atheros turbo mode uses two channels, correct? Whats the difference if you're using multiple cards? Turbo is legal in the US.
take 2 cards. both are running in turbo mode. this should give you real 100 mbit. not just 50 - 60 like in normal turbo mode. the bonding feature uses both cards and combines them together. this doubles also the bandwith almost and if both are running in turbo, you have now a super turbo mode
I should have been clearer with the question. I understand how channel bonding and card bonding make it faster, I mean I don't understand why it would violate any FCC regulations. I don't think they limit the ISM band to any particular channel size. I'll have to do some more reading. _________________ mmm... forbidden donut....
Joined: 06 Jun 2006 Posts: 7492 Location: Dresden, Germany
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:22 Post subject:
but maybe they do. in some countries its forbidden to use turbo mode for example. it might be a violation or might be not. but you must read the complete text, it was related to the mikrotik nstream protocol and this uses an non 802.11 conform protocol and this could be critical in 5 ghz band. the 5 ghz regulary restrictions are very strict and there is alot of things you have to care about to be FCC and ETSI conform. its not just radar pulse detection, dfs in general and tpc _________________ "So you tried to use the computer and it started smoking? Sounds like a Mac to me.." - Louis Rossmann https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL_5YDRWqGE&t=60s
