Kitz Forum
Computers & Hardware => Networking => Topic started by: Weaver on September 12, 2016, 11:01:49 AM
-
I did some measurements of the timings for pinging my router over a wireless LAN. Could you tell me how these compare with your WLAN ? I'm using WPA2-PSK and did IPv4 pings below
--- IPv4 ping statistics ---
64 bytes: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=4.794 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=43.95 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=27.174 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=29.226 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=3.45 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=43.282 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=55.626 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=35.226 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=33.965 ms
64 bytes: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=28.499 ms
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.45 / 30.519 / 55.626 / 15.554 ms
I'm using a ZyXel NWA-3560-N WAP. The results with IPv6 pings are a bit different. The minimum is about the same, but the average is quite a bit higher. I should perhaps try to do both types with longer packets so that the packet size could be made the same.
Why the enormous variation?
The shortest time I’ve ever seen is ~2.5 ms, the longest is ~90 ms !
-
Hi weaver
I hope you don't mind, but I usually use fing from the App Store, which is very useful
Mine are 2ns min to 116ms max, where max is always at the very start
Fing also shows you graphically but I'm not sure if it's available for iPad, it is for iPhone
We usually use fing when we first look at a new network
Many thanks
John
-
Will definitely take a look at Fing. Btw, tried two different iPad apps, just in case the results were a red herring.
-
Fing app works nicely on an iPad. Big weakness, doesn't speak IPv6. Pretty much the same range of values obtained, so it's not a red herring to do with one particular app.
-
--- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19025ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.020/2.679/4.720/0.637 ms
It's a nice simple 11g wireless router. The signal doesn't have far to go, only through a floor. I even reduce the tx power on my computer a little.
-
Access statistics relating to the WLAN in TheCattery, IPv4, 802.11n, --
[Duo2 ~]$ ping -c 10 ap
PING AP (192.168.1.254) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=6.33 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=3.39 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.36 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=3.36 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=7.25 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=3.49 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=5.15 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=3.19 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=5.46 ms
64 bytes from AP (192.168.1.254): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=3.18 ms
--- AP ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9017ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 3.185/4.420/7.258/1.434 ms
[Duo2 ~]$
-
IPv4, 802.11n
Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=120ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=116ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 120ms, Average = 16ms
IPv4, 802.11ac
Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=64
Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 105ms, Average = 10ms
Using a TP-Link Archer C2600 with an Asus PCE-AC53. The variance is mainly caused by the fact that Wi-Fi is an inherently half-duplex system, it can only transmit to or receive from one device at a time, it cannot communicate both ways at the same time or with multiple devices unless those devices use MU-MIMO, which my router supports but I do not believe any of my existing devices support. You may also notice that my 802.11ac results are more consistent, which is because it is using 5Ghz, which has much less devices on and much less interference. The 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz transmitters and receivers work independently in routers.
-
ejs and Burakkucat are far better than me. NEXUS2345 is far better almost all the time, but just occasionally even worse. There is a lot going on here that I don't understand at all.
Guys, are you all using WPA2-PSK ?
-
Yup, WPA2-PSK. It is worth noting that my house isn't that big, so signal is pretty good throughout.
-
Also confirming the use of just WPA2-PSK.
-
And for comparison :
--- IPv6 ping statistics ---
16 bytes: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=3.149 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=18.044 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=24.907 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=55.351 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=19.179 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=25.908 ms
16 bytes: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=37.786 ms
7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min / avg / max / stddev = 3.149 / 26.332 / 55.351 / 15.273 ms
-
I am unable to assist with IPv6 investigations, as only IPv4 is used here.
-
I'd start the investigation by finding out the received signal strength at each end of the wireless link.
-
My iPad is reading 5 / 5, but only a miserable 65 Mbps on an 802.11n access point. The signal has to go through a couple of wood + plasterboard walls, but the access point is fairly close.
-
pinging my laptop :) 5ghz AC bear in mind.
Pinging 192.168.1.125 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.125: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Ping statistics for 192.168.1.125:
Packets: Sent = 12, Received = 12, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 1ms, Average = 1ms
occasionally the first ping will be higher.
-
I used to see those sorts of pings too on my old Asus DSL-N55U. May have to invest in an Asus again at some point, probably an RT-AC8*U. The TP-Link is much better than my old N55U, but the N55U still had better range and latency.
-
My iPad is reading 5 / 5, but only a miserable 65 Mbps on an 802.11n access point. The signal has to go through a couple of wood + plasterboard walls, but the access point is fairly close.
To be useful, signal strength readings need to be the actual values in dBm, 5 out of 5 or 100% doesn't really mean very much.
My computer is receiving -48 dBm from the router, and my router is receiving -42 dBm from my computer. Probably about -60 to -65 dBm would be the minimum for it to be a good signal to achieve the full rate.
65 Mbps is the maximum rate for a single stream 11n device, using 20 MHz of bandwidth, and without SGI.
-
Laptop to WiFi Access Point
Link Quality=47/70 Signal level=-63 dBm
$ ping -c5 192.168.0.16
PING 192.168.0.16 (192.168.0.16) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.0.16: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=2.29 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.16: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.972 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.16: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.943 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.16: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.955 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.16: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=0.986 ms
--- 192.168.0.16 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.943/1.230/2.295/0.533 ms
Laptop to Hardware firewall/router
$ ping -c5 192.168.0.1
PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.60 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=1.66 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=2.14 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=1.67 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=1.68 ms
--- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.600/1.752/2.145/0.200 ms
-
My latency figures argue really horrible compared with some but not all of these other results. Wonder what's the story?
-
First pings are often higher if arp needs to be resolved. That probably won't apply if it's the default router you're pinging. At the moment I'm monitoring PC to router, via first wireless to the AP, then over Powerline. Total is around 3ms, see graph. PC <> AP is less than one ms.