On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:01:12 GMT, "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On 13 Jul 2005 10:15:14 -0700, "Joe" <duah55@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You can tilt the antenna to a horizontal position, and get much better
>> up and down coverage, but at the expense of horizontal coverage. A
>> good compromise is two high gain antennas, one vertical and one
>> horizontal. The catch is that you lose some of the benifits of
>> diversity reception.
>Jeff, I'm curious about how this works. (2 antennas, 1 pointed up, 1 pointed
>horizontal)
It works fairly well.
>When the computer on the same level "talks to" the WRT54G does the antenna
>pointed up tend to receive the signal?
Yes. You used the right words with "tend to". There's no guarantee
that it will be the preferred antenna. The way diversity reception
works is that the preferred antenna is one that *LAST* received a
non-corrupted packet. If data corruption becomes excessive, then the
receiver starts scanning for a better antenna. It's not instantaneous
and may take a while for the access point to start scanning.
>And when the computer on a different
>level "talks to" the WRT54G does the antenna pointed horizontal tend to receive
>the signal?
Probably. Again, no guarantee. With the main lobe of the antenna
pattern for a horizontal omni being up and down, it's most likely that
the horizontal antenna will pickup the upstairs signal first (or
better). Remember, there's little or no RF interaction between the
two antennas.
>I think that is what you are saying. But what happens when the
>WRT54G talks back to the computers. Which antenna will it use?
Which ever antenna it heard the last non-corrupted packet. There's no
diversity on transmit. It simply uses the antenna that was selected
for receive. However, there are some really old access points that
would do diversity receive, but would only transmit on one antenna.
I'll have to dig through my mess of notes to find the makes and
models.
>Is it smart
>enough to use the correct antenna at that moment?
No, it's not very smart. If the "wrong" antenna is initially
selected, it will take a succession of corrupted packets to convince
the access point that it's time to try the other antenna. If the
signal is sufficiently marginal to be useful, it may never try to
switch until the signal is totally lost. This is not as horrible as
it may sound because the utility is not for getting the best range or
performance. Instead, it's for dealing with the all too common
multipath and reflections found in indoor environments. Reflections
are delays in the signals which can land in between packets. Instant
data corruption. Chances are good that the other antenna will NOT be
in the area affected by the same reflections. So, if the data gets
trashed, it tries another antenna. Not great, but better than one
antenna.
>And would this smartness vary
>if there was traffic from both computers at the same time?
Nope. Diversity antenna selection is by the MAC address, which is by
the connection. I wish there was a table easily available for which
antenna is selected for which client radio. However, all that is done
transparently in the RF chipset and does not involve anything in the
MAC controller. Therefore, not data is available.
Where problems start is if you do something tricky like two
independent antennas and two clients talking to each other. The
access point has to switch between antennas for every packet. All
modern chipsets handle this with ease, but older incantations had
problems. If the traffic is going through the access point, and each
client is on a different antenna, it can slow things down tremendously
with these old access point chipsets.
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831.336.2558 voice
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
#
jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
#
jeffl@cruzio.com AE6KS