Mixing
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
One of my friends (that knows very well Wireless world) told me following:
Consider we have high speed AP. If one user stays out of the range of AP WiFi (lets say 51 meter away) - he will have low throughput and therefore all users that connected to the same AP will suffer from low traffic.
Is it true?
ieee-802.11 throughput
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
add a comment |
One of my friends (that knows very well Wireless world) told me following:
Consider we have high speed AP. If one user stays out of the range of AP WiFi (lets say 51 meter away) - he will have low throughput and therefore all users that connected to the same AP will suffer from low traffic.
Is it true?
ieee-802.11 throughput
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
add a comment |
One of my friends (that knows very well Wireless world) told me following:
Consider we have high speed AP. If one user stays out of the range of AP WiFi (lets say 51 meter away) - he will have low throughput and therefore all users that connected to the same AP will suffer from low traffic.
Is it true?
ieee-802.11 throughput
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
One of my friends (that knows very well Wireless world) told me following:
Consider we have high speed AP. If one user stays out of the range of AP WiFi (lets say 51 meter away) - he will have low throughput and therefore all users that connected to the same AP will suffer from low traffic.
Is it true?
ieee-802.11 throughput
ieee-802.11 throughput
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
asked Jan 13 at 21:24
Maxim ShoustinMaxim Shoustin
1163
1163
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
Yes, this is true at least in the traditional 802.11 network.
Why? By the nature of 802.11 wireless, a channel (i.e. frequency range) is a shared medium. Only one device can be using the channel at a single moment in time. So a device connecting at a lower data rate will potentially consume more of the "airtime" available for communication; using more airtime to send/receive the same amount of data.
There are a couple of features in many modern 802.11 networks that mitigate or reduce this impact. Some wireless systems provide for client "airtime fairness" mechanisms. By manipulating the traffic in some fashion, each client is given an equal amount of time to use the channel, passing as much data as it can during it's allotted time.
Second, starting with 802.11ac, multi-user MIMO (aka MU-MIMO) was introduced. Combined with beam forming, this allows an 802.11ac access point to allocate radio resources to communicate with more than one downstream client at the same time. 802.11ax (still in the draft process) provides an improvement to allow MU-MIMO in both downstream and upstream directions.
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
add a comment |
An individual station will receive traffic at whatever speed it can, independent of any other stations. In infrastructure mode (with an AP), stations communicate with the AP, not each other, so the ability for each station to hear and understand each other is (a) not necessary, and (b) often not even possible (see also: hidden node problem.)
What will be slow is broadcast (and thus multicast) traffic as that has to be sent at a rate ALL stations can hear. That's one frame that will only be sent once with no acknowledgement. (that's call basic-rate, and is substantially less than any main-rate.)
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
add a comment |
Well it depends... See, wireless interference is unfortunately inevitable, because wireless LAN communications are based on radio frequency signals that require a clear and unobstructed transmission path.
Quickly,
WAP's cant detect "collisions", since these "signals" are in the air. So their mechanism WAPs have to deal with collisions is "carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance" (CSMA/CA). Basically what that is, is a threshold/window in which a single devices can transmit data. Therefore the more people attached to a WAP the slower they transmit because their time slot they're allowed to transmit through becomes smaller and smaller and smaller...
Now, I believe what might be happening is that its taking a long time for the WAP to relay to the device/determine when what device has this "right of way" to transmit its data. And that since wireless is typically slower then wired speeds so is the network broadcasts, as a result they too are slower when relaying to the WAP.
I hope that makes sense. And it could be possible however, I don't believe that his throughput would drop significantly enough for him to notice it.
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "496"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f56087%2fdoes-distance-of-one-user-from-wifi-ap-have-negative-impact-on-other-connected-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
Yes, this is true at least in the traditional 802.11 network.
Why? By the nature of 802.11 wireless, a channel (i.e. frequency range) is a shared medium. Only one device can be using the channel at a single moment in time. So a device connecting at a lower data rate will potentially consume more of the "airtime" available for communication; using more airtime to send/receive the same amount of data.
There are a couple of features in many modern 802.11 networks that mitigate or reduce this impact. Some wireless systems provide for client "airtime fairness" mechanisms. By manipulating the traffic in some fashion, each client is given an equal amount of time to use the channel, passing as much data as it can during it's allotted time.
Second, starting with 802.11ac, multi-user MIMO (aka MU-MIMO) was introduced. Combined with beam forming, this allows an 802.11ac access point to allocate radio resources to communicate with more than one downstream client at the same time. 802.11ax (still in the draft process) provides an improvement to allow MU-MIMO in both downstream and upstream directions.
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
add a comment |
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
Yes, this is true at least in the traditional 802.11 network.
Why? By the nature of 802.11 wireless, a channel (i.e. frequency range) is a shared medium. Only one device can be using the channel at a single moment in time. So a device connecting at a lower data rate will potentially consume more of the "airtime" available for communication; using more airtime to send/receive the same amount of data.
There are a couple of features in many modern 802.11 networks that mitigate or reduce this impact. Some wireless systems provide for client "airtime fairness" mechanisms. By manipulating the traffic in some fashion, each client is given an equal amount of time to use the channel, passing as much data as it can during it's allotted time.
Second, starting with 802.11ac, multi-user MIMO (aka MU-MIMO) was introduced. Combined with beam forming, this allows an 802.11ac access point to allocate radio resources to communicate with more than one downstream client at the same time. 802.11ax (still in the draft process) provides an improvement to allow MU-MIMO in both downstream and upstream directions.
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
add a comment |
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
Yes, this is true at least in the traditional 802.11 network.
Why? By the nature of 802.11 wireless, a channel (i.e. frequency range) is a shared medium. Only one device can be using the channel at a single moment in time. So a device connecting at a lower data rate will potentially consume more of the "airtime" available for communication; using more airtime to send/receive the same amount of data.
There are a couple of features in many modern 802.11 networks that mitigate or reduce this impact. Some wireless systems provide for client "airtime fairness" mechanisms. By manipulating the traffic in some fashion, each client is given an equal amount of time to use the channel, passing as much data as it can during it's allotted time.
Second, starting with 802.11ac, multi-user MIMO (aka MU-MIMO) was introduced. Combined with beam forming, this allows an 802.11ac access point to allocate radio resources to communicate with more than one downstream client at the same time. 802.11ax (still in the draft process) provides an improvement to allow MU-MIMO in both downstream and upstream directions.
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
Does distance of one user from WiFi AP have negative impact on other connected users?
Yes, this is true at least in the traditional 802.11 network.
Why? By the nature of 802.11 wireless, a channel (i.e. frequency range) is a shared medium. Only one device can be using the channel at a single moment in time. So a device connecting at a lower data rate will potentially consume more of the "airtime" available for communication; using more airtime to send/receive the same amount of data.
There are a couple of features in many modern 802.11 networks that mitigate or reduce this impact. Some wireless systems provide for client "airtime fairness" mechanisms. By manipulating the traffic in some fashion, each client is given an equal amount of time to use the channel, passing as much data as it can during it's allotted time.
Second, starting with 802.11ac, multi-user MIMO (aka MU-MIMO) was introduced. Combined with beam forming, this allows an 802.11ac access point to allocate radio resources to communicate with more than one downstream client at the same time. 802.11ax (still in the draft process) provides an improvement to allow MU-MIMO in both downstream and upstream directions.
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
answered Jan 14 at 3:33
YLearn♦YLearn
22.1k545103
22.1k545103
add a comment |
add a comment |
An individual station will receive traffic at whatever speed it can, independent of any other stations. In infrastructure mode (with an AP), stations communicate with the AP, not each other, so the ability for each station to hear and understand each other is (a) not necessary, and (b) often not even possible (see also: hidden node problem.)
What will be slow is broadcast (and thus multicast) traffic as that has to be sent at a rate ALL stations can hear. That's one frame that will only be sent once with no acknowledgement. (that's call basic-rate, and is substantially less than any main-rate.)
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
add a comment |
An individual station will receive traffic at whatever speed it can, independent of any other stations. In infrastructure mode (with an AP), stations communicate with the AP, not each other, so the ability for each station to hear and understand each other is (a) not necessary, and (b) often not even possible (see also: hidden node problem.)
What will be slow is broadcast (and thus multicast) traffic as that has to be sent at a rate ALL stations can hear. That's one frame that will only be sent once with no acknowledgement. (that's call basic-rate, and is substantially less than any main-rate.)
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
add a comment |
An individual station will receive traffic at whatever speed it can, independent of any other stations. In infrastructure mode (with an AP), stations communicate with the AP, not each other, so the ability for each station to hear and understand each other is (a) not necessary, and (b) often not even possible (see also: hidden node problem.)
What will be slow is broadcast (and thus multicast) traffic as that has to be sent at a rate ALL stations can hear. That's one frame that will only be sent once with no acknowledgement. (that's call basic-rate, and is substantially less than any main-rate.)
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
An individual station will receive traffic at whatever speed it can, independent of any other stations. In infrastructure mode (with an AP), stations communicate with the AP, not each other, so the ability for each station to hear and understand each other is (a) not necessary, and (b) often not even possible (see also: hidden node problem.)
What will be slow is broadcast (and thus multicast) traffic as that has to be sent at a rate ALL stations can hear. That's one frame that will only be sent once with no acknowledgement. (that's call basic-rate, and is substantially less than any main-rate.)
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
answered Jan 14 at 1:56
Ricky BeamRicky Beam
21.7k22961
21.7k22961
add a comment |
add a comment |
Well it depends... See, wireless interference is unfortunately inevitable, because wireless LAN communications are based on radio frequency signals that require a clear and unobstructed transmission path.
Quickly,
WAP's cant detect "collisions", since these "signals" are in the air. So their mechanism WAPs have to deal with collisions is "carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance" (CSMA/CA). Basically what that is, is a threshold/window in which a single devices can transmit data. Therefore the more people attached to a WAP the slower they transmit because their time slot they're allowed to transmit through becomes smaller and smaller and smaller...
Now, I believe what might be happening is that its taking a long time for the WAP to relay to the device/determine when what device has this "right of way" to transmit its data. And that since wireless is typically slower then wired speeds so is the network broadcasts, as a result they too are slower when relaying to the WAP.
I hope that makes sense. And it could be possible however, I don't believe that his throughput would drop significantly enough for him to notice it.
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
add a comment |
Well it depends... See, wireless interference is unfortunately inevitable, because wireless LAN communications are based on radio frequency signals that require a clear and unobstructed transmission path.
Quickly,
WAP's cant detect "collisions", since these "signals" are in the air. So their mechanism WAPs have to deal with collisions is "carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance" (CSMA/CA). Basically what that is, is a threshold/window in which a single devices can transmit data. Therefore the more people attached to a WAP the slower they transmit because their time slot they're allowed to transmit through becomes smaller and smaller and smaller...
Now, I believe what might be happening is that its taking a long time for the WAP to relay to the device/determine when what device has this "right of way" to transmit its data. And that since wireless is typically slower then wired speeds so is the network broadcasts, as a result they too are slower when relaying to the WAP.
I hope that makes sense. And it could be possible however, I don't believe that his throughput would drop significantly enough for him to notice it.
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
add a comment |
Well it depends... See, wireless interference is unfortunately inevitable, because wireless LAN communications are based on radio frequency signals that require a clear and unobstructed transmission path.
Quickly,
WAP's cant detect "collisions", since these "signals" are in the air. So their mechanism WAPs have to deal with collisions is "carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance" (CSMA/CA). Basically what that is, is a threshold/window in which a single devices can transmit data. Therefore the more people attached to a WAP the slower they transmit because their time slot they're allowed to transmit through becomes smaller and smaller and smaller...
Now, I believe what might be happening is that its taking a long time for the WAP to relay to the device/determine when what device has this "right of way" to transmit its data. And that since wireless is typically slower then wired speeds so is the network broadcasts, as a result they too are slower when relaying to the WAP.
I hope that makes sense. And it could be possible however, I don't believe that his throughput would drop significantly enough for him to notice it.
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
Well it depends... See, wireless interference is unfortunately inevitable, because wireless LAN communications are based on radio frequency signals that require a clear and unobstructed transmission path.
Quickly,
WAP's cant detect "collisions", since these "signals" are in the air. So their mechanism WAPs have to deal with collisions is "carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance" (CSMA/CA). Basically what that is, is a threshold/window in which a single devices can transmit data. Therefore the more people attached to a WAP the slower they transmit because their time slot they're allowed to transmit through becomes smaller and smaller and smaller...
Now, I believe what might be happening is that its taking a long time for the WAP to relay to the device/determine when what device has this "right of way" to transmit its data. And that since wireless is typically slower then wired speeds so is the network broadcasts, as a result they too are slower when relaying to the WAP.
I hope that makes sense. And it could be possible however, I don't believe that his throughput would drop significantly enough for him to notice it.
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
edited Jan 14 at 2:08
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
answered Jan 14 at 2:02
BoschkoBoschko
614
614
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
add a comment |
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
1
1
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
That's not exactly how it works (i.e. TDM), and isn't the question he asked. If you are connected at 400mbps, and I connect at 100mbps, my association doesn't drag the whole network down to 100mbps. Yes, my traffic will take 4x as long to transmit, but it otherwise has no effect on anyone elses transfer speed.
– Ricky Beam
Jan 14 at 19:55
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
ahhh I see makes sence
– Boschko
Jan 14 at 21:02
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f56087%2fdoes-distance-of-one-user-from-wifi-ap-have-negative-impact-on-other-connected-u%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
