Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[garypace]

I recently bought a D-Link DNS-321 NAS and loaded it with two 1TB WD Drives as a backup device. I have set it up to my liking on my 1GBPS wired network. So the next step was to create a wireless link to it, so I can put it in my shed as a sort-of-offsite backup.

There were various options for this, but I settled on two DAP-1522's (one as AP, one as bridge). I chose this because : Wireless N, GB Ethernet, AP/Bridge mode.

I have got this set up and working. There were a few problems - the two DAP's tend to crash each other's setup web servers (I set them up one at a time). The bridge cannot connect to the AP unless I broadcast the SSID.

However, the file transfer speed is nothing like I expected.

Considering single large file transfer, the speeds for 1GB wired, 100MB wired and DAP-to-DAP wireless (1GB wired links at either end) are 16MByte/s, 11MByte/s and 5MByte/s respectively. The comparison is even worse for multiple small files.

I have WPA2 encryption. I have set the AP DAP to 5GHz band.

Can anybody help me with :
- Are there any setup options that could improve file transfer rates ?
- Where in the setup websites can I monitor things like signal strength, connection speed etc ?

Thanks
Gary

[anon]

Are you using the latest f/w?
Have you tried using them on 2.4GHz with 20MHz or 40MHz?

You can check the signal strength of the Dap-1522 by going to the product page http://dlinkap, SETUP, WIRELESS, and click on Site Survey.

With devices that contain the antenna(s) inside the unit, the placement of them play an important role in performance. It is best to just run a wired connection if possible. The speed difference between wired and wireless is just not worth the minor convenience you get… to me that is.

[Kzbd]

I'm having an issue connecting my dns-321 to my dap-1522, dns-321 configuration page is enabled but just never loads it says "loading web page" forever

[tamsler]

I have two DAP-1522 (one as an AP an the other one as a Bridge) and did some speed tests. Setup:

- 1 wired linux system
- 1 wired or wifi macbook pro
- AP accepts only N, and connects to Bridge via 5GHz and
- CAT 5 ethernet cables, which should be good for at least 12.5MB/s (100Mb/s)

Test 1 AP to wire:
scp 100M file: highest throughput was 1.0MB/s (8Mb/s)

Test 2 Bridge to wire:
scp 100M file: highest throughput was 1.0MB/s (8Mb/s)

Test 3 wire to wire on AP:
scp 100M file: highest throughput was 1.1MB/s (8.8Mb/s)

The result indicate that the transfer rate is just a little bellow 1.25Mb/s (10Mb/s). I would have expected that "Test 3 (wire to wire)" would have resulted in a higher transfer rate, closter to 12.5 MB/s (100Mb/s)

Best,
-- Thomas

[jerry6]

I get 75-80 Mbps wireless on 5 ghz , wired from x-box to media comp I get 560-660 Mbps , but I am using cat 6 cables .

[tamsler]

I redid the speed test, this time using Iperf http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf/ instead of ssh/scp, and came up with the same results.

To establish a "baseline" I actually removed the DAP-1522 from the equation and just hooked up the two systems to a gigabyte switch. To my surprise, the results are the same, which indicates that the DAP-1522 is not causing this problem. Now, I suspect that one of the systems is causing the problem. I ran some tools on the linux box, mii-tool/mii-diag and it indicates that it's properly working at 100Mb/s full-duplex.
I will have to do some more troubleshooting and hope to redo the speed test with two systems that work properly at least at 100Mb/s.

Best,
-- Thomas

[tamsler]

I just had a chance to test this again with a third system, running linux. It turns out that there is something wrong with my Linux system's NIC that I used initially. Testing with the third system, I got data rates up to 95 MB/s ( 760 Mb/s ).

So in my case, there is nothing wrong with any of my two DAP-1522.

Best,
-- Thomas

[tamsler]

I found the solution for the slow throughput. I had the netmask misconfigured on my linux box. I had 255.255.255.255 instead of 255.255.255.0. After fixing that, everything works perfectly.

Best,
-- Thomas