







The research was funded by the National Science Foundation.

Source: NCSU [press release]

Comments     Threshold


RE: How Is This Different?
By Etsp on 11/16/2012 12:38:57 PM , Rating: 3
I read the source link, and I read the daily tech article, and I find that I'm coming to a completely different understanding than Jason did when he wrote the article.

What the source link describes is when you have one access point serving a large number of users, there are significant performance issues, and NC State's proposed solution to some of those issues.

It's not some sort of coordination between access points, but rather it's a means of dynamically giving priority to the access point to transmit a backlog of data over the users within a given WiFi channel.

Interestingly, the abstract in the source link specifies that the 400% increase was in "downlink goodput", not overall throughput, but that caveat wasn't listed anywhere else...

RE: How Is This Different?
By name99 on 11/16/2012 2:40:44 PM , Rating: 3
Goodput IS what you want to measure. Throughput refers to, essentially "number of bit transitions" including bits that are used to run the protocol, as headers, as packets that are dropped at the router for lack of buffer space, etc.
Goodput refers to the throughput of REAL data --- how many bytes per sec of MY data do I see leaving my PC.

ALL network measurements anywhere that are of interest to the public should be of goodput. The only time throughput should ever be mentioned is in technical papers dealing with modulation and protocols, where the target audience knows the difference and understands the relationship between the two.

RE: How Is This Different?
By Etsp on 11/16/2012 3:38:27 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't sure what goodput is, so I included it. However, the "downlink" portion of that was the caveat I was referring to. Thank you for your explanation goodput though.


Related Articles
WiGig Specifications Completed
December 10, 2009, 11:16 AM
