<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding. in Access Points - Indoor and Outdoor</title>
    <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24500#M6699</link>
    <description>I tested those on ver.104 and ver.110 both.</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:27:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-10-17T08:27:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24494#M6693</link>
      <description>I have tested throughput test with NAT forwarding for Ruckus AP and some vender APs.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;On Nat-forwarding, Aruba(IAP mode)and Samsung AP(standalone mode) have over 300Mbps at throughput test, but Ruckus AP have just 150-200Mbps.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Using same Ruckus AP, when we associated to SZ ver 3.6,x, we find throughput is over 300-350Mbps.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;In SZ envirnment, I know Ruckus enhanced nat performance since 3.6.x.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Some customer complaints us Ruckus AP(Standalone) about a poor throughput&amp;nbsp;performance about standalone with NAT forwarding.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;They say that when we used cheap wireless Router, those had better throughput than Ruckus.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Why have Ruckus AP poor throughput at using NAT forwarding?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Like SZ, do Ruckus&amp;nbsp; enhance Standalone-AP with NAT forwarding better throughput in future?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;In korea, many partner and customer want it.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 06:09:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24494#M6693</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-05T06:09:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24495#M6694</link>
      <description>Hi Jeronimo,&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;What software and version are you running on the standalone AP?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;regards&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Martin&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 07:58:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24495#M6694</guid>
      <dc:creator>martin_martin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-05T07:58:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24496#M6695</link>
      <description>I have tested that using all 104.x and 110.x.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 08:31:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24496#M6695</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-05T08:31:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24497#M6696</link>
      <description>Can you report how you are tested, or share experiences?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Do we need to know that you have tested them for ISM (2.4GHz), or UNII (5GHz)?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;We need to know which foi or throughput server that you used, was foi or mesmo em both (local server, jitter, latência);&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;But when you are not standalone method, to ruckus não trabalha com resources de rádio (RRM), não works to beam flex feature, nem do channel fly. I acknowledge that this is a difference as long as Aruba, so you can adjust the resources of non-IAP RRM, and transform it into virtual AC.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;More please, compartilhe or method used for testing, pois sua dúvida é muito important for nós.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 11:19:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24497#M6696</guid>
      <dc:creator>jardel_almeida1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-05T11:19:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24498#M6697</link>
      <description>I had tested 5Ghz/802.11acperformance using iperf3 due to not matter performance for 2.4Ghz.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Samsung AP and Aruba AP are better performance at NAT forwarding.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Ruckus AP with NAT forwarding on standalone mode is very poor.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I don't understand why do Ruckus AP have poor performance.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2018 13:28:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24498#M6697</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-08T13:28:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24499#M6698</link>
      <description>What version firmware running on your Ruckus AP?</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2018 20:31:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24499#M6698</guid>
      <dc:creator>michael_brado</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-08T20:31:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24500#M6699</link>
      <description>I tested those on ver.104 and ver.110 both.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:27:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24500#M6699</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-17T08:27:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24501#M6700</link>
      <description>Any update?</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2018 05:30:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24501#M6700</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-11-06T05:30:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24502#M6701</link>
      <description>In a lot of sites customer&amp;nbsp; give me a appeal concering this issue.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Why ruckus stand alone AP has slower speed than other vendor APs .&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;I wish I resolve this problem.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2018 05:39:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24502#M6701</guid>
      <dc:creator>nnamjin_roh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-11-06T05:39:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24503#M6702</link>
      <description>we are seeing this exact same issue (very poor performance when ruckus AP is in gateway mode vs great performance in bridged mode) and its become a really big issue.&amp;nbsp; are there any options to disable QOS maybe (or other packet processing) to increase performance in standalone gateway mode?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;While i was seeing 70-100mbit TOPS on a 7372 with 104.x FW ,&amp;nbsp; i was really appalled when on higher end hardware (ie r610 or r720), speeds were maxing out at 150-200m in gateway mode.&amp;nbsp; (same APs in bridge mode, 400m +)&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;any ideas on disabling some packet processing or qos maybe to improve standalone ap gateway mode performance?&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;(fwiw, unleashed performance in GW is not any better)&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;thanks</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 05:52:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24503#M6702</guid>
      <dc:creator>stephen_hall_60</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-25T05:52:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: A poor throughput performance standalone AP with NAT forwarding.</title>
      <link>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24504#M6703</link>
      <description>I thinks so.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;Someone using standalone mode is eager to improve performance in NAT mode(GW mode), but Ruckus seems to have no interest in this.&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR alt="" name="" rel="" target="" title="" type="" value="" /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2019 02:13:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.ruckuswireless.com/t5/Access-Points-Indoor-and-Outdoor/A-poor-throughput-performance-standalone-AP-with-NAT-forwarding/m-p/24504#M6703</guid>
      <dc:creator>hyosang_choi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-26T02:13:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

