Ruckus R720/R710/R610 Unleashed half speed download

[igor_vax]

Dear Ruckus, I have invested enough money to get fast and seamless internet on my APs. Not only did I recommend Ruckus Unleashed to many of my friends who wanted a fast and stable internet connection, and they also bought your points. But it is not, stable - yes, seamless - rather yes, fast - no. I carefully read all the similar problems in this forum over the past and did not find a single solution to the problem with half speed internet. Some offer a downgrade to 200.4, some Standalone. But this does not solve the problems if you have a few modern points with Wave 2 (which have the earliest firmware 200.5) and there are not so many to buy ZD. But what is more frustrating is that all the solutions are offered by users, not Ruckus himself. Even the timing of its decision is not defined. Recently a new firmware 200.8 was released, but this problem is still not solved. Because it’s really a problem when an AP for $40 gives Internet download speed up two to three times faster than at a point for $1500. Just tell us you are solving this problem or not? And when is the result possible? If it drags on for a long time, it’s easier to sell all my APs on eBay and switch to another vendor.

Related posts:
https://forums.ruckuswireless.com/ruckuswireless/topics/slow-download-speeds-r710-unleashed
https://forums.ruckuswireless.com/ruckuswireless/topics/fixes-in-january-2020-r720-ap-unleashed-uplo...

[s_j]

@hayward_kong I've tried performance and compatibility, as well as every other possible option I've found in various threads. And the issue isn't with ChannelFly taking time to adapt, because a) I've had this running for a couple weeks now, and b) there's hardly anything using 5GHz near me, and nothing at all on the frequencies it's using. Also, with regards to ChannelFly, it appears to have a serious issue, because I tried multiple times to transfer a large file over the network to test it, and every, single time it would run (slowly) for a few minutes then the connection would drop, and when it came back I'd see that the Ruckus had jumped to a different channel, despite almost the entire 5GHz spectrum being completely empty, and none of the channels it used had any other usage. So I have no idea why it was changing channels unnecessarily, or why every time it did it causes the connection to break and the file transfer to fail. If it can't happen seamlessly, then what's the point? And to add to the mess that ChannelFly apparently is, after reenabling it, it's now using one of the two small parts of the spectrum with other devices, leaving a large swatch of completely untouched channels unused. Ridiculous.

I personally believe file transfers are the best way to test the true performance of a network, and as I said, I was maxing out at ~480Mbps, and often not even getting that. It also allows for finding issues like mentioned with ChannelFly. That said, I just tested with iperf3, and it's still abysmal. Between 50-150Mbps, and the vast majority between 50-100. (Repeat tests several minutes later achieved ~150-250).

I've tested with my laptop which has an AX200 WiFi 6 adapter and is capable of Gb+ as well as my Galaxy A71.

I realize I can create two separate SSIDs, but I shouldn't have to, it should automatically use the fastest one that has a strong enough signal. And even with using 5GHz only, I'm not even getting 2.4GHz speeds.

I've tried both at and af modes (don't remember which is the preferred one found where I saw it before and that it needs to be at) and it's the same with each. When setting it to af, I get a warning that not enough power is supplied, which is interesting because I'm using a Ruckus 24V/0.5A POE injector, which is both what I read is needed, and supplies the same 24W that the label states it requires (12V/2A) for the DC adapter. So apparently yet another issue with this thing. Regardless, AFAICT based on the manual, speed isn't impacted by not having enough power, at least not on 5GHz, though it's not really clear. Also, I thought the af/at problem was going to be resolved in the .8 firmware.

The house is very old, but considering I'm ~3' from the AP with a single wall between me, unless that wall were solid steel (it's not), none of that should matter. Even so, I ran iperf with both devices in direct LOS with the AP from a few feet away in one direction and ~5' in another, and the results were the same.

Another thing I've found is that I get frequent lag when online gaming, and I ran ongoing pings with the AP, the router, the modem, and 8.8.8.8 last night to see which was was having latency spikes when the lag happened, and while there was some decent mix of which one had the issue for any given occurrence--and at least a couple occasions where the ping to the router seemed, somehow, less than that to the AP, which I have no idea how that's even possible--the majority of the issues appeared to be mainly due to high latency with the AP, which I'm guessing was because it was running so slow it was getting bottlenecked, which is just really, really bad, since that's the only thing I was doing at the time.