SCHOOL OF INFORMATION, COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY SIRINDHORN INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY ASSIGNMENT REPORT

Transcription

1 ! SCHOOL OF INFORMATION, COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY SIRINDHORN INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY ASSIGNMENT REPORT CSS331 Fundamentals of Data Communication Experiment By Mr. Nontajid Pantarak ID Mr. Ekdanai Deeboonchai ID Mr. Santichai Nasantisuk ID OBJECTIVES 1 Compare the performance of wired and wireless technologies, especially for LANs 2 Understand the factors that impact on performance for Ethernet and WiFi 3 Gain experience conducting and reporting on network experiments 1

2 CONTENTS Ethernet Experiments 3 Network Topology and Hardware Specification 3 Ethernet experiment Windows size as parameter 4 Default Parameter Values 4 Ping Over Ethernet 4 Datarate 5 6 Loss 7 8 Ethernet experiment Packet size as parameter 9 Default Parameter Values WiFi Experiments 11 Network Topology and Hardware Specification 11 Wifi experiment distance as parameter 12 Default Parameter Values 12 Building floor plan 12 Ping in open space compare to inside building 13 Data rate Open space 15 Inside building 15 Open space compare to inside building Comparison of Ethernet and WiFi Default parameter value

3 Ethernet experiment Network Topology Ethernet IEEE /100 Sever Computer Client Computer Sever and client computer connect via switch by using ethernet IEEE /100. Hardware Specification Sever Computer Brand Dell Inspiron OS Windows 10 Ethernet IEEE /100 WIFI IEEE b/g/n Client Computer Brand Dell Inspiron OS Windows 7 Ethernet IEEE /100 WIFI IEEE b/g/n Switch Brand Technicolor Ethernet Ethernet 4 Port 10/100 WIFI WiFi b, g, n mode 3

4 Ethernet experiment Windows size as parameter We tested by using Windows size as a parameter on receiver (Server) by using this command. Command: Server Computer : Iperf -s -u -w (Windows size) Client Computer : Iperf -c(ip Address of server computer) -u -t 20 -b 10M Default parameter value Transport Protocol Ethernet mode link speed(data rate) Sending rate Limit Interval Transmission time UDP mode IEEE Mb/s 100 Mb/s 10 Mb/s 20 sec Ping Over Ethernet Ping (AVG) 4 3 Ping Attempts Graph above showing ping between two computer connect via ethernet. As the result we have ping less than 1 so the approximate value of ping is zero. The reason is connection via ethernet cable is very stable. 4

5 Data rate Sever Computer Client Computer Connection between two computer using data rate of 100 Mb/s at all the time in this ethernet experiment. 5

6 Sent Receive 10 rate in Mb/s Limit at 10 Mb/s Windows size in KB Comparing between throughput of sending rate and receiving rate. We can see that if window size is too small then the receiver (Server computer) won t able to receive all the packet so it s loss that effect the throughput of receiving. Anyway on UDP mode as we set the protocol to send at rate of 10 Mb/s all the time. So we don t have any effect over throughput of sending. 6

7 Loss Loss 80% 60% Loss Percentage 40% 20% 0% Window size in KB In this experiment, we tested by using different windows size. theoretically if windows size of server computer is smaller than sending of client computer. Server computer won t able to receive all the packet that send from client. As show in the graph above. when window size is 1KB, we get loss about 77% but when we reach suitable window size that relate to our sending rate,we won t have loss anymore. 7

8 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% Window size in KB Link speed limit Receive % % % % 8

9 Ethernet experiment Packet size as parameter We tested by using Packet size as a parameter on client computer by using this command. Command: Server Computer : Iperf -s Client Computer : Iperf -c(ip Address of server computer) -t 20 -l(packet size) Default parameter value Transport Protocol Ethernet mode link speed(data rate) Interval Transmission time TCP mode IEEE Mb/s 100 Mb/s 20 sec B 200B 400B 800B 1600B 63KB Packet size As we increase packet size, the result on a graph show that we will get better throughput rate. 9

10 The reason is each packet that sent, it have to carry out an overhead information of the protocol. So if we have more number of packet that sent, we will have to carry more overhead. By limited amount of time we can send less payload then we have smaller number of throughput. 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% 100B 200B 400B 800B 1600B 63KB Packet size 10

11 Wifi experiment Network Topology IEEE b/g/n IEEE /100 Client Computer Sever Computer Sever connected to AP via IEEE Mb/s and Client connect to AP via WIFI IEEE N. Hardware Specification Sever Computer Brand Dell Inspiron OS Windows 10 Ethernet IEEE /100 WIFI IEEE b/g/n Client Computer Brand Dell Inspiron OS Windows 7 Ethernet IEEE /100 WIFI IEEE b/g/n 11

12 Wifi Experiment distance as a parameter In this test We use distance as a parameter on both open space and inside the building. By this command. Command: Server Computer : Iperf -s Client Computer : Iperf -c(ip Address of server computer) -t 20 Default parameter value Transport Protocol Wifi mode link speed(data rate) Interval Transmission time TCP mode IEEE GHz 72.2 Mb/s 20 sec Building Floor Plane Sever location 0 Meter 5 Meter 10 Meter 15 Meter 12

13 Ping result vs distance Ping in open space compare to inside building Ping(inside building) Ping(Openspace) Ping average) Distance in meter Graph above showing comparison between open space and inside the building ping. We can clearly see that in open space distance won t effect much on ping result. Anyway we got a larger amount of ping comparing to most of ping inside the building over same distance. One of the reason is in open space we may have more interfered from other type of device(there is no wall between those two computer and AP but the place still a lot of operating device nearby.) 13

14 Data rate Client Computer Sever Computer Connection between two computer using data rate of 72.2 Mb/s at all the time in this ethernet experiment. 14

15 Experiment in open space Distance Experiment inside the building Bandwith Bandwith Distance 15

16 Open space compare to inside building Inside building openspace 40 in Mb/s Distance in meter As you can seen those graph above similar as ping result distance won t effect that much over open space throughput (not far enough) but can clearly see the drop over inside the building throughput. 16

17 60% Open space Inside Building 45% 30% 15% 0% Distance Open space Inside Building % % 27.67% % 14.19% % 7.07% 17

18 Comparison of Ethernet and WiFi In these experiment we use the same configuration as WIFI and Ethernet experiment tested in UDP mode. Server Computer : Iperf -s -u Client Computer : Iperf -c(ip Address of server computer) -u -b(sending limit) -t 20 Default parameter value Transport Protocol Wifi mode Ethernet mode WIFI link speed Ethernet link speed UDP mode IEEE GHz IEEE Mb/s 72.2 Mb/s 100 Mb/s 18

19 Ethernet Sent WIFI Sent Ethernet Receive WIFI Receive in Mb/s Sending rate limitation Ethernet WIFI 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% Sending rate Limitation(for wifi limit at 72.2Mb/s) 19

20 Ethernet WIFI(Sending rate Limit at 72.2Mb/s) Sending rate Sent Receive Sent Receive % % % % % % % % % % When compare between ethernet and Wifi efficiency, we limit sending rate as the result for Ethernet more stable over the throughput rate. This can be clearly seen on efficiency of sending rate of 100Mb/s (Anyway for wifi we use 72.2 Mb/s for calculating efficiency) Ethernet we get about 87% of the link but over wifi we get about 63% of the link. 20