Tell us your V2 REMOTE CW performance experiences.

Tico

Can someone tell us his V2 experience regarding remote cw operating?
Till now all our remote attempts with VPN where not completely successful.
We've tried OpenVPN and EtherSoft servers but keep getting audio drop-outs, cracks and clicks.
which are very annoying and make a CW QSO impossible.
Our goal is remote contesting.

It would be nice if there was an opportunity to try the V2 software first before we decide to upgrade.

Mike va3mw

Tico

Dropouts are related to internet connectivity issues and they even happen on high speed connections.

If you run this test, www.dslreports.com/speedtest, what are your BufferBloat numbers?  You need to see a B or better.

Mike va3mw

Jay Spaulding

Not sure if that makes any difference to his question. I found that VPN works better the. Using smart link. More packet loss and drop outs. Pan adapter freezing. Spend the money on a better Asus router with built in VPN and open VPN server like I did and it works great. But the other benafitd of 2.0 are good.

Tico

Thanks for your fast replay Mike. I've done the test and try to post the result here. The server has no graphic capabilities but here are the results from a simple speed test. If I'm right D means "not good"? And certainly not good enough to operate SmartSDR flawless remote? Then for us, and many with us, a upgrade to V2 would be worthless. Tico

ctate243

From what I can see, you can benefit from an Evenroute IQ router.  this solved my issues as a turn key solution if you dont want to make yourself a router QoS expert.

Mike va3mw

Hi Jay

It can make a difference actually.  The data handling over a VPN tunnel with an L2 layer is different then sending packet streams via the internet.  

For the past 2 weeks I have been off my VPN and 100% SL.  Since I replaced my firewall SL has provided the same performance of that my SoftEther provided.  

Now, I am running about 0.01% packet loss all the time on SL.

Mike

Mike va3mw

D is the issue.  Chris is right.    

ctate243

When you get your bufferbloat under control, PM me and I will be happy to offer you solutions for some of the cw related remote contesting issues that are not yet implemented but you may find necessary for performance contest operation.

Kevin

Michael... does this mean that anyone that doesn't get a B should not purchase v2.0 if SmartLink is their primary interest? I kind of wish I knew this before.

What are all the network requirements for SmartLink to perform acceptably? I know many wireless vendors are out. Port forwarding is required. Now a DSL Report of B or better. What else? Did all the alpha testers give SmartLink a 100% passing grade with no caveats?

I'm on wireless, no port forwarding permitted, D on DSL reports. Maybe I would have held off purchasing until some real features were added if I knew the limitations up front. Now I just hope something comes along to justify the cost.

73,
Kev K4VD

Mike va3mw

Hi Kev

This has been well discussed on the community for past while.  Lots of discussion on network performance, all of which is out of control of the Flex software.  

I'm pretty sure I started discussions about a year ago on this by me and some alpha team members.

I did write this up about 3 months ago long before I was employed by Flex, so I am sorry if you  missed it. https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/getting-read-for-smartlink-test-your-upload-perform...

73,  Mike

Michael Aust

Got a BlufferBloat of F but still enjoy V2 Smartlink on Slow Slug DSL with 384Kbytes/sec
upload 

The Low BW selection is worth the $200 for V2 

Remote just fine, just cannot run more than 10fps onSpectrum or Waterfalll, but
being able to run remote can be done as long as Latency is <300ms 


So I really like V2.0 

73 Mike

Kevin

Must have missed that. OK. I paid for my mistake.

ctate243

Having a well functioning internet connection is a checkpoint for ANY remote operation.  Not just FRS.  Although some codecs can be more forgiving than others, flex is delivering a lot of experience over the wire and having a well tuned internet connection will improve that. Likewise if you scale back on some of that experience, say turn off the waterfall, and make your window smaller, etc. depending on your connection on EITHER end based on your current environment, you may find a good sweet spot.  Even with some of these compromises V2.0 is still a good value upgrade IMO.  As you can see from another post in this thread, folks have found ways to leverage V2.0 even from less than optimal connections.

Mike__K5JR

I've operated CW contests remotely using both v1 and v2, both with Softether and SmartLink. No issues. I do have significantly better results if the remote client (laptop in my case) is wired versus wifi. At home, I'm almost always on the LAN rather than in front of the radio, and on wifi. It is crucial that the rescan function on your wifi be disabled. I recommend WLAN Optimizer if your pc/laptop won't allow you to turn rescan off. I've also discovered better performance on 5GHz ac only, turning off B, G and N. I recently operated NAQP CW remotely from a friend's house (wired) in the afternoon and later that day from my hotel room (wifi) 800 miles from my radio.

Kevin

I work from home. I run my VPN, make network phone calls, participate in webexs including live sharing and video, work with remote desktops and at the same time have my other computer playing youtube videos and other internet functions. My wife is upstairs surfing and watching videos. All this is being down over my lowly wireless with 20 dn/5 up 32 ms latency (next hop). But DSL reports gives me a D and port forwarding is not supported and maybe my router isn't good enough and...

Good for folks. I am glad others find this working. Sorry I missed a post about my poor network rating. So forth and so on.

Sorry guys. Not happy with the situation so I take my opportunities to voice my opinion. Said it before. Love the 6500. I wish there was an alternative to SSDR.

73,
Kev K4VD

Mike va3mw

Kev, I appreciate what you are saying, but there is a big difference between what everyone is doing in your house and what SSDR does.    

With SSDR, you are the host, just like NetFlix to others in your house.  If you where hosting video streaming to the world, you may run into the same issues as you are sadly experiencing.  

Another example would be to run a PLEX server in your house and then go out to a Starbucks and try to watch an HD movie.  You will be able to watch, but it won't be perfect.

For everything you listed, you wouldn't care (or know) if you dropped packet, especially for Webex's or Video Conferencing. 

For HF, you can actually hear the packets failing.  In fact, I use it to demo to others just how bad there internet is.  I don't tell them it is radio, I tell them it is an audio tuning tool.  

We really want to make sure we are comparing the same thing when it is out of the control of FRS.  

many 73, Mike

Kevin

Yes. There always is. There was a big difference in the cables I was using and the switch I was using and the routers I was using and the provider I'm using.

Actually, thinking about it, the only difference is the software I'm using. SSDR. I'm waiting for an IETF RFC to cover the requirements of SSDR and then for Cisco and Juniper to start coming out with SSDR complaint equipment. Maybe next time I should hire a consultant to make my home SSDR compliant.

Don't answer... I can go on like this forever!     Just accept that you have one unhappy customer.

Love the 6500. No love for SSDR.

Kev

Jay Spaulding

I have the best internet you can get. I have packet loss over wireless connections using att 4g with smart link. use VPN none. You can get all technical with me if you want but the proof is there. I know your an employee and get payed to be smarter then me.. Im not knocking it. Everybody cant have the best connections like you.

My question is, smart link a redirect or is there some kind of host there they carry's the info over to my network?

Thanks Mike.. And Dont take it that I'm being **** you I dont mean it that way at all.

I love the new 2.0 regardless. But I do see some hiccups on the pan adapter even on network.


Jay  

Tico

Thanks for all the answers so far.

If been playing with some QoS settings in the routers, remote and locale.
Now I get an A as a result Which is better than B, right?


But...... unfortunately I still get (to many) audio drop-outs, cracks and clicks.



Again for all clarity, I am talking about high speed CW.
In usual ssb contacts, the cracks do not, or hardly not, disturb.

Mike__K5JR

Tico, how is the computer running the SSDR client connected to you LAN? Is it wired, wifi? 73, Mike / W5JR

Mike__K5JR

And when you say "high speed", is that 30-40 wpm or 50+?

Tico

Hi Chris, thanks for your help.
As you can see below, I have bufferbloat < B. 
But, unfortunately still (to many) audio drop-outs, cracks and clicks.

I don't know how to PM you on this forum.

Tico

Thanks for your help Mike.
I can run the client both ways wired or WiFi and it does not make many difference.

By "high speed" I mean contest speed, 30-40 wpm.
De clicks and drop-outs distortion is to big for solid copying.

John - AF3K

I reported my experience running V2 and CW remote here https://community.flexradio.com/flexradio/topics/remote-cw-with-a-paddle-and-maestro-it-works 73, John, AF3K

ctate243

im good on qrz.com. drop me an email.

Tico

Unfortunately, after reaching the "correct" bufferBloat numbers and a weekend long network fine tuning, still no disturbance free connection.
Remarkable thing is that other SDR applications like Perseus and SDR-Radio work flawless over the same connection.
Even more disappointing is that a V2 upgrade does not seem to solve this problem.

Hank Wolfla

My grade is C to a C- from Comcast.  How can I improve this?  I am having bad "pops" on my transmit audio and dropouts on CW.  Not happy.  Hank K9LZJ

Tim - W4TME

You can purchase a router that has intelligent queuing algorithms like the IQrouter (http://evenroute.com/iqrouter/)