[plug] Wireless-N router for faster wireless....

Lucas van Staden lvs at dedmeet.com
Tue Jan 20 09:54:07 WST 2009

Daniel Pittman wrote:
> Lucas van Staden <lvs at dedmeet.com> writes:
>> I stream media using MediaTomb to my PS3, and when any of the other
>> machines are very busy on the network, then the PS3 media stream lags,
>> and the video stutters badly.
> Given that I have been thinking about this setup myself, how do you find
> it handles transcoding?  Specifically, is it often required to transcode
> video or audio on the server since the PS3 doesn't handle the format,
> and if so, how well does it integrate and work?
> Are there any issue WRT stepping forward/backward in transcoded streams,
> etc, that you run into?  How about noise?
Firstly - 3rd day using this setup, so I have not as yet found all the 

So far transacoding is handled without any issues, in other words - at 
the PS3 side I can't actually tell which files are transcoded, and which 
not - they handle the same.
The media server is a dual core 3Ghz system. I think as long as the 
transcoding machine can transcode fatser than the stream feed, you are ok.

See these pages for some transcoding ideas:

ffwd and rew does have issues when you start stepping faster than 10x.
The image on the screen freeze, and only updates now and then. I figure 
this is once again bandwidth issues.

I have not as yet found issues with noise, but my streams are fairly 
high quality. (once again, why bandwidth is an issue)
>> On my home network, I have my webserver, my media server, my office
>> machine, two laptops and of course the PS3.
>> I am wondering about possible ways to improve the speed (or more
>> accurately, available bandwidth) between the media server and the PS3,
>> when I am busy with a stream.
>> First thoughts - Hardware upgrades:
>> I am considering updating my 'g' router to an 'n' router, and thus also
>> updating my network cards to 'n' compatible ones.
> OK: There is a second question here: are you thinking of 2.4GHz 802.11n,
> or 5GHz, or both?
Ah, I did not realise there is two versions (strange - none of my 
googling about the technology highlighted that)
Will investigate.
>> I know the PS3 can only do 'g/b', but I figure if I upgrade the rest
>> of the network, to 'n', then the PS3 stream will have more bandwidth
>> available.  Is my assumption correct here?
> Probably not.  I say probably because this is actually a complicated
> question, and not as easy to answer as it looks.
> If you are moving the rest of your network up to 5GHz 802.11n, and using
> 2.4 only for the PS3 then, yes, you will improve bandwidth availability,
> because you are no longer competing.
> If you are still running the 802.11n network in the 2.4GHz band then
> maybe.  Assign it to a non-overlapping channel[1] and run a distinct
> 802.11g network and maybe you gain, but less.
> Run them on the same radio space and you gain nothing. :)
That makes sense.
>> Chances are that once the other machines have more bandwidth
>> available, they will just hog it all again, and I will be back to
>> where I started.
> The problem is that wireless shared bandwidth within channels, which are
> distinct frequencies.  With 802.11[bg] there are three distinct
> channels, 1, 6 and 11, none of which overlap.  You could run three
> full-bandwidth wireless networks in that space.
> Up in the 5GHz range, though, because bandwidth is plentiful, none of
> the channels overlap, and they can carry more data too.  The drawback is
> that they are less able to penetrate obstacles, so range is lower...
>> Another option would be to go with the 'n' upgrade above, but also get
>> an extra router, and connect that direct to the PS3 wired network
>> port, and thus get the ps3 to get onto the 'n' network.  Again, the
>> other machines could just hog more bandwidth, as there are more
>> available.
> Yeah... again, complex, and it depends on how the network runs.  OTOH,
> putting the PS3 on the faster 802.11n network, especially at 5GHz, will
> give you substantially more data capacity than you had before, so the
> issue may be less...
>> Second Idea:
>> Throttle the other machines when I stream to the PS3.  Personally I
>> think the throttling would be the best (and cheapest) option, and one
>> that I can actually control.
>> Any thoughts on this please, on how to improve the PS3/MediaTomb
>> streams?
> Well, the term you want is probably "Quality of Service" rather than
> throttling, but this is likely to have good results.  Many modern
> wireless devices have some QoS support, and you may want to investigate
> those to see about giving the PS3 priority.
I was thinking more in throtling the machines at the source, ie - 
throttle their local network interfaces.
Fom mediatomb I can run a script to remote ssh commands to each machine 
on start and stop of the stream.
That way I cut the problem at the source.
> Regards,
>         Daniel
> ...or you could just run Ethernet to the PS3.
That would be the best option, but I am currently in a rental. The wife 
is not happy with cables laying about.
If this was my own place, I would have aevery room hard-wired - properly.
> Footnotes: 
> [1]  ...and accept that you can't get the 40MHz channels that roughly
>      double performance on 802.11n.
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> http://www.plug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/plug
> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.linux.org.au

More information about the plug mailing list