Netonix Forums

I know it does not make a perfect iperf end node, but sometimes it is a useful debug tool.

I guess while I am thinking about it, are SFTP or at least SCP sessions possible?

no Iperf is not in the firmware but that is good suggestion, I will add it to the firmware roadmap.

Do you suppose either SFTP or SCP would be useful?

JustJoe wrote:Do you suppose either SFTP or SCP would be useful?

I think we should use the iperf since it is a standard and we could allow the user to enable the server allowing you to test from UBNT radios to the switch and also have a client so you can test switch to switch or where ever between towers.

I think we would be a little more granular then UBNT and allow you to select TCP or UDP tests as UDP is over optimistic in my opinion and not real world.

Command line iperf is fine with its various options let either TCP or UDP to be used.

I guess it was unrelated, I meant SFTP or SCP for purpose of directory file system access. Ubiquiti radios provide SCP.

I suppose we could offer it but give me some examples for what you would use it for.

Do you remember when airos first came out, it did not have a config "test" mode"? Then even when they added that, there were several version iterations where "test" mode actually hosed the configuration. Well we had some hard to access repeater links that we wanted to be able to recover without a truck ... err ... pack-mule-roll. So my partner developed a pre and post-start script scheme that would fallback to a simple config that was easy to access wirelessly if it was unable to phone home after booting. Not that he could not have done it without SCP, he just found it much easier to to keep track of the files he was using.

So I guess to put it another way, SCP or SFTP file access would make custom application development easier.

Did iperf (any version) ever get released yet? I'd like to setup monitoring for jitter, and wanted to use iperf to do that.

From the release notes:
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=240&p=7058&hilit=iperf#p7058
Granted, there are a few after that stating it was still a work in progress.

We took iperf out because the little embedded CPU that drives the UI/CLI/STATS could not deliver enough bandwidth to make it worthwhile.