Subject: NIST Manet Opnet models & 802.11

From: Panos Papadimitratos <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 08:15:16 -0500

Dear All,

I have the following problem with the 802.11 Opnet model -- as used for the 
above-mentioned DSR and AODV models:

A change of the parameter values (wireless LAN attributes) makes all 
transmissions to fail.
For example, by setting the rate to 2Mbps (default: 1Mbps) not a single 
packet is delivered!
Other changes cause the same or similar problems as well. Unfortunately, a 
selection of settings according to the IEEE standard does not do the trick 
either.

Is this one of the "minor" bugs that were discussed earlier (Dec/01) in the 
list? (:-)
Or, am I doing something wrong?

Could you please point out possible fixes, patches, or any workable 
selection of values?

Thank you very much,

Panos

---

From: Jason Ballah <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 09:57:45 -0500

Panos,
   The primary problem there is that the packet streams from the 
wlan_mac process module to the transmitter and receiver modules are 
criss-crossed and not defined correctly for any data rate other than 1 
Mbps.  You will need to re-define the packet streams to the transmitter 
and from the receiver in the dsr node module to match the defined stream 
enumerations in the wlan_mac process module.  (i.e., stream 0 is 1Mbps, 
stream 1 is 2Mbps etc).

   You can use the generic wireless lan workstation node provided by 
OPNET as a reference point.  Let me know if you run into problems and I 
can provide more assistance.

- Jason Ballah

Panos Papadimitratos wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I have the following problem with the 802.11 Opnet model -- as used 
> for the above-mentioned DSR and AODV models:
>
> For example, by setting the rate to 2Mbps (default: 1Mbps) not a 
> single packet is delivered!
> Other changes cause the same or similar problems as well. 
> Unfortunately, a selection of settings according to the IEEE standard 
> does not do the trick either.
>
> Is this one of the "minor" bugs that were discussed earlier (Dec/01) 
> in the list? (:-)