Article <vi70pa$3vogk$9@dont-email.me>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <vi70pa$3vogk$9@dont-email.me>

Deutsch English Français Italiano

<vi70pa$3vogk$9@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.raspberry-pi
Subject: Re: Dual wifi connections in Bookworm
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 11:45:45 +0000
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <vi70pa$3vogk$9@dont-email.me>
References: <vhvsif$2bgld$1@dont-email.me> <vi2pvm$30hu1$1@dont-email.me>
 <slrnvkduch.5ca.news-1513678000@a-tuin.ms.intern>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:45:56 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d3a623bf95e4349e30bbb37a7e6182dd";
	logging-data="4186644"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19v2LF11VYaQS/dvKLXxGrMhfF84k5mAMY="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xn/xesOBC9RcxnwS7W39x8EuWrU=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <slrnvkduch.5ca.news-1513678000@a-tuin.ms.intern>
Bytes: 2299

On 27/11/2024 10:50, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> On 2024-11-25, druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
>> If both interfaces are talking to the same Access point on the same
>> frequency, it's going to be worse as WiFi can only talk to one thing at
>> a time, and the two interfaces will compete for bandwidth.
> 
> It's not different from having two completely separate clients connected to
> the same AP. Unless the channel is fully saturated, the available bandwith
> will be shared between the clients.
> 
> cu
> Michael

It reminds me of a really strange situation we encountered in the early 
days of NT and TCP/IP

The customer complained of 50% packet loss.

EXACTLY 50% packet loss.

It turned out their NT server was bridging tow networks and had two 
Ethernet cards. And two different IP addresses.
Nothing wrong with that.

However the ability under windows to make BOTH of them the default 
route, led to the TCP/IP stack using them in round robin to send TCP/IP 
packets.

Microsoft were complete assholes.

-- 
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before 
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.