What's the point of having the CPE run full duplex? Example scenario: two CPEs (#1 and #2) are connected to a magic filter equipped FD AP. Both want to send and receive as much bandwidth as possible.
The AP splits the frame up into two halves. During the first half, it talks to #1 while receiving from #2. During the second half, it talks to #2 while listening to #1. The AP spends 100% of the frame-time talking and receiving at the same time. The CPEs meanwhile are running TDD, and spend 100% of the frame-time either talking or listening, but not at the same time. I see no benefit from building this tech into the CPEs unless you want your CPE to be able to use up more than 50% of the AP's frame-time. On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 3:59 PM Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > Why not have CPE talking at the same time as they're receiving? > > I don't know why it wouldn't work on MIMO, but I'm not smart enough to > make that declaration. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"castarritt" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Friday, October 19, 2018 3:53:12 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Antenna article > > I understand the benefit. My point was that only the APs would need the > magic filters as long as a frequency and/or time division multiple access > scheme will still be in use. The SMs don't need the magic filters because > they aren't talking while receiving, only the AP is. The only reason I can > see to have the filters in the SMs if you want each SM to be able to use > more than 50% of the AP's frame time. > > > My other question still stands though; is this tech going to work for MIMO > APs? I would rather have a dual-pol (or better yet, MU-MIMO) AP running > TDD/FDD than a full duplex SISO AP. > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 3:23 PM Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If this works, Tx and Rx at the same time means throughput goes up >> everywhere with everything (that adopts it), given that everything is now >> full duplex and not half duplex. No need for TDD. No need for FDD. It's all >> just FD. >> >> *IF* it works... >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >> >> >> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"castarritt" <[email protected]> >> *To: *[email protected] >> *Sent: *Friday, October 19, 2018 3:00:47 PM >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Antenna article >> >> Why would you want the CPE to RX and TX at the same time/frequency when >> you can use OFDMA? >> >> My big question is if they can get this to work with MIMO. We already >> have better ways to get double the throughput of a single-chain omni. >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:29 PM Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> What do you do at the CPE end? Will one of these fit on a cellphone? >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * >>> [email protected] >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 19, 2018 2:04 PM >>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Antenna article >>> >>> >>> >>> Well... get on it! We don't have all day. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:41 PM <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Very interesting article in the latest IEEE Antennas & Propagation >>> Magazine >>> >>> >>> >>> Pseudo broadband omni that allows TX and RX on the same freq. >>> >>> >>> >>> The orientation of the elements provides something like 50 dB reduction >>> of mutual coupling between the TX and RX signal. >>> >>> >>> >>> Then there is an analog cancellation stage that give another about 30 dB >>> of cancellation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Then there is a digital section that automagically does another 30+ dB >>> of cancellation. >>> >>> >>> >>> The TX signal ends up being down like 110-120 dB when it hits the >>> receiver. >>> >>> >>> >>> If this can be perfected we double our channel throughput... >>> >>> -- >>> AF mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>> >>> -- >>> AF mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>> >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
