I am unaware of any correlation between DFS events and either Packetflux or 15.x FW.
I don’t use a lot of DFS because honestly it seems fussy no matter what. But I have a tower with 10 sectors in 5 GHz (8 x 450i and 2 x 450m). They are all synced from a Packetflux Rackinjector using Cambium Sync. 4 of the 450i sectors are in 5.4 DFS, and I’m embarrassed to find they are still on 15.2 FW. Uptime of about 6 months and no DFS events. So I’m dubious about all of this. The latest production FW is 16.2.1 and it also has a lot of fixes so I’m not sure why you would be running something so far behind. As I said, I’m embarrassed to find I still have radios on 15.2. Has he opened a case with Cambium support? There are some best practices with DFS. For sure you don’t want to configure the AP to think the antenna gain is lower than it is (not possible with 450m or integrated 450i). You don’t want to set the SM Receive Target Level higher than necessary on other sectors. Then there’s choosing the alternate frequencies. And I suppose a poor sync configuration could cause false DFS detections, where an AP sees the signal from an adjacent AP. But who knows what causes these events? Somebody’s Linksys reflected off a bird? A competitor aiming a new radio? I used to have a 5.4 GHz PTP500 backhaul and the end pointed in the general direction of Chicago would have DFS events when there were storms. I thought ducting was causing it to see distant signals, but it could also have been tripped by lightning. DFS is fussy. I don’t like it. If I could swap out all the SMs on those DFS sectors for 450b, I would probably move them to U-NII-1. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:56 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450i/450m DFS false detect problem solved in later firmware? I read the 16.0.1 release notes, nothing really specific about DFS other than it being on when it shouldn't be. However, I agree there is lots of stuff fixed in there, some of which could have repercussions for DFS. Are you saying that mid to late 15.x was generally broken for DFS and this is largely fixed in 16.x? I guess my real question should have been 'What is the state of DFS in the 450 platform and how fussy is it'? I'm still gathering information from this customer but it sounds like they're still trying to track down the root cause. Sometime in the past week or so they figured out that there was some correlation between the DFS events adding a fair bit of PacketFlux gear, so this correlation is now the leading root cause in their minds. So now I get to try to resolve their problem for them. On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 3:00 PM Dave <dmilho...@wletc.com <mailto:dmilho...@wletc.com> > wrote: If they are not running 16.0.1 nuthing can help them from some weird issues with the DFS bands. Lots of things corrected in 15.2 and later for EIRP and SNR related calculations the help with H/V misreads and A/B channel alignments. Read the release notes in 16.0.1 for further info. On 7/11/2020 3:12 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: I'm working with a customer that is having problems with DFS false hits who is convinced this is a PacketFlux sync issue. I'm never one to say it definitively isn't my problem, but I'm skeptical in this case. I know that at some point in the past that anything beyond 15.0.2 was known to have fairly common DFS issues by some customers. I thought this was resolved in later releases, but I also don't see any mention of said issue being resolved in any release notes post 15.0.02. I was wondering if anyone knew the current status? I.E. if they had been seeing the problem previously, and then discovered it was fixed. Or have tried recent releases and discovered the problem still exists, etc... -- - Forrest -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- - Forrest
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
