If Proxim can do it, surely Cambium can? I'm not sure there's much advantage in any one or two PMP operators in an area switching to that unless they all do as you would still run into the issue of being out of sync.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Hohhof via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 1:25:12 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 100 beefy I am guessing if anything, you will see Canopy (or at least 450) sync with ePMP/320. Seems like it would be easier to make the FPGA based radio use a longer frame than to make the Atheros based radio use a shorter frame. I'm sure they already tried that. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Prince via Af Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 1:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 100 beefy George, you ought to be all over that new Proxim WORP stuff like white on rice. They claim that it will sync with Canopy. bp On 9/17/2014 10:41 AM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: > Is that 2.4 or 5GHz? A couple weeks ago someone asked why the 2.4 AP > sector is slant and the integrated SMs are H/V. Cambium responded with an > explanation, something about the SM detecting phases and doing its thing. > > Definitely looks like a Laird/Pac feed design. That has to be a pain to > weather seal. > > When they get these things to sync with Canopy and get the PTP latency > down, then I'll buy some. > > On 9/17/2014 9:22 AM, Greg Osborn via Af wrote: >> We received our first shipment of ePMP Force 100's yesterday. Pretty >> beefy at 10 lbs. Quite a curious angle on the feed horn N-type >> connections. >> It would lead you to believe the antenna system is dual slant. All the >> specs say H&V. > >
