Maximum of 512 MB of memory on the RB230. I don't think that's enough
to handle full BGP roues these days.
bp
On 9/18/2014 6:13 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
I found an RB230 (I think that is the number) on a tower. Can that handle
MPLS\VPLS with full BGP routes? ;-)
Better pricing? They have to what, cut it in half to be competitive? GigE
radios are something like $7k/link now.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shayne Lebrun via Af" <af@afmug.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 8:09:37 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 100 beefy
(gosh, I hope I'm allowed to say all this, but what the hell, they didn't
say 'and don't repeat nothing!' and it's not like other road-show goers
can't ask themselves)
Oh, I'm sure it'll be user-definable, on the 450, in terms of how to sync.
The thing is, with the ePMP, you have exactly three options; something like
75/25, 50/50, and 30/70. Those are all you get for sync options; the
downlink percent. They were very clear that 'max range' is NOT a timing
parameter.
So, making your 450s sync with your ePMP is going to have some tradeoffs,
and that's to be expected.
As to the 100/430s, it was pretty unambiguous that those would never sync
with the ePMP. Or have their MTUs increased. Or all sorts of other stuff.
The idea they seem to be moving to, and this is my conclusion rather than a
direct statement, is that the 100 series gets flat-out replaced with ePMP,
you put 450 where you have needs that the 450 meets (no guard bands, smaller
latency, etc etc) and that the 430 is a red-headed stepchild. Don't ask
what the 320 is in that analogy.
Also, there's a new licensed PTP radio to be announced in a month or so,
which, supposedly, a better pricing structure.
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+slebrun=muskoka....@afmug.com] On Behalf Of
George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 6:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 100 beefy
I was told there will be various options coming soon to make all of this
stuff sync. There will be advantages and disadvantages to each way of doing
things, but at least it will work. As far as the aging PMP/PTP100, I assume
it will do 5ms framing because that's what 900 does today, so it is possible
on the platform, obviously with a latency hit, but what can you do.
On 9/17/2014 4:23 PM, Peter Kranz via Af wrote:
This would be a VERY bad thing for people with PMP450 networks..
Increasing the frame duration to match the ePMP will double the
latency of the 450 platform.
Peter Kranz
Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd
www.UnwiredLtd.com
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
Mobile: 510-207-0000
pkr...@unwiredltd.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+pkranz=unwiredltd....@afmug.com] On Behalf
Of Shayne Lebrun via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 1:23 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 100 beefy
450 is being made to sync with ePMP, by increasing frame duration to
match.
100/430/320 will likely see no new changes. This is what I got from
an ePMP roadshow.
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof via Af
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 2:25 PM
To: af@afmug.com
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.
