We have one PtP link up... they work fine, but expect slightly higher latency than you'd see with NanoBeams.
I don't really see a problem with using them for CPE, the weight really shouldn't be an issue for any half way decent mount. ________________________________ From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Mike Hammett via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 7:15 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Using EPMP for PTP links Ten miles I'd rather use something with 2' dishes, but I am using some in PtP mode. *shrugs* They work. They're my preferred CPE now. A PITA to assemble, but the new design should be coming this winter. It won't actually weigh much less, but it does feel a lot less. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Alan West via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2014 11:29:47 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Using EPMP for PTP links Hello, anyone used the Force 100 units for PTP links yet? I have four of them and really do not want to use them on customers roofs (until they get a better (and lighter) design).... So, PTP links seems like a logical choice...I have a new link at about ten miles I had purchased Nanobeam 400s for, but may use these instead.
