I’ve lost track of what I can and can’t say anymore. “I say Nothing, I jsee Nothing!
-Sergeant Schultz From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 8:28 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons I was told that at the booth, so I'm assuming its clear. There's also a hint to that in the specs on the web site, "Polarization 4 Panels, Alternating Polarization". ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Rory Conaway via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 10:07:54 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons Yea, didn’t know if that information violated the old NDA thing Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 5:35 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons It "eliminates" the need for sectors... by having four sectors in one enclosure. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Rory Conaway via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 12:48:06 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons We keep our residential home deployments down to about ½ mile or less. We figure that’s good for about 50 users with 20MHz channels with on Rocket 5Ms and about 60-70Mbps capacity. I might change to Ubiquiti Rocket AC radios when they get a stable PTMP firmware assuming it’s done by early next year. If it’s delayed further than 1st quarter, I will probably wait to evaluate Mimosa’s A5-360 . That bad boy can support up to 1Gbps with 802.11ac clients which pretty much eliminates the need for sectors unless you have a down-tilt or range issue. Even the gain on that antenna is 18dBi which is more than sufficient for DFS channels. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds via Af Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 10:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons If we lived in an area where things were flat, you might be right. We're full of hills and valleys, mountains and glaciers. ... but we're not flat, and Rory is doing similar things in his environment by using low-to-the-ground microcells and using the residential structures to create an urban canyon effect. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com On 10/18/2014 01:52 PM, Mark Radabaugh via Af wrote: And now your completely out of spectrum and can't deploy anything new. I suppose the good part for you is nobody else can do anything given the amount of noise your making. Mark On 10/18/14, 1:27 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af wrote: You just hit the nail on the head why we have never considered deploying 450 (and similar) in the past: By the time "you" (relative term) have the cashflow to pay for those sectors, "we" (another relative term, for people deploying UBNT or similar) have already thrown up 4-6 shielded sectors and at least 10 clients per. If we don't think we can hit a decent sub density or at least make the site a valuable repeater, then we don't go there. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com On 10/18/2014 09:01 AM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af wrote: I prefer sectors too but math doesnt always work out. I'll put the omni in to get the site up and once the customers are there change it to sectors. The 450 platform is very easy to drop sectors in and have the existing clients link right up. I have a couple sites with existing customers i am dropping a two sector 450 system in with 120 segree KP antennas. cant afford any more sectors than that per site right now... Sent from my iPhone Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Oct 18, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Mike Hammett via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: I've noticed a lot of PMP operators are deploying omnis (presumably because they can't afford 4 APs. Give me TDMA Atheros with sectors over omnis on anything any day. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Kurt Fankhauser via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:38:14 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons TJ, No difference between the 3 different frequencies bands (other than NLOS range) as far as the product itself they are all the same animal. 2.4ghz NLOS is slightly better than 3.65ghhz. They all function the same and have the same expected throughputs per channel width. They all use the same firmware and i love the interface being the same across all 3. The only major difference is the 5ghz is V/H versus slant on the other two. That just translates to the 5ghz omni being ALOT smaller and lighter. There are some places that i wish the 2.4ghz woulda been V/H because of the omni size but overall I am still very happy with the 2.4ghz 450. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com <http://www.wavelinc.com/> tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:57 AM, TJ Trout via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: Kurt, Any pros and cons on 450 between 2ghz, 3.65 and 5? Any differences at all? Range vs throughput? Obviously 2ghz penetrates better, 3 is licensed and 5 has more spectrum but anything else? All bands are open for me Thanks On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: I started the spring deploying 450 in 2.4ghz, 5ghz, and 3.65ghz and then middle of the summer deciding i had to"try" some ePMP because the cost was so low I couldn't resist.... I can say now that I am fairly certain I will probably stick with the 450. There are many small reasons that when I considered them all i came to this conclusion. Here are my reasons: 1. ePMP latency starts to go up quickly once you have more than 10 clients on an AP. Once you get over 20 clients the latency is pretty much 25-30 ms. Cambium was honest about this at the road tour and they noted if you want the best latency to stick with the 450. 2. Sync between the two platforms is not there yet. If you have adjacent towers on the different platforms that can see each other you won't have sync. 3. No remote spectrum analyzer for clients. This is HUGE for when the clients fire up their wireless camera and baby monitors and trash the whole spectrum. 4.No burst bucket on CPE's 5.EPMP Interface is SLOWWW. Cambium explained at the tour they were offloading alot of processing power to the PC you are viewing the interface with and i can't be taking a quad core machine up a tower to work on these radios and do site surveys. I am working with a Panasonic Toughbook and takes FOREVER to log into the EPMP radios. 6. Fore some reason site surveys are a PITA with ePMP. Think its a combination of many factors here... slow interface one of them... 7. EPMP in 5ghz DFS band has really low power output. Something like 13-14db. When using an omni antenna you can't get maximum legal EIRP out of the ePMP. 8. 450 link tests and SM modulation is pretty stable and predictable. EPMP seems like its all over the place. I don't think I have yet seen EPMP linktest get full up or down outside of a lab environment. There might be other reasons but I'm pretty tired and was heading for bed. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com <http://www.wavelinc.com/> tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:05 PM, TJ Trout via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: I haven't been keeping real up to date on current generation ptmp offerings but we have a new site going up and I need to decide pretty quickly on some equipment. For the guys who have been using both 450 and epmp do you have any pros and cons ? Any reason to spend the extra money when epmp seems to have the same if not better performance , sync, etc? My gut says 450 is going to be my best long term solution but with all of the positive epmp feedback it's hard to justify the extra money? -- Mark Radabaugh Amplex m...@amplex.net 419.837.5015 x 1021
