No argument but I don't think the value statement is there, especially with Ubiquiti and ePMP. At the same time, 802.11ac, MU-MIMO, Beam-forming, and other features in next generation chipsets may change the design models we are now discussing. I'm just saying...... J
Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 9:44 AM To: <af@afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons Good to point Also, to some extent, sync will help you on a environment with lots of noise from nonsynced operators Gino A. Villarini @gvillarini On Oct 19, 2014, at 12:27 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: I think one point Mike is missing is without the WISPs that use GPS sync sharing frequencies, there wouldn't be enough spectrum for the WISPs that don't. It's like someone disputing the value of carpooling because they drive solo and don't experience traffic jams. But is that because other people carpool? You experience interference in a band with limited spectrum like 900. 2.4 or 3.65, and survey to find who all is using the band. Some you can coordinate sync with, others you can't. So you call up the WISPs you can sync with, coordinate your frequencies and timing, and let the non-sync guy have a channel to himself. Which convinces the non-sync guy that the value of GPS sync is a myth. From: Rory Conaway via Af <mailto:af@afmug.com> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 11:03 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons If you don't have 100% cooperation with GPS sync with competitors for various reasons, you will have interference. When more beam-forming options start coming out, GPS might have value on the same tower, but little value since the trade-off with reduced throughput isn't worth it. This is why I don't like towers in high-density areas. If I had 12 competitors, I'd have micro-cells until the equipment catches up with environment which I'm sure is coming. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 8:38 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons You lost me, Rory... ----- 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 10:35:08 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons Which then makes it not that valuable. I think Beam-Forming has more value. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 8:29 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons Half or more have the same Canopy settings. The rest are 802.11 based with some cooperating and some not responding to anything. ----- 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 10:13:45 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons I'm assuming all 12 WISPs cooperate with each other? Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 5:33 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons Entirely not true spoken by a WISP that has up until this point used Mikrotik and Ubiquiti in rural and suburban markets with 12 WISP competitors. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ________________________________ From: "Mark Radabaugh via Af" <af@afmug.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 3:52:03 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons 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
