Sounds like we need an AirFiber WaveGuide test adapter.
Chuck, are you busy this Thanksgiving weekend?
Matthew Jenkins
SmarterBroadband
m...@sbbinc.net
530.272.4000
On 11/24/2014 01:44 PM, Eric Kuhnke via Af wrote:
If you were willing to hack apart an existing AF5, you could probably
build waveguide from the hollow tubular center feed coming up from the
PCB in the center of each of the two dishes, and run it to a
waveguide-fed 5 GHz band dish... Such as a pair of 3' diameter
Andrew/Commscope.
Would probably require hacking of the end reflector of each integrated
dish's feed and putting on a custom CNC machined, waveguide adapter.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Mike Hammett via Af <af@afmug.com
<mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
Is there a waveguide combiner\splitter?
If they made both AFs connectorized, could you plumb them both
into the same dish for the same path?
Would obviously need a dish that accepted waveguide.
No clue how the RF performance of a dish would be in both of those
bands simultaneously.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Eric Kuhnke via Af" <af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent: *Monday, November 24, 2014 3:37:19 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] For Cambium
I agree, I want an AF5 connectorized. From the perspective of ubnt
engineering in Chicago, I bet a connectorized AF5 scares the hell
out of them, because they're selling airfibers to
enterprise/clueless customers that don't understand the technical
properties of different types of PTP microwave dishes.
If you could guarantee that a FDD, two dish AF5 setup was always
installed with a pair of high quality, >70dB f/b ratio Jirous
dishes or similar, it'd work great.
When Bubba hooks up a connectorized AF5 to a random pair of noisy,
low quality, unshielded PTP dishes, terrible things will happen.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Mike Hammett via Af <af@afmug.com
<mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
Until they give me what I want (connectorized).
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Eric Kuhnke via Af" <af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent: *Monday, November 24, 2014 3:32:48 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] For Cambium
he's asking for a 12 mile link... if the goal is to maximize
the clean, empty 5.x GHz spectrum for PtMP use by end user
customers, an airfiber5 backhaul is ruled out.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Chuck Macenski via Af
<af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
Why not Zoidburg (airFiber)?
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Sean Heskett via Af
<af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
i would go licensed gear from SAF (or your favorite
licensed PTP vendor).
we keep all the unlicensed bands available for
PMP...we use licensed for PTP.
the difference between a wifi backhaul and a licensed
backhaul is like the difference between a Ford Focus
and a Ferrari F12berlinetta. they are both cars that
drive on roads but that's about where the similarities
end. same thing with backhauls.
2 cents
-sean
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Paul McCall via Af
<af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
>
> Cambium,
>
> Can you please make a suggestion as to what
equipment that you recommend to us for this type of
problem/solution?
>
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf Of Paul
McCall via Af
> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:32 PM
> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>
> For Cambium.... we have a very remote tower that
feeds several other towers. Everything is OSPF but
logically...
>
> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G
with several anti-twist devices) is "fed" by...
> Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND
a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
> This commercial tower (Tower A) has over
300Mbit of usable bandwidth and feeds about 75 to 85
Mbit to Tower A
> Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
> This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G
>
> Tower R then feeds...
> Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz -
50 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz -
40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz -
40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz -
40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>
> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a
frequency juggling act. There are other towers in the
area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each
other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz
UBNT radios on the backside links.
>
> The challenge...
>
> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but
mostly Tower C. And, I need better consistency... at
times the links do not perform as I expect and then I
get customer complaints etc. I hate that.
>
> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can
recommend other than a ton of licensed links?
Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.
>
> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsynced.... can it
sync, now or tomorrow? Latency with sync?
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please allow me to clarify.
> >
> > The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit
with the two 10/100 FE ports.
> >
> > The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS
Sync'd unit with the
> > single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in
addition to proprietary PoE. GPS capabilities will be
disabled (but the radio can still use the on board GPS
chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
> >
> > The 2ms latency is achieved purely through
software changes in Release 2.4 and will apply to both
products.
>
> Reading this spec sheet.
>
>
http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf
>
> >>>LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6
ms (Flexible Frame
> >>>Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)
