Not a fair test, he was talking to his wife, so he already knows to wait until she’s done talking!
With 700 ms delay, maybe resort to terms like “roger” and “wilco”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_procedure From: Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 7:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results I wouldn't have thought it would, but it kinda supports my point that if you can control the other metrics, latency can go much higher on VoIP calls. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeremy" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 9:51:28 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results I talked to the Exede guys at AF. After running a speedtest with 650+ms of latency they told me that their VoIP works perfectly. I called BS and they had it hooked up and said feel free. I called my wife and had about a five minute conversation. I have noticed worse lag on the AT&T VoIP service locally (like where you are constantly talking over the top of each other). It had two very small, almost unnoticeable, points where it 'chopped out' a bit. I was completely blown away. Apparently VoIP can work fine with 700ms latency. I never would have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: Well if there is a mention of latency (and whether there is or isn't) will speak volumes about the influence (or lack thereof) of the satellite broadband industry. And if there is a specification for latency (and I've never understood why there isn't), then it should surely be < 500 ms, and more reasonably < 100 ms, or possibly < 200 ms. I think the tolerance breakpoint for any VoIP-type service is in the area of 200-250 ms. Exede claims to support some type of VoIP service these days. Has anyone had the opportunity to see how this actually works (or doesn't)? bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 2/14/2015 9:34 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: I guess we really don’t know what latency, usage limit or price is acceptable because the FCC hasn’t told us yet. The Report & Order resulting from Proceeding 14-126 didn’t set benchmarks for them. Maybe Mike says 100 ms because that’s the limit for CAF II funding. Round trip to the Internet exchange point. From: Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:11 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results 100 ms end to end. That user device to the far server. If you're like Josh in Alaska, there's 30 - 40 ms before you even get anywhere in the cables down to Seattle. The Internet seems to work okay for him. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ken Hohhof" mailto:[email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:12:19 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results I think Kurt’s point, which I agree with, is this is a PTP product, and backhaul latencies get multiplied by the number of hops, while you only have one “last mile”. You can perhaps use licensed or other FDD radios for the first few hops and go cheap with the last few hops at the farthest reaches of your network, especially if there is a plan to upgrade these in the future. That doesn’t work so good though if you have a backhaul ring. I agree with Rory that 10 ms isn’t a bid deal. I don’t agree with Mike that 100 ms doesn’t really matter. The problem is that a whole bunch of 10 ms links adds up to 100 ms. Also I worry that some CDN’s use fancy new TCP stacks that back off based on latency rather than packet loss as an indicator of congestion. I think they are wrong to assume that everyone uses infinite buffers for queuing rather than packet drop, but they don’t ask my opinion. From: John Woodfield Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results Not to mention the UBNT gear under load has at least that much latency... John Woodfield Delmarva WiFi http://www.delmarvawifi.com cell (410) 708-1937 -----Original Message----- From: "Rory Conaway" mailto:[email protected] Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:10am To: mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results ADSL latencies used to be over 40ms or more. Cable latencies are about 10ms from my router to the first hop so 10ms isn’t that big a deal. I agree with you Mike. Rory From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results A lot of WISPs get hardons over low latencies, but as long as end-to-end is under 100 ms or so, it doesn't really matter. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 8:39:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results I wonder if WISPs are going to be part of a trend toward higher latencies. It used to be customers mainly did web browsing and really noticed whether the websites snapped up immediately or lagged. Now everyone is streaming, streaming, streaming. And websites are more worried about tracking cookies and on-the-fly ad auctions for your eyeballs than responsiveness. Plus people use mobile devices and are accustomed to the higher last mile latency of 3G and LTE. Still it’s a little disappointing to backslide on latency because customers don’t value quick response like they used to. They just want mass quantities of data to watch video, as cheap as possible. I guess gamers still care about ping times. From: Erich Kaiser Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:44 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results I would assume AF5x is going to be the same issue if you are using GPS? Erich Kaiser North Central Tower Consulting [email protected] Office: 630-621-4804 Cell: 630-777-9291 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[email protected]> wrote: I can't afford 8-12ms of latency 7 hops out... Time for some Full Duplex links I suppose.... Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Erich Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote: The Mimosa seems awesome so far (Except for lack of SNMP support, which is coming in April). If you have GPS sync it seems to run between 8ms-12ms. Erich Kaiser North Central Tower Consulting [email protected] Office: 630-621-4804 Cell: 630-777-9291 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[email protected]> wrote: I was hoping to replace a Ligowave link I have that's running on 40mhz. I don't feel like burning up a whole 80mhz of spectrum through, so I think I'll be buying a PTP-650 especially since I need DFS freq's. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: I see that they sell them on the 'Trango store' now too. Pretty sweet. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: Yeah, that is what I was told at Animal Farm also. It seems like doing something specific or something in the wrong order makes them not work. Next time I guess I'll have to follow directions, LOL. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[email protected]> wrote: Jeremy, I ended up having to default the units and then follow the quick start guide to the T. There must be some bugs to work out in the firmware cause when I ordered them the guy told me to follow the quick start to the T. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:59 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: I also didn't follow the guide the first time. On subsequent attempts I did, but it seemed like something was wrong with them at that point. Anyway, it's nice to see someone having some success. The platform looks like it has a lot of potential. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[email protected]> wrote: Jeremy, Yes I had issues but I didn't call support. It took me almost 2 hours to get the two radios to see each other but I finally got them too. I wasn't following the PTP quick start guide like I was told to. When I initially configured the radios I disabled the 2nd port (called WAN) in the manual. For some reason they would not link until I turned it back on. Even though I wasn't using the WAN port. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: I had some issues with the configuration and couldn't ever get them to pass traffic. Did you run into any issues that required support? On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> wrote: I saw that too when I was reviewing the brochure this morning. I was just assuming they were considering this a long range product. Kurt, do you mind telling me what those radios cost? Rory From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 7:36 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results Just got done testing a Trango Altum AC PTP link on the bench. Units are 25db integrated panels. Did a 40mhz channel test and 80mhz via UDP. I tried a TCP test between two RB2011's and best I seen was 175-180'ish and that was with both 40 and 80mhz channels. CPU seemed to be maxing out on the 2011's. Has UNI-1 bands and ISM bands. I was hoping it had the middle DFS bands but it doesn't :( Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110
