Wow. 90 watts? Gulp. Even 85 would be hard to swallow. I blanch with
AF24 at 50 watts.
Takes a lot of infrastructure to run that kind of stuff on a solar site.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 2/17/2015 10:14 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
If I recall correctly, the 1000 was the only choice that made any
sense. Though I haven't looked lately and I can't remember why.
The power consumption is a bitch. When you're used to 7 watt PMP100,
which would run all day on a stack of little alarm panel batteries,
going to 90 watts is a big deal. They say 125W peak on the spec sheet
btw, but actual measurements say 85-90. On new sites I'm figuring four
group31 batteries. Then consider the bigger charger, bigger PDU,
bigger box to hold all this bigger stuff.....
Basically TCO just keeps going up, and I'm glad I'm not writing the
checks.
....I'm still not selling this am I?
Looking at the datasheet, the 1000 is the only version I would call
“compact”. Compared to the PW basestation we have, it is a much nicer
physical design the way the BS and antenna mount and cable up. Still
the guy in the installation video must be as strong as an ox to hold
it with one hand while using a wrench with the other.
I think a downside to all the WiMAX and LTE gear is it’s designed for
licensed bands where you can run higher xmt power than we are
allowed, so the power consumption and physical size are bigger than I
suspect a 3.65 only product would be. The SDR approach no doubt
increases size and power consumption as well compared to something
built around ASICs.
But at least Telrad/Alvarion has 3 different sizes, not sure exactly
what the tradeoffs are between the 1000, 2000 and 3000.
*From:* Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:54 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 320SMs Gathering ethernet Error stats
LTE is the light at the end of my tunnel right now, bro....don't ruin
the magic.
I don't know about "hasn't yet been tested". The LTE firmware is
basically beta, but it's said to be functional. Functional enough
that they offered to let me run it anyway. I might still take them
up on the offer, but for their sake and mine I hope it blows my mind
with how awesome it is.
The only smoke and mirrors I'm aware of is that whenever they tell
you about the awesome-sauce they have, they're definitely talking
about LTE and the near future. What they have right now is not the
Corvette they're trying to sell you. What they have now is equally
quirky as the 320, but 10x harder to use. It does have 4 antenna
ports and if you want to, you can run two base stations out of one
unit, using two different channels and two BSID's. So you do get two
base stations for the price of two base stations. Or the four
antenna ports give you antenna diversity at the base station....which
they say gives you a little more margin in the upload direction.
They claim better performance, but I can't point to any of the
Compact base stations and say, "ah, this one is doing more than a 320
could have."
It's a good thing I'm not in sales. I would be terrible at it. It's
not a bad product, it's just not the awesome product I would like it
to be.
I was all about the Telrad koolaid until I sat in on a webinar and
saw the plethora of smoke and mirrors. Im concerned when a company
has a product with attached promises of greatness based on standards
based technology that hasnt yet been tested on their own hardware
and the promises have the caveat of no longer being standards based.
But I do like the promises of the magic they will have like being
able to use what would have been interference from another AP in the
system as usable client signal, however im not sure how much IP
likes traversing to isolated sites at once.
I really hate not having any ethernet stats or control on the 320, I
never understood that being locked out
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com
<mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Did they promise you it's going to get better?
Buying Wimax feels like buying a Chevy Cobalt for the price of a
Corvette, based on the promise that they're delivering the
Corvette next year.
Moto never delivered the Corvette.� Alvarion/Telrad still says
the Corvette is coming.
I would have to check the MIB for the basestation, that was not
something I ever tried to graph.� The CPE was generic Gemtek
and Greenpacket stuff, so no, very little remote monitoring
capability.
�
I dread every time I have to log into the Purewave GUI and do
anything, it is so cumbersome.� I guess actually the
Greenpacket GUI is easy to use, just lacking in functionality.
�
�
*From:* Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:44 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 320SMs Gathering ethernet Error stats
�
Did any of your Purewave stuff give you ethernet error counters?
So much for 4G stuff being �carrier class�.� Or maybe in
that world, CPE is customer-owned-equipment and not the
responsibility of the network operator to monitor.
�
�
*From:* Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:12 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 320SMs Gathering ethernet Error stats
�
If you figure it out, let me know.� It's one of my biggest
pet peeves about the 320.
I'm sad to report that none of the Telrad CPE to seem to have
it either.....so maybe a Gemtek chipset limitation?
Is there an OID to gather Ethernet errors from the 320SMs in
either bridge and/or NAT mode?
�
Paul
�
Paul McCall, Pres.
PDMNet / Florida Broadband
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800 <tel:772-564-6800> office
772-473-0352 <tel:772-473-0352> cell
www.pdmnet.com <http://www.pdmnet.com/>
pa...@pdmnet.net <mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>
�
--
All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that
the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore,
if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all
means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
