Yes, the TDMA Window can be set to 2ms, 4ms or 8ms - I'm not sure what the actual effect is on peak throughput, but it obviously makes a big difference to latency... which is more important in this case. I'm running it at 2ms.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > IIRC, the latency is configurable, depending on what peak throughput > you're after. > > > > ----- > 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: *"Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com> > *To: *"af" <af@afmug.com> > *Sent: *Wednesday, February 18, 2015 11:19:05 AM > > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results > > That's similar to what I'm seeing. we only have one link up so far, but > pinging between the routers on each end of the link, I get an average of > 5ms and minimum of 4ms. > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Rory Conaway <r...@triadwireless.net> > wrote: > >> We just did some optimization of our 3 Mimosa links and latency is >> about 18ms over 3 hops with a 50/50 setting on the traffic split so >> basically 6ms per hop. >> >> >> >> Rory >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie >> *Sent:* Sunday, February 15, 2015 2:03 PM >> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Trango Altum AC PTP test results >> >> >> >> Argh, "It wouldn't surprise me"... >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Jason McKemie < >> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote: >> >> I'd be curious to see how this actually worked at an end user's >> location. I wouldn't surprise me if these guys did some sort of trickery >> or prioritization for demonstration purposes... >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: >> >> 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 >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From: *"Jeremy" <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> >> *To: *af@afmug.com >> *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 <part15...@gmail.com> >> 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 <af...@ics-il.net> >> >> *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:11 AM >> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> >> *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" <af...@kwisp.com> <af...@kwisp.com> >> *To: *af@afmug.com >> *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 <john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz> >> >> *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:01 AM >> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> >> *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" <r...@triadwireless.net> <r...@triadwireless.net> >> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:10am >> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> <af@afmug.com> <af@afmug.com> >> 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:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On >> Behalf Of *Mike Hammett >> *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:45 AM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *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" <af...@kwisp.com> >> *To: *af@afmug.com >> *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 <er...@northcentraltower.com> >> >> *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:44 AM >> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> >> *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 >> >> er...@northcentraltower.com >> >> Office: 630-621-4804 >> >> Cell: 630-777-9291 >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <li...@wavelinc.com> >> 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 < >> er...@northcentraltower.com> 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 >> >> er...@northcentraltower.com >> >> Office: 630-621-4804 >> >> Cell: 630-777-9291 >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <li...@wavelinc.com> >> 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 <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> 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 <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> 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 <li...@wavelinc.com> >> 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 <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> 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 <li...@wavelinc.com> >> 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 <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> 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 <r...@triadwireless.net> >> 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:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser >> *Sent:* Friday, February 13, 2015 7:36 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >
