We need a combination of GPS, Filtering, Beamforming and automatic
spectrum optimization. So this UBNT filtering with a working gps added
with stuff Mimosa announced. Radios who look at the spectrum and
select the best channels on their own talking to other radios for a
network wide optimization.
*Von:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Josh Reynolds
*Gesendet:* Sonntag, 19. April 2015 09:31
*An:* af@afmug.com
*Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] Very interesting post..
Yes, GPS sync helps with yourself, you are absolutely right. It
doesn't help a damn about the combined noisefloors of dozens or
hundreds of radios your RF front end hears though, the receiver's
selectivity is destroyed despite your sync. It also doesn't do
anything about your competitor transmitting on an adjacent channel,
the same channel, or an overlapping channel on one you are trying to
receive on at your AP.
Josh Reynolds
CIO, SPITwSPOTS
www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 04/18/2015 11:26 PM, Stefan Englhardt wrote:
You can reduce self interference with GPS. So with limited
spectrum you can optimize it with ABAB. If you need to use
adjacent channels on your APs GPS Sync reduces the problems.
Your own radios are close together so you see them at much higher
levels then your competitors radios. Your backhauls point at your
towers exactly.
For sure in congested areas licensed is the way to go for backhaul.
*Von:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Josh Reynolds
*Gesendet:* Sonntag, 19. April 2015 08:54
*An:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] Very interesting post..
You're not.
Explain to me how single player GPS sync helps in a mixed
environment of various vendors when your equipment is in the
beamwidth many other competitors and your radios suck in the
presence of adjacent channel noise? It doesn't. It doesn't at all.
Notch filters would help those radios in that scenario, but it's
not really practical unless you just like to climb towers for kicks.
Josh Reynolds
CIO, SPITwSPOTS
www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 04/18/2015 08:19 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
You may not need the benefits, but it doesn't mean I'm not
correct.
-----
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: *"Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
<mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
*To: *"Animal Farm" <af@afmug.com> <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Sent: *Saturday, April 18, 2015 11:15:53 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Very interesting post..
Nope. Having great success with no sync using Ubiquiti
radios. Now with new channels even better. Just like Mesh.
Not ready for prime time on my TV...
Jaime Solorza
On Apr 18, 2015 10:11 PM, "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net
<mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
The more competitors, the *MORE* you need sync.
-----
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: *"Josh Reynolds" <j...@spitwspots.com
<mailto:j...@spitwspots.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>, "Mathew Howard"
<mhoward...@gmail.com <mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>>
*Sent: *Saturday, April 18, 2015 8:51:00 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Very interesting post..
AF absolutely has sync?
As far as AirMaxAC, sure, no sync.. At this time.
In the end though, there are a lot of operators that
simply don't care about sync.
Eventually in many markets it will come to a point when
you simply run out of clean frequency, ie: using one or
two or three per tower won't cut it, due to competitors,
cell offload, etc. In that scenario where GPS sync is
virtually useless (because you're picking the best freq
per direction), its pretty obvious that there are a few
radios that would currently excel in that scenario.
There are many places where we are, for instance, where
multiple competitors, city and state links, federal, etc
have towers less than a mile from us. Having the ability
to "shrug off" that adjacent and co channel noise is
critical for us.
On April 18, 2015 4:52:38 PM AKDT, Mathew Howard
<mhoward...@gmail.com <mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
This test ignores a few kind of important details...
the UBNT and Mikrotik AC radios have no ability to
sync, which gives them a significant disadvantage.
also, the Mimosa radios are (theoretically) capable of
higher throughput since they are the only ones with
the ability to use two 80mhz channels... granted, it's
pretty rare that is actually possible in the real
world, but if you had synced Mimosas everywhere, it
could be done. He's also using a $499 ePMP radio, when
he should be using a $200 Force110 PTP.
That said, the conclusion the the AF5x is the best is
probably right :P
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Ken Hohhof
<af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
If your criterion is performance in the presence
of a signal on a different frequency 30 dB
stronger than the desired signal, this analysis is
relevant. Also, this seems to be the scenario
airPrism is designed to address. But how often
would this occur? Even if the interference is
from another non-synced transmitter on the same
tower, you’d think directional antennas would
knock the interfering signal down to less than
1000 times the desired signal.
I guess this could be realistic if you have a
point to point link in the same band as a sector,
so that a giant dish at the other end is pointed
right at your sector.
*From:*Josh Reynolds <mailto:j...@spitwspots.com>
*Sent:*Saturday, April 18, 2015 5:34 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> ; Seth
Mattinen <mailto:se...@rollernet.us>
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Very interesting post..
Horseshit, read the article. Did you miss the
portion where Jim said "it's the exact same chip
that's in the RM5"?
I would have liked to have seen the RM5 in this
test as a baseline, but ignoring the results
simply because it's N tech in the EPMP is silly.
Not only does the throughput drop, but the LEVEL
it degrades at is only "bested" by the B5C in a
few of the tests. N or not, that's a very poor result.
I would love to see other tests posted on this
from other people, its always nice to have
multiple sources to remove any potential level of
bias.
Jim did an excellent job on this and should be
commended.
On April 18, 2015 2:26:50 PM AKDT, Seth Mattinen
<se...@rollernet.us <mailto:se...@rollernet.us>>
wrote:
On 4/18/15 2:49 PM, Peter Kranz wrote:
Very interesting shootout comparing AF5X,
AC-Lite, AC PTP, EPMP-1000,
B5c and RB922
https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airMAX-Stories/Radio-Shootout-Pt-2-let-s-try-a-whole-bunch-of-them/cns-p/1232309
Dude didn't seem to catch that the ePMP is an N radio
and dismisses it
as worst of the worst. Looks to me like it would
probably hold up
comparably to its AC counterparts if you take that into
consideration.
~Seth
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please
excuse my brevity.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse
my brevity.
