I don't know. I have had one M5 link that definitely performed better on 40MHz over 30MHz, but that link has been upgraded to licensed now. I just regurgitate the BS that they feed me on the forums.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]> wrote: > That doesn't make much sense since the wlan and eth ports are bridged. > The cpu isn't involved unless you're routing/NATing the two interfaces. > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think he is talking about using 40MHz channels on the older M series, >> that didn't have gig ports. It was my understanding that the processor >> would get taxed as well on a 40MHz channel, making 30MHz actually work >> better. >> >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Josh Luthman <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Ubnt and epmp have gig ports. >>> >>> Josh Luthman >>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>> 1100 Wayne St >>> Suite 1337 >>> Troy, OH 45373 >>> On Jun 8, 2015 11:20 AM, "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I don't know how epmp does it. >>>> >>>> For UBNT, a 30mhz channel is just a "fat" 20mhz channel in the atheros >>>> chip. Single operation. For a 40mhz channel, it's really two 20s, meaning >>>> radio operations are ran twice. Loss in efficiency, also marred by the lack >>>> of gigabit port. >>>> On Jun 8, 2015 7:13 AM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I've never seeing much difference in performance on the ubnt M series >>>> between 30mhz and 40mhz channels, so yes, I would say that is true... but >>>> I'm not sure how much applies to ePMP - they do have a much a faster >>>> processor and on a software level they are very different. >>>> >>>> So far, I have been running all of our ePMP APs on 20mhz channels and >>>> PTP links on 40mhz or 20mhz, depending on how much capacity they need. I >>>> haven't really seen much need to go down to 10mhz channels with ePMP. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Shayne Lebrun <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I seem to recall that with the M series, at least, a 30 mhz channel >>>> works 'better' than a 40 because the 40 is really two 20 mhz channels >>>> bonded together, where a 30 mhz channel is a 30 mhz channel. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway >>>> Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 8:32 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz >>>> >>>> I'm not that familiar with the ePMP's yet but I can tell you some >>>> things that we saw with Ubiquiti. One is that channel width does not scale >>>> with bandwidth that that Atheros chipset. For example, 40MHz channels >>>> rarely hit their theoretical maximum due to a variety of factors, noise, >>>> lower s/n, processor limitations, etc... Second, 20MHz channels seem to be >>>> the sweet spot but even with GPS sync, you have to deal with reflections. >>>> Third, 10MHz channels have more overhead as a percentage of total capacity >>>> and don't handle a lot of users well (above 40 for example with the older >>>> 400MHz chipsets. I'm starting to deploy XW radios with the 520MHz >>>> processors but everything is 20MHz now so I don't have a comparison). We >>>> did see peaks of 32Mbps with some customers on 10MHz channels but that's >>>> non-peak times. In peak times, we were seeing 8Mbps when more users were >>>> online. >>>> >>>> Rory >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Craig House >>>> Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2015 5:20 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz >>>> >>>> We have deployed 6 towers to begin our new EPMP network and 4 of those >>>> towers have a full cluster of 2.4 90 degree EPMP sectors. They are >>>> configured with ACS turned off now because in several cases they all ended >>>> up on the same or very close to the same channel. I have Front back >>>> designations and non overlapping channels set up on all towers. I have >>>> tried 40 mhz 20 mhz and now 10mhz channels and while the customer stability >>>> has gotten better the more I play with settings I have kind of hit a point >>>> I dont know what else to try. I have some that the uplink quality will >>>> vary wildly from 100% to 0%. Most have gotten better since I went to a >>>> 10mhz channel. Most of the customers get 12MB -30mb down in the wireless >>>> link test but the uplinks are as bad as .17. What is the cause of this >>>> poor uplink quality? Is it interfernece? My one 5ghz AP does not have >>>> this problem but even with noise many of these customers have -50 signals >>>> and oddly enough the ones with the great signals seem to be the ones that >>>> have the poorest link tests on the up link side. I also have customes with >>>> -65 or -72 signals that get 5MB up on the same sectors? Im scratching my >>>> head a bit on what the fix is for this? Should I leave ACS on and change >>>> everything to 10mhz channels? Will a full cluster with ACS on work all on >>>> the same channel? >>>> I'm used to FSK where you pick your channel and any channels that are >>>> adjacent will cause problems with connected SM's. So am I just applying >>>> old knowledge to a technology that it doesn't apply to? >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
