And you can legally do it until this Friday.
*From:* Josh Reynolds <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 10, 2015 12:10 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
We have been blocking torrents as a network protection measure
for over 6 years using various DPI and behavioral detection
systems, and its in our AUP. We have never lost a customer or
even had a complaint because of it.
On Jun 10, 2015 4:56 AM, Mathew Howard
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
Agreed. I don't even want to think about how many calls we
would have to deal with if blocked VPNs... and torrents for
that matter.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Mike Hammett
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Yes and blindly killing things is a terrible practice.
-----
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>
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Paul McCall" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Tuesday, June 9, 2015 11:12:43 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
Rory, how do you “kill torrents”? technically,
And, aren’t there a lot o legitimate programs that use
torrents as the distribution method?
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
*Sent:* Monday, June 08, 2015 3:54 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
If you have file sharers on there for example, I’ve seen
XM radios drop to 10Mbps or less (another reason we kill
torrents). If you watch the modulation levels when that
happens, you will also see them drop as the CPU load
goes up.
Rory
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Monday, June 08, 2015 12:46 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
PS in the run queue? That certainly isn't load, there's
no way an XM radio can do 20+.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Bill Prince
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I'm with Rory. It depends a lot on the traffic, and and
what role it may be playing (backhaul, AP, or SM). This
is just a 1 day snapshot of one in SM role.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 6/8/2015 12:34 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
SSH into every single AP and it says 0.00 or 0.01. I
used to graph it way back (maybe 5.3 days?) and I
never saw it deviate. This is definitely all XM gear.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Rory Conaway
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I would have to se your data, mine does not support
that.
Sent from fromm phone where I type with a single
digit so please excuse shortcuts or typos.
Rory Conaway
Triad Wireless
-------- Original message --------
From: Josh Luthman <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: 06/08/2015 3:26 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
If that was the case why are the loads of every
radio 0.01 or less?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Rory Conaway
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
To prove my point further, if you do throughput
testing with Ubiquity in ptmp mode, you will
find with xm radios, cpu load affects modulation
levels. I haven't tested xw radios yet but I
believe the threshold is just higher and
probably justifies 30mhz but it's going to be close.
Sent from fromm phone where I type with a single
digit so please excuse shortcuts or typos.
Rory Conaway
Triad Wireless
-------- Original message --------
From: Rory Conaway <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: 06/08/2015 3:16 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
The pps and cpu load absolutely is another
variable you need to take into acount,
especially with 400 and 526mhz atheros
processors that are also running polling. Ignore
it as part of your overall strategy and you
could be wasting spectrum. If your ap never
exceeds 80mbps, why do you want 30mhz channels.
Sarcasm aside, does that help you understand my
point.
Sent from fromm phone where I type with a single
digit so please excuse shortcuts or typos.
Rory Conaway
Triad Wireless
-------- Original message --------
From: Josh Reynolds <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: 06/08/2015 2:17 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
I think we are having two different
conversations, and I have no idea what you are
talking about right now.
What we were discussing has to do with channel
sizes, epmp, and ubiquiti. In particular, why
UBNT 40mhz isn't any better than 30mhz in terms
of efficiency.
This part of the discussion has nothing at all
to do with any theories on PPS you may have,
other than those you have tried to inject into
this discussion.
On Jun 8, 2015 10:07 AM, Rory Conaway
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Excopt that as was mentioned before, the s/n
ratio goes down and if you aren't hitting the
limits of the physical layer in 20MHz, why do it?
Sent from fromm phone where I type with a single
digit so please excuse shortcuts or typos.
Rory Conaway
Triad Wireless
-------- Original message --------
From: Josh Reynolds <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: 06/08/2015 12:43 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
I can assure you that on radios connected in a
ptp config or small ptmp, that you will see more
throughput on the 30mhz channel given a noise
floor of -97 and signals in the mid -50s, even
with nothing connected on the other side of the
radios.
Its an efficiency issue.
On Jun 8, 2015 8:13 AM, Mathew Howard
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I kind of does, the way I understood it, that
bottleneck limited you from really being able to
do anything beyond what a 30mhz channel could
support.
Now that I think about it, I have seen 40mhz
perform better than 30mhz... but yes, that was
because of RF problems, and neither one was
doing anything close to what it would with a
good link.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Josh Reynolds
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
That is a bottleneck in the system, but not
relevant as far as this discussion goes. That
has nothing to do with the 30/40MHz channel
efficiency per say.
On Jun 8, 2015 8:03 AM, Rory Conaway
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
The limitation on the older xm radios was pps.
When you added a lot of small packets and
airmax, you could drop down to as low as
40Mbps. In the real world in ptmp mode. We
planned for 50mhz per AP with eveything g taken
into account.
Sent from fromm phone where I type with a single
digit so please excuse shortcuts or typos.
Rory Conaway
Triad Wireless
-------- Original message --------
From: Josh Reynolds <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: 06/08/2015 11:59 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz
This. Thought it was pretty obvious but I guess
I assumed too much out of some on this list ;)
On Jun 8, 2015 7:33 AM, Jeremy
<[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Ubnt and epmp have gig ports.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 8, 2015 11:20 AM, "Josh Reynolds"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Rory
Conaway
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 8:32 PM
To: [email protected] <mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of
Craig House
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2015 5:20 PM
To: [email protected] <mailto:[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
