He didn't say ePMP was too expensive, he said it had too many bugs.
On 11/9/2015 9:40 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Dude he thinks EPMP is way too expensive. Doesn't read like a very
rational post to me.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Nov 9, 2015 9:35 AM, "Sean Heskett" <af...@zirkel.us
<mailto:af...@zirkel.us>> wrote:
You must be doing something wrong because our experience is the
complete opposite with PMP450.
What does your noise floor look like?
-Sean
On Sunday, November 8, 2015, Daniel Gerlach
<danielgerl...@gmail.com <mailto:danielgerl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
the 450 is a 4 years old pointless product like nearly
everything from
Cambium..it is too expensive and soo low Bandwith for the
customers.We
have thrown it out of the Network..The epmp serie has only
bugs( we
have found last week a new with heavy traffic and more than 35
CPE´s
on a AP) and Cambium told me that they can not fix it before
Christmas.
2015-11-08 4:21 GMT+01:00 Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com>:
> Same on any half duplex TDD platform with PtMP and low
modulation (QPSK)
> subscribers. If you have a ubnt 5 GHz AP with a bunch of
clients in 64QAM
> 3/4 to 64QAM 5/6 and a few are on the air using QPSK 1/2,
it's going to drag
> down the performance of that whole radio and sector
significantly. It can be
> as much as from 80 Mbps aggregate to 20 Mbps. Looking at the
RSL thresholds
> needed to operate at 1X in 450 terms, it sounds like a few
of those client
> radios are "just barely hanging on"...
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:37 AM, George Skorup
<geo...@cbcast.com> wrote:
>>
>> If those 1X and 2X downlink SMs are even moderately active,
that really
>> throws a wrench into the sector performance. This is true
on any PMP
>> platform. We've seen our fair share of it. We've moved a
couple back to FSK
>> which is something I never, ever want to do, but it was
unfortunately
>> necessary.
>>
>>
>> On 11/6/2015 11:50 AM, Eric Muehleisen wrote:
>>>
>>> We have a few 450 AP's with 30-40 subscribers and have
been getting
>>> several slow speed complaints lately. I just chaulked it
up to issues
>>> with the SM since the AP rarely got over 20mb/s downlink.
We upgraded
>>> to 13.4 recently so we could watch our frame utilization.
We started
>>> graphing it over night and as you can see, we are hitting
100% for
>>> sustained periods of time. During that time the AP is only
doing
>>> approx. 23mb/s. This particular AP has 34 registered SM
and the
>>> majority show 6x and 4x with 4 or 5 SM's at 2x and 1x. The
performance
>>> is a major disappointment. Anyone else have similar
experiences?
>>>
>>> AP configuration: 20mhz channels, 2.5ms frame, 10 miles,
75% downlink,
>>> 3 contention slots.
>>>
>>> Attached is a screenshot of the utilization and sector
throughput
>>> calculator from the Capacity Planner R13.
>>
>>
>
