Hi Chuck, I was directly responding to Mark’s question on 430 “upgrade” project where I assumed he was eventually going to upgrade his 430 SMs to 450/450i. Perhaps it was an incorrect assumption. Believe it or not, my responses aren’t loaded when I post here.
> On Nov 28, 2015, at 10:28 AM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > > "right away" sounds ominous > > > -----Original Message----- From: Sriram Chaturvedi > Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 8:00 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 14.1.1 Release and PTP > > 450i AP will interop with 430 SMs. You don't need to swap the SMs out right > away. > > Thanks, > Sriram > > ________________________________________ > From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> > Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 8:24 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 14.1.1 Release and PTP > > How about 450i AP to 430 SM? I would like to start deploying 450i instead > of 450 for 430 upgrade projects. Do I have to get all of the 430 SM�s > swapped first? > > Mark > > >> On Nov 27, 2015, at 11:21 AM, Aaron Schneider >> <aaron.schnei...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote: >> >> It should work, but at the moment I can�t recall if/when we tried this >> with PTP mode. I�ll let you know. >> >> 450i - 450 isn�t really an �interop� situation like 430 - 450 was. >> 430 - 450 was quite a bit different, needing SISO to talk to MIMO with the >> way we did MIMO at first (MIMO-B using both channels for data). 450i - 450 >> is much more similar, and we have been using that combination internally for >> a long time. It wasn�t part of the initial release of 450i due to needing >> to focus on the HW release itself. >> >> I�ll be in touch on the PTP question. It is important to allow you to >> upgrade a PTP link one end at a time. >> >> Regards, >> -Aaron >> >> >> >> >> On 11/27/15, 12:09 AM, "Af on behalf of George Skorup" <af-boun...@afmug.com >> on behalf of geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: >> >>> I thought interop was only for PMP? >>> >>> On 11/26/2015 11:38 PM, Matt wrote: >>>> Is it possible for a PTP450i master to talk to a PTP450 slave now? >>> >
