sorry miss typed the update  13.4 DES PMP 100

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 11:29 AM, huge uge <hugeuge1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Chuck,
> a bit off subject for most posts Ive seen here,  i was trying to do the
> Cambium 13.4, pmp 100 update for our equipment (11/09/15), I keep getting
> this message:
>
>  "Error occurred while updating device: AP-DES: null 11/15/15 03:05:58
> WARN: Host:  . . . .   ;ESN: 0A003E910EBE;Message: Invalid File
> Image(status:211).
>
>  and another freakish event took place  : Thanksgiving morning, a raven
> was pecking at our Memory Link GHR 5011 timing slave/ backhaul, and
> succeeded at knocking the antenna off of the unit. I tried repairing the
> connector (the keeper/ internal snap ring was dislodged from the collar)
> but the stub extension will not stay in position once the winds here pick
> up.  I also do not know how to access the Memory Link unit, since the
> previous events I no longer can access any equipment downstream from  T 1 (
> T 2 and T 3 ), If I am on site with an SM or CMM registered with T2 or T3
>    I can access everything downstream of T1 as long as the unit I am
> plugged into is downstream of T1,  logic says : T1 and T2  have an issue
> with a timing master or timing slave or both,  I don't know where to find
> more resources to expand my peanut (brain) possibly due to frustration but
> I need to trouble shoot this issue our network is down and Cambium
> generally takes too long. so far, every instance of Cambium support has
> been an education in what doesn't work,  and after 2 or three reads of the
> card provided procedures I spend two to three weeks undoing their support.
> Cambium Updater could  have been the cause,  the program locked up and did
> nothing for three days, which led to having restore the PC due to corrupt
> or missing files, of which I am still finding.  My redheaded temper and
> lack of patients has me in a spin,  any body familiar with Memory link
> procedures i.e default/reset  access for configuration ? thanks  HAGD
>
> Chedder
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote:
>
>> We have a number of towers to convert from 4 450’s with 90 degree sectors
>> to 6 AP’s with 60 degree sectors.   Most of these are already at 80-90% 450
>> SM’s.   I was asking if I can go directly to 450i AP’s without having to
>> finish collecting the 430’s.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> > On Nov 28, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Sriram Chaturvedi <
>> sriram.chaturv...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > 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?
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to