When are we looking at 13.4.1 official? It would be nice to bring up all
of the FSK to 13.4.1 official and 450 to 14.1.1 at the same time.
On 11/30/2015 11:49 AM, Aaron Schneider wrote:
Yes, just be aware that for 430 to talk to 450i AP in its native mode,
the 430's will need to be the latest 13.4.1 Open Beta. Otherwise,
you'll have to enable the "legacy mode" on the 450i AP to let the
older SW register. Enabling this mode limits the radio HW Queue depths
to be compatible with the older SW.
The SMs need to be upgraded to be able to detect these new depths and
adapt automatically during registration. For 430, 13.4.1 was the
first load which supports this, and for 450, 13.3 was the first load
which supports this (it originally came with 5ms Frame support, which
was/is a 450/450i only feature).
You can find this option on the 450i AP's Radio Configuration page:
This is only there for you to use for migration of SW releases � it is
not meant to be on indefinitely once all of your SMs are on acceptable
releases (which is now 14.1.1 for 450i/450 sectors, including 450/430
SMs), as having it on will impact the performance capability of the
450i AP.
Regards,
-Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sriram Chaturvedi
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 1:06 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 14.1.1 Release and PTP
Yes you can, Mark.
________________________________________
From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on
behalf of Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net <mailto:m...@amplex.net>>
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 12:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 14.1.1 Release and PTP
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
<mailto: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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on
behalf of Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net <mailto:m...@amplex.net>>
>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 8:24 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com%20on%20behalf%20of%20geo...@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?
>>>>
>>
>
>
