I agree, nothing can beat airFiber's latency when you're using sync. We've pretty much standardized on either ePMP or AF5x for all our 5ghz PTP links.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Stefan Englhardt <s...@genias.net> wrote: > Regarding small channels you should test AF5X. I see 75mbps aggregated on > a 10MHz Channel. 2ms Frame Length. > > > > [admin@gw24] > ping 192.168.51.180 > > SEQ HOST SIZE TTL TIME > STATUS > > 0 192.168.51.180 56 64 2ms > > 1 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 2 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 3 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 4 192.168.51.180 56 64 2ms > > 5 192.168.51.180 56 64 3ms > > 6 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 7 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 8 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 9 192.168.51.180 56 64 2ms > > 10 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 11 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 12 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 13 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 14 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 15 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 16 192.168.51.180 56 64 1ms > > 17 192.168.51.180 56 64 0ms > > sent=18 received=18 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=0ms avg-rtt=1ms max-rtt=3ms > > > > > > On 30MHz I see 264mbps. > > > > Imho best option for small channels. With big channels Mimosa is great. > > > > > > > > *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Mathew Howard > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 4. Februar 2016 21:23 > *An:* af <af@afmug.com> > *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP GPS PTP > > > > But you can't use sync in ePTP mode... here's what I get pinging across a > PTP link with 2.5ms frames, with an average of around 5mbps going across > it. Testing between the Mikrotiks at each end, I can average around 80mbps > on a 20mhz channel. > > 0 10.1.27.25 56 64 10ms > 1 10.1.27.25 56 64 9ms > 2 10.1.27.25 56 64 6ms > 3 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms > 4 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms > 5 10.1.27.25 56 64 13ms > 6 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms > 7 10.1.27.25 56 64 7ms > 8 10.1.27.25 56 64 11ms > 9 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms > 10 10.1.27.25 56 64 9ms > sent=11 received=11 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=6ms avg-rtt=8ms > max-rtt=13ms > > I wouldn't really put them in the same class as a B5c... the B5c is > capable of a lot more throughput and has some nice gimmicks like being able > to run two separate channels and make changes without taking the link > down... but latency isn't too much different (actually a lot better in ePTP > mode). > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > wrote: > > Latency in 2.5ms frames from router through AP to SM (16 subs) doing > 7-9mbps > > > > > ping 172.16.10.178 > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=14 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=10 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=12 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=12 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=10 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms > > 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms > > > > 62x15 mbps speed test in flexible mode > > > > Haven't used a B5c and that's a ptp product...if you do ePTP mode on ePMP > product you get ~1ms > > > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Matt <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What kind of luck are people having with the ePMP PTP using GPS? > Throughput and latency? How do they compare to the Mimosa B5c? > > > > >
