I'm beginning to wonder, why do we even care? :P On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
> Look at pic. Cut off one of those N connectors. Past the cut N connector > down the side and width of the radio. Figure out l/w of regular N > connector. Multiply. > > End result = close enough :) > On Mar 17, 2016 12:54 PM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It does look like it's a bit bigger to me, but probably still relatively >> small (as far as 11ghz radios go). >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: >> >>> Hard to get scale from that pic though. >>> >>> On 3/17/2016 12:26 PM, Jeremy wrote: >>> >>> Pic: >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> When you say form factor I am thinking is it more like AF24/HD or more >>>> like AFx. It's obviously connectorized and more like X, but likely thicker >>>> to handle the N bulkheads. As far as absolute dimensions, I don't think >>>> those have been documented or mentioned anywhere. >>>> On Mar 17, 2016 12:22 PM, "Nate Burke" <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Is it the same form factor? I can't see 2 N-Connectors fitting on the >>>>> current form factor. Maybe same shape but dimensionally bigger? >>>>> >>>>> The Sales Email from UBNT says available Summer 2016. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 3/17/2016 12:19 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yes no unsure, I believe by summer >>>>> On Mar 17, 2016 12:16 PM, "Josh Baird" < <joshba...@gmail.com> >>>>> joshba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I missed the UBNT session.. Is the form-factor of this radio the >>>>>> same as the other AirFiberX radios? Does it have a SFP interface? When >>>>>> will they be available? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Reynolds < >>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> There was discussion about waveguide - I pushed for it. I mentioned >>>>>>> the RF Elements adapters as well... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the end, it was decided that N connectors were more universal and >>>>>>> adaptable to various antennas. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, George Skorup < >>>>>>> <geo...@cbcast.com>geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: >>>>>>> > Yup, I believe the B11 is ac based. The AF will do true FDD so you >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> > license standard coordinated channel pairs. And to top it off, >>>>>>> they went the >>>>>>> > Exalt path with field replaceable diplexers. And looks like you >>>>>>> can reverse >>>>>>> > the diplexer for high or low side. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > The N connector thing is kinda odd. As Chuck said, they would've >>>>>>> been better >>>>>>> > off with SMA @ 11GHz. Or even better, a f'n waveguide interface! >>>>>>> C'mon UBNT! >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On 3/17/2016 10:40 AM, Mathew Howard wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I'm pretty sure Mimosa actually is 802.11 based, but yeah the >>>>>>> airFiber >>>>>>> > certainly is not. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Also, do NOT compare airFiber quality with anything else UBNT >>>>>>> makes... it's >>>>>>> > on a completely different level than the airMax stuff. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Josh Reynolds < >>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>j...@kyneticwifi.com> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Mimosa isn't 802.11 based as far as I know. UBNT is doing this on >>>>>>> >> AirFiber FPGA. Who's making 802.11 based 11G radios? >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:32 AM, TJ Trout < <t...@voltbb.com> >>>>>>> t...@voltbb.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >> > is anyone else concerned about the quality and reliability that >>>>>>> comes >>>>>>> >> > with >>>>>>> >> > these low cost 802.11 based 11ghz radios?? >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Josh Reynolds < >>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>j...@kyneticwifi.com> >>>>>>> >> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> When we bought our SAF stuff a few years back, we had to show >>>>>>> our >>>>>>> >> >> distributor our coordination docs before they would ship gear. >>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lewis Bergman >>>>>>> >> >> < <lewis.berg...@gmail.com>lewis.berg...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> >> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >> >> > I don't know about turning sellers into enforcement arms of >>>>>>> the FCC. >>>>>>> >> >> > All >>>>>>> >> >> > of >>>>>>> >> >> > that is really the FCC's job. Has there really been a >>>>>>> problem? >>>>>>> >> >> > >>>>>>> >> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 10:17 AM Cassidy B. Larson < >>>>>>> <c...@infowest.com>c...@infowest.com> >>>>>>> >> >> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> >> That would be an awesome idea to limit random joes from >>>>>>> lighting up >>>>>>> >> >> >> un-registered/coordinated links. But shouldnt they do that >>>>>>> for 3.65 >>>>>>> >> >> >> as >>>>>>> >> >> >> well? >>>>>>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> >> > On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Brian Sullivan >>>>>>> >> >> >> > <installe...@foxvalley.net> >>>>>>> >> >> >> > wrote: >>>>>>> >> >> >> > >>>>>>> >> >> >> > Can't they force some sort of compliance with license >>>>>>> keys you get >>>>>>> >> >> >> > after >>>>>>> >> >> >> > you prove your FCC application/coordination? >>>>>>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> >> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
