Actually, no... I don't believe ubnt radios will limit it properly for ptmp, even all the right boxes are checked and the antenna is set properly... but ePMP would. On Jun 5, 2016 6:28 PM, "Colin Stanners" <cstann...@gmail.com> wrote:
If all that is done in the Ubnt gear, yes, but I suspect a number of Ubnt WISPs do not... On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Jerry Head <li...@blountbroadband.com> wrote: > i guess it could be something like that...but are they not both limited to > regional maximum if one checks the calculate EIRP limit in the ubnt gear? > And sets the correct antenna gain of course... > > On 6/5/2016 3:58 PM, Colin Stanners wrote: > > Is it possible the ePMP tx power is at the regional maximum while the > ubiquiti tx power was at the hardware maximum? > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Jerry Head <li...@blountbroadband.com> > wrote: > >> RSSI? >> 4-7dBm >> >> >> On 6/5/2016 1:17 PM, Jay Weekley wrote: >> >>> What was the average signal difference? >>> >>> Jerry Head wrote: >>> >>>> It absolutely does perform worse on the same link, we just helped a >>>> friend move an entire site from UBNT to epmp to make use of the sync >>>> capabilities. We actually had to transfer about 15% of the customers to 900 >>>> because they would not work at all on epmp. >>>> >>>> On 6/2/2016 4:31 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: >>>> >>>>> But does it actually perform worse that UBNT 2.4ghz on the same link, >>>>> or is it maybe just differences in how they calculate signal levels? It >>>>> doesn't make any sense that two different radios running on the same >>>>> frequency putting the same amount of power into the same antennas would >>>>> give significantly different signal levels... >>>>> >>>>> The closest thing I've done to a comparison was playing with a Force >>>>> 200 2.4ghz in wifi mode... there didn't seem to be a significant >>>>> difference >>>>> between it and a PowerBeam connecting to the same AP. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Josh Luthman < >>>>> <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>j...@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto: >>>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> And I've tried IT Elite dual pol panels, Force 200 2.4, >>>>> integrated + reflector for CPEs. Continues to suck. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Josh Luthman >>>>> Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340> >>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343> >>>>> >>>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>>> Suite 1337 >>>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Ken Hohhof < <af...@kwisp.com> >>>>> af...@kwisp.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I’m thinking more the CPE antennas. >>>>> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <mailto: <par...@cyberbroadband.net> >>>>> par...@cyberbroadband.net> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:59 PM >>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>>> >>>>> hmm, i will check into that. Pretty sure with ubnt we're >>>>> using kp performance. With epmp, i think it is bundled >>>>> antennas... >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> *From:* Ken Hohhof <mailto: <af...@kwisp.com> >>>>> af...@kwisp.com> >>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:50 PM >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>>> >>>>> Jay, I suspect the difference you are seeing may be >>>>> mainly in the antennas. 2.4 GHz from any vendor should >>>>> penetrate the same, the radio waves don’t care what brand >>>>> radio launched them. And I think the difference between >>>>> the platforms will be most evident in low interference >>>>> environment where they can achieve their full modulation >>>>> and throughput. With low SNR, I think it’s kind of like >>>>> arguing Ferrari vs Porsche for off road racing, neither >>>>> will be able to show off its capabilities. Receiver >>>>> sensitivity and bits/sec/Hz won’t matter. >>>>> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <mailto: >>>>> <par...@cyberbroadband.net>par...@cyberbroadband.net> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM >>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>>> >>>>> Also interested in interference rejection of the pmp450 >>>>> - is there any (in 2.4) >>>>> we are getting better foliage penetration with ubnt 2.4 >>>>> than epmp 2.4 - - and from the performance of >>>>> the epmp 2.4 i wish wish wish it penetrated better! >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> *From:* Matt <mailto: <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> >>>>> matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> >>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 2:25 PM >>>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>>> >>>>> We have mostly PMP100 and PMP450 deployed. Some >>>>> Ubiquiti we tried and >>>>> some we inherited as well. Have some ePMP we have >>>>> tested but so far >>>>> have not deployed more then couple test links. >>>>> >>>>> For those who have tried both ePMP and PMP450 what >>>>> are the differences >>>>> you have seen in performance? Interference tolerance >>>>> among others? >>>>> >>>>> For those that have gone with PMP450 over ePMP what >>>>> was the reasoning? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
