Yup 36 Max ptmp and no I cannot confirm what power levels were being run
on UBNT.
On 6/6/2016 10:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
21+15 just checked
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Josh Luthman
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Isn't it 21+18 max?
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 Jun 6, 2016 10:52 AM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com
<mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
only if the power is set wrong.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Josh Luthman
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Epmp is like 6 dB less power?
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 Jun 6, 2016 10:47 AM, "Mathew Howard"
<mhoward...@gmail.com <mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The only direct comparison I've seen with the same
antennas at the AP was the one Jerry Head mentioned
here... and he wasn't able to confirm that TX power
was the same.
The other thing that I'm wondering about is if the
fact that the Cambium sectors are dual slant instead
of H/V has something to do with it.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Ken Hohhof
<af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
Someone asked whether the xmt power was
apples-to-apples, has that been answered?
If the antennas are comparable, it would seem the
only explanations for different rcv signal would
be xmt power, or calibration error.
*From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
*Sent:* Monday, June 06, 2016 8:18 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP
I think if I was cambium, I would have a couple of
guys on a plane or in a car with a suitcase of
equipment to visit you in the field.
This was not the intended or expected outcome for
that product.
*From:* Josh Luthman
<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
*Sent:* Sunday, June 05, 2016 8:17 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP
Never really left. I would have to lose customers
with epmp 2.4 wifi due to lack of signal.
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 Jun 5, 2016 10:12 PM, "Paul McCall"
<pa...@pdmnet.net <mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>> wrote:
So you went back to UBNT in 2.4?
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On Behalf Of
*Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Sunday, June 5, 2016 9:57 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP
No. I have no pmp450 in my network simply due
to cost.
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 Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Paul McCall
<pa...@pdmnet.net <mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>>
wrote:
Josh,
Have you tried 450 2.4 in the exact situation
where ePMP 2.4 “sucked”?
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On Behalf Of
*Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:10 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP
No...it's not. The EPMP 2.4 radios just suck
at penetration. I've done Ubnt KPP and IT
Elite - they all performed terribly.
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 4:59 PM, CBB - Jay
Fuller <par...@cyberbroadband.net
<mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>> wrote:
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>
*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>
*Sent:*Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto: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>
*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?
