....... far as having any employee grab replacement...... hmmmm... what are they grabbing and from where ?
LOL! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Jon Langeler" <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2017 2:04:51 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience > It's easy to use. Way better than PTP820 as far as having any employee grab > replacement. Single radio covers the whole network...is huge. > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > On Jan 14, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Lewis Bergman < lewis.berg...@gmail.com > wrote: >> User interface was always a big deal to me. More important than the money. >> To me >> is the deciding factor as most of the gigs gear pompous out very similar >> bs/hz/$. The UI and SIMPLE are big factors in being able to restore lossy >> service and preventing recurring outages. >> What kind of UI does the AF11 have? I have always thought that ubnt was >> heavy on >> pretty but light on real and helpful details. >> On Jan 14, 2017 10:36 AM, "Ken Hohhof" < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: >>> Which cannot be determined without taking system margin into account. >>> Cost must also take into account antennas, licensing, tower rent, and >>> scarcity >>> of spectrum. So if one system needs larger antennas, those cost money, and >>> may >>> increase tower rent. >>> It’s too easy to focus on just radio cost and max throughput. You are on the >>> right track with your last line. Can it do the job at hand. But you need to >>> look at more than just the max throughput on the spec sheet to determine >>> that. >>> From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard >>> Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2017 10:25 AM >>> To: af < af@afmug.com > >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>> Well, comparing bits/mhz/$, I really don't think anything else comes close >>> to >>> the AF11... the B11 might beat it on bits/$ (it's close anyway, and it has >>> the >>> advantage of more overall capacity... and SFP), and plenty of other radios >>> can >>> beat it on bits/mhz, but comparing all three the AF11 is a pretty clear >>> winner. >>> So what it really comes down to, is if it can handle enough bandwidth for a >>> given link in the available spectrum. >>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Gino Villarini < g...@aeronetpr.com > >>> wrote: >>>> I’ll guess that is the way to get them produced at way lower price… >>>> I always use the bits/mhz/$ when comparing radios >>>> From: Af < af-boun...@afmug.com > on behalf of Josh Reynolds < >>>> j...@kyneticwifi.com > >>>> Reply-To: " af@afmug.com " < af@afmug.com > >>>> Date: Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 12:56 AM >>>> To: " af@afmug.com " < af@afmug.com > >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>> There's an ongoing discussion about this. It seems it has to do with the >>>> hitless >>>> ARQ modulation change support. >>>> Basically, it's a trade-off. >>>> Gino Villarini >>>> President >>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>>> <image002.png> >>>> On Jan 13, 2017 10:14 PM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: >>>>> I love how Gary says they use so much better, newer technology... but >>>>> they get >>>>> worse throughput. *sigh* >>>>> ----- >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>>> The Brothers WISP >>>>> From: "Tim Hardy" < tha...@comsearch.com > >>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 5:54:53 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>> Post 6 here discusses the use of ARQ rather than FEC. >>>>> https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/AF11x-Capacity/td-p/1737631 >>>>> From: Af < af-boun...@afmug.com > on behalf of George Skorup < >>>>> geo...@cbcast.com >>>>> > >>>>> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 6:41:10 PM >>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>> Which I don't understand. Sounds like strong FEC? >>>>> On 1/13/2017 5:36 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: >>>>>> According to Link Planner, PTP820S (IP20S) gets around 243M at 256QAM, >>>>>> 347M at >>>>>> 2048QAM (350M with header compression). So add that to George’s >>>>>> Trango/Exalt/SAF list. >>>>>> From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Chris Gustaf >>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 5:20 PM >>>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>>> Real usable capacity at Layer 2 Ethernet depends on several variables >>>>>> besides >>>>>> the modulation level and the regulatory bandwidth. For 1024 QAM there >>>>>> are 10 >>>>>> bits per symbol so theoretically one would expect to get 400 Mbps in a >>>>>> 40 MHz >>>>>> channel (10 bits x 40 MHz symbol rate). >>>>>> To actually make a radio that meets FCC spectrum masks, a reduction of >>>>>> the >>>>>> symbol rate down to around 35 MHz is required plus filtering, giving a >>>>>> max of >>>>>> 350 Mbps over the air. >>>>>> After that, Forward Error Correction (FEC) is required which is >>>>>> typically around >>>>>> 85-90 % for most microwave radios using LDPC, giving a net throughput of >>>>>> around >>>>>> 300 to 315 Mbps. >>>>>> Add header compression at layer 2 which in the worst case for large >>>>>> packets adds >>>>>> about 2.5 % improvement and you get to around 325 Mbps, which is what >>>>>> Trango >>>>>> and others get on a single 40 MHz channel with the newest technology. >>>>>> Ubiquiti maybe using a lower FEC rate like 75-80% (or a lower symbol >>>>>> rate if the >>>>>> filtering is not steep enough) and no header compression, which would >>>>>> give them >>>>>> about 250 Mbps for large packets. >>>>>> Hope that helps! >>>>>> Chris Gustaf >>>>>> Trango Systems >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> What other radios will only do 250Mbps (502.4Mbps capacity according to >>>>>>> the data >>>>>>> sheet...) on one 40mhz single polarity channel at 256qam? The other's >>>>>>> I've >>>>>>> looked at are typically around 300Mbps... >>>>>>> Not that I'm saying the AF11 is a bad radio, I plan on putting up at >>>>>>> least a few >>>>>>> of them this year... but I find it a little funny that they use 1024qam >>>>>>> as a >>>>>>> selling point, when it can't do as much throughput at 1024qam as other >>>>>>> radios >>>>>>> do at 256qam. >>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Eric Kuhnke < eric.kuh...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> I think this whole thread can be summed up that there's no magical way >>>>>>>> to get >>>>>>>> around the shannon limit and bps/Hz coding efficiency for a given >>>>>>>> channel size >>>>>>>> and modulation... From the technical perspective of people who have to >>>>>>>> really >>>>>>>> understand the FDX capacity of a new PTP link, the ubnt marketing >>>>>>>> department is >>>>>>>> divorced from reality, it's not 1200 Mbps no matter how many slick >>>>>>>> PDFs they >>>>>>>> publish. >>>>>>>> One 40 MHz channel single polarity at 1024QAM 5/6 code rate is going >>>>>>>> to be >>>>>>>> nearly the same efficiency bps/Hz from many different manufacturers. >>>>>>>> Multiply >>>>>>>> as necessary for dual polarity or for larger channel sizes such as 60, >>>>>>>> 80 or >>>>>>>> 112 MHz. >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Faisal Imtiaz < >>>>>>>> fai...@snappytelecom.net > >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> FYI... on a "single" 40mhz channel 'dual polarity' (mimo) the expected >>>>>>>>> throughput on Af11x is 500meg duplex. >>>>>>>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>>>>>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom >>>>>>>>> 7266 SW 48 Street >>>>>>>>> Miami, FL 33155 >>>>>>>>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >>>>>>>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >>>>>>>>>> From: "Josh Baird" < joshba...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 10:30:10 AM >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>>>>>>> But if I can get 80mhz channels in both polarities (running at >>>>>>>>>> 56Mhz/1024QAM >>>>>>>>>> with this radio), I should be able to at least double he capacity of >>>>>>>>>> my PTP-800 >>>>>>>>>> link which can do 228Mbps. Right? >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> At 40 MHz and a single polarity, you're looking at an almost >>>>>>>>>>> insignificant >>>>>>>>>>> increase in throughput. >>>>>>>>>>> Their claim is 1.2 gb+. >>>>>>>>>>> Cut that in half as they're advertising the aggregate, so 600 mb+. >>>>>>>>>>> That's using both polarities, so now only 300 mb+. >>>>>>>>>>> Only I haven't heard of anyone getting much more than 500 in a >>>>>>>>>>> single direction >>>>>>>>>>> (they may certainly exist, I just haven't seen them), so now that >>>>>>>>>>> 300 is really >>>>>>>>>>> only 250. >>>>>>>>>>> Not much of an upgrade unless you can also get larger channels in >>>>>>>>>>> both >>>>>>>>>>> polarities. >>>>>>>>>>> ----- >>>>>>>>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>>>>>>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>>>>>>>>> The Brothers WISP >>>>>>>>>>> From: "Josh Baird" <joshba...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 11:47:42 AM >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>>>>>>>> This PTP800 is only capable of running at 40Mhz (ODU-A) so it can >>>>>>>>>>> only do >>>>>>>>>>> 228Mbps full-duplex. The AF11x should be able to do much more than >>>>>>>>>>> that, right? >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Gino Villarini >>>>>>>>>>> <g...@aeronetpr.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> IIRC, PTP800 is Remec Style, you'll need Remec to N connector >>>>>>>>>>>> adapters (AF11x is >>>>>>>>>>>> N) >>>>>>>>>>>> What do you expect to achieve with this upgrade? Not much capacity >>>>>>>>>>>> difference >>>>>>>>>>>> between PTP800 and AF11x, maybe 50-80- mbps more. Only if you have >>>>>>>>>>>> a xpic >>>>>>>>>>>> license you can double your throughput with the af11x >>>>>>>>>>>> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Josh Baird >>>>>>>>>>>> <joshba...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thursday, January 12, 2017 at 9:12 AM >>>>>>>>>>>> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >>>>>>>>>>>> Good news - thanks for sharing. >>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhat un-related question: >>>>>>>>>>>> I have a PTP-800 link using these dishes: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.hol4g.com/AC/product.aspx?number=ANC-VHLP3-11W-RR1&p=237127&sc=0 >>>>>>>>>>>> Do you know if I can re-use these dishes with the AF11x? Do I need >>>>>>>>>>>> adapters? >>>>>>>>>>>> Josh >>>>>>>>>>>> Gino Villarini >>>>>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>>>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>>>>>>>>>>> <image003.png> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Gino Villarini >>>>>>>>>>>> <g...@aeronetpr.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all, just dropping by to share our experience with AF11x, we >>>>>>>>>>>>> habe been beta >>>>>>>>>>>>> testing the unit since Sept and for the last 3 months, the unit >>>>>>>>>>>>> has been rock >>>>>>>>>>>>> solid. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are very happy with its performance, just wished it had a SFP >>>>>>>>>>>>> port! >>>>>>>>>>>>> This unit replaced a Mimosa B11 unit that we were having some >>>>>>>>>>>>> intermitent >>>>>>>>>>>>> throughtput issues, >>>>>>>>>>>>> The swap was easy since we reused the Jirous Dishes and only had >>>>>>>>>>>>> to add the >>>>>>>>>>>>> af11x adapters to it, >>>>>>>>>>>>> The link went live on 9/21/16 and on the first weeks we >>>>>>>>>>>>> experienced some >>>>>>>>>>>>> lockups, but after a revised beta fw was applied, all issues went >>>>>>>>>>>>> away. >>>>>>>>>>>>> For UBNT, please add SFP port and continue the good work towards >>>>>>>>>>>>> a af6x and >>>>>>>>>>>>> af18x >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gino Villarini >>>>>>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>>>>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>>>>>>>>>>>> <image003.png>
