Yeah, I agree that those radios should be considered a different class than the more traditional licensed radios... but I'm not sure I'd use the same criteria to classify them. The B11 has an SFP port, and the AF11 has a direct DC connector... I can't find any mention of whether it will take -48, but I suspect it has a floating ground - for that matter I would guess you could run the B11 off -48vDC too (although you would have to feed it through the ethernet port).
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > With modern radios in the 35W to 50W max load range, you can go a > surprisingly long distance with 18AWG stranded copper (such as from > basement to roof of a 45 floor building) with voltage drop that is totally > within the acceptable operating range limits of modern licensed band -48VDC > fed radios. > > Such as starting from whatever your 52-53VDC float voltage is in the > basement and as measured at the radio, far above 45VDC at the roof. > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > >> What he said... plus the wires can be smaller and less cost. >> >> *From:* Eric Kuhnke >> *Sent:* Monday, January 16, 2017 1:36 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience >> >> Say that again when you're building pure Ethernet 1, 10 and 100GbE >> backbone links for an ISP that has its own AS, traffic exchanges at >> multiple IXes and spans a 3-state sized area... -48VDC is not obsolete, >> it's an industry standard for many good reasons. >> >> -48VDC is very useful unless you enjoy masochism and building power >> systems that go AC-to-DC-to-AC-to-DC (AC wall power, to the AC input of a >> true sinewave AC-input/AC-output UPS, running loads off its inverter with a >> DC battery bank inverter, fed through its output to the AC power inputs to >> equipment like switches which run on 12VDC power internally inside the >> equipment). >> >> Also much higher efficiency whether you have a POP with a thermal load of >> 1, 5, 15 or 20kW. >> >> That's before I even get into the idea of photovoltaic/off-grid 48VDC >> systems which have no AC powered equipment whatsoever. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Robert <i...@avantwireless.com> wrote: >> >>> Seems to me caring about -48VDC power feeds would be like caring about >>> ATM transport on fiber... Legacy considerations but not necessary for new >>> infrastructure moving forward. SFP ports are modern capability... >>> >>> On 1/16/17 11:58 AM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: >>> >>> In my opinion things like the B11 and AF11X should be considered in >>> their own special low cost category... It wins in bps/$ and other figures, >>> but if you divide licensed band 11, 18 and 23 GHz radios (FCC band plan) >>> into generally two categories: >>> >>> a) Radios that take direct -48VDC power feeds and have SFP ports >>> >>> b) Radios that do not take direct -48VDC and/or do not have an SFP port >>> >>> There's an emerging divide between the two categories, where you have >>> things like the 1024QAM radios from traditional FDD manufacturers in >>> category B, and things like the B11 and AF11X in category A. >>> >>> Category A will probably be a huge growth market for small WISPs that >>> have no reasonable expectation of affording a $14,000 licensed link any >>> time soon. >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Well, comparing bits/mhz/$, 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 >>>>> >>>>> 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 <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>>>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>>>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>>>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> *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 <%28305%29%20663-5518> >>>>>> >>>>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <%28305%29%20663-5518> 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 <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Midwest Internet Exchange* >>>>>> >>>>>> *The Brothers WISP* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> *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 >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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? <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Gino Villarini <*g...@aeronetpr.com*> >>>>>> wrote: <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> IIRC, PTP800 is Remec Style, you'll need Remec to N connector >>>>>> adapters (AF11x is N) <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> *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 >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> Good news - thanks for sharing. <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> Somewhat un-related question: <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a PTP-800 link using these dishes: >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *http://www.hol4g.com/AC/product.aspx?number=ANC-VHLP3-11W-RR1&p=237127&sc=0* >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you know if I can re-use these dishes with the AF11x? Do I need >>>>>> adapters? <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> Josh <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Gino Villarini* >>>>>> >>>>>> President >>>>>> >>>>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Gino Villarini <*g...@aeronetpr.com*> >>>>>> wrote: <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> We are very happy with its performance, just wished it had a SFP >>>>>> port! <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> This unit replaced a Mimosa B11 unit that we were having some >>>>>> intermitent throughtput issues, <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> The swap was easy since we reused the Jirous Dishes and only had to >>>>>> add the af11x adapters to it, <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> For UBNT, please add SFP port and continue the good work towards a >>>>>> af6x and af18x <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Gino Villarini* >>>>>> >>>>>> President >>>>>> >>>>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
