+100
been here too
On 03/25/2017 03:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:
I've never lost one of Chuck's suppressors to lightning/surges. The 5
or so that I have has all been because of the cable leaking water down
into GIGE(-POE)-APCs at the bottom.
Had one last week. Of course, had to be the only non-gel tape cable
running up the tower. I see the ethernet link suddenly start flapping.
Bounce the MikroTik port. Nope. Log into the SiteMonitor, the
SyncInjector port shows it's using about 400mA. Seems normal, but
wait, the other sectors aren't consuming that much. I knew right then
and there what it was. I get to the site and it's sizzling, rj45 all
burnt up, but the radio is still powered up and transmitting, just no
ethernet link. SyncInjector port didn't trip, obviously because the
fixed 2A limit wasn't reached. Lost nothing other than the GigE-APC.
Stripped the cable, put a new Rj45 on it without the jacket in the
plug, tied it to the rack post, put a coupler and a patch cable in
place of the APC, plugged it all back in and left. Not even any
ethernet errors with the water in the cable.
AFAIK, CMMs and LMG CTMs have always had port protection. Dumb POE
injection without over-current protection.. been there, done that.
In-line suppressors or not, many radios these days are coming with
surge suppression built in, like 450 APs. Methinks it's a fundamental
design issues that Mr. Netonix should revise.
On 3/25/2017 8:35 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
There are other reasons a cable could short: water ingress,
accidental cut, faulty device.
Changing your surge suppressor is a good idea, but I think PoE
devices ought to include short circuit protection anyway.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: 3/25/2017 9:28:51 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
If an impulse comes along and the surge suppressor clamps to ground,
you run the risk of smoking the Netonix POE transformer. It will
not protect itself against shorts.
*From:* Josh Baird
*Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 7:23 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
What exactly is the reason? We always run through your surge
protectors before connecting to Netonix.
On Mar 25, 2017, at 9:15 AM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Bypass ALL surge suppressors that are connected to Netonix,
irrespective of manufacturer.
*From:* can...@believewireless.net
*Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 5:41 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
So we should now bypass all our APC-type surge suppressors that are
connected to Netonix?
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
I am going to fix this little problem...
Netonix will fix your port for something like $25
*From:* Bill Prince
*Sent:* Friday, March 24, 2017 8:56 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Netonix
Yeah. We accidentally hooked up an AF24 through a Cambium surge
suppressor, and it fragged the port on the Netonix. We were
swapping from something else that had been on the cable, and
completely forgot that it was going through that surge
suppressor. Hard lesson learned.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 3/24/2017 1:27 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
OK, had an exchange with Netonix today. It is just as Matt
Hoppes said. You short out their POE and it will blow the
Ethernet transformer.
I really presumed they had circuitry like Forrest that could
detect and shut down in an over current situation. They do
have poly fuses which are slow to react and may protect it
from a very brief short, but longer shorts will indeed harm
the port feeding the transformer.
So, Netonix is not active POE. I would say that on passive
POE a plain surge suppressor should not be used. I am working
some “non plain” surge suppressors now.... ;-) Stay tuned to
this bat channel and a big thanks to Matt for forcing me to
learn something new. It was painful, but I can do painful
things when I have to.
*From:* Chuck McCown
*Sent:* Friday, March 24, 2017 10:01 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Netonix
tnx
*From:* Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Friday, March 24, 2017 9:47 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Netonix
chris.sisler
( A )
netlinx.net <http://netlinx.net>
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:%28937%29%20552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:%28937%29%20552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Chuck McCown
<ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Anyone know the email for the guy that runs Netonix?
--
Mitch Koep
A Better Wireless
218-851-8689 cell
