I am about to put up an AF11FX dual polarity 80 MHz licensed path in the near future, and will be doing exhaustive tests on it (RFC2544 + various layer 3 tests/iperf, etc). Will be sure to post the results. As the relatively short 13 km distance it's going it will be a solid 1024QAM link.
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: > Yes, but I've actually yet to have someone verify that. Another Radio > vendor has told me that testing the AF11x on the bench they can only get to > half the advertised throughput. Others on this list claim they have heard > they are only good for 400-500mb, but nobody that I've seen yet has > conclusive proof. The people I've talked to to Offlist that have installed > them have never actually run any throughput testing. > > On 5/25/2017 7:59 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: > > I think the throughput should exactly match the ubnt datasheet claim and > what the frequency coordinator for your link says it will do. It would be > directly related to channel size and one or two polarities. In a H&V 80 MHz > FDD licensed configuration it actually uses a linear 56 MHz channel in each > polarity, each way, which I believe results in a 630 Mbps full duplex > link. > > That's assuming a properly installed link that has the right RSL on each > end to be in 1024QAM mode 99.9%+ of the time of course. > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote: > >> Have you run BW tests on it? what kind of throughput are you 'really' >> seeing? >> >> What Channel size Mimo/siso etc. >> >> On 5/25/2017 7:42 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: >> >> We have one up... other than some very ugly issues right after we put it >> up (which was apparently a bug in the firmware they shipped with... >> upgrading to the latest beta firmware fixed it), it has been working >> perfectly, and I haven't touched it since. >> >> The AF11 is certainly worth a look in my opinion, but it all depends on >> what you need it to do. >> >> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Jon Langeler < >> <jon-ispli...@michwave.net>jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote: >> >>> Ignoring a few software bugs and delayed fixes, it's good for '2nd >>> string' links. If this is for high priority link, I'd try SIAE or Cambium. >>> >>> Jon Langeler >>> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >>> >>> >>> On May 25, 2017, at 2:46 PM, SmarterBroadband < <li...@sbb.net> >>> li...@sbb.net> wrote: >>> >>> We are looking to add some more Licensed Links to our network. >>> >>> >>> >>> Does anyone actually have the AF11 in service. Is it worth a look? How >>> is it performing for you? Any issues? >>> >>> >>> >>> Just not sure if it is worth considering or should I be looking at >>> existing companied like; >>> >>> >>> >>> Exalt ? >>> >>> Dragonwave ? >>> >>> SAIE ? >>> >>> >>> >>> Or newer ones like >>> >>> >>> >>> Alcoma >>> >>> Cablefree FOR3 >>> >>> >>> >>> Anyone tried the last two? >>> >>> >>> >>> Just looking for best bang for the buck in non core ring usage. >>> >>> >> >> > >
