how else would you suggest building a tower?!?! friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to back > frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction... > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote: > > actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the clients > > evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take advantage of the > MU-MIMO. > > > > we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is 64qam). > > > > it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing with regular > > 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would need 3 > APs > > each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used. > > > > win, win, win. > > > > but i also wouldn't install them at every tower. > > > > 2 cents > > > > -sean > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients are > >> short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is costly. > >> > >> It's a niche of a niche. > >> > >> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at all, I'm > >> just saying it's not the second coming like people make it out to be.) > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote: > >> > Then by all means don’t deploy any 450m’s josh. Geeze dude take a > chill > >> > pill. > >> > > >> > I’m just stating what I have on my network in a real world > environment, > >> > earning me real world dollars and conserving much needed spectrum. > >> > > >> > It’s not the right tool for every situation, BUT under the right > >> > conditions > >> > the 450m delivers. > >> > > >> > Cheers bud > >> > > >> > -sean > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:46 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Further note: You can see I did those calcs at 1024QAM, so reduce > that > >> >> down the 256QAM for closer to real numbers :) > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Josh Reynolds < > j...@kyneticwifi.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > Let's break this down a bit. > >> >> > > >> >> > Firstly, what outdoor PTMP platform is really using WiFi anymore? > >> >> > *shakes head* > >> >> > > >> >> > Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread apart > >> >> > (physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into almost the same > >> >> > timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one client that ends up in > >> >> > the > >> >> > same window as other clients reduces the overall capacity of the AP > >> >> > (like in many other situations). It can, in some situations, lead > to > >> >> > cumulative transfer windows where overall throughput ends up > getting > >> >> > reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up taking > a > >> >> > hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings of MU-MIMO, not > >> >> > even taking into account "massive" systems like 14x14 that end up > >> >> > costing quite a bit in overall power budget due to the number of > >> >> > elements, further meaning that your range is severely limited in a > >> >> > system like this... so only decent in very dense situations. > That's a > >> >> > unique niche. > >> >> > > >> >> > So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern system > >> >> > (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2). > >> >> > > >> >> > 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually > streaming. > >> >> > Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps for > >> >> > gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets sent in > >> >> > most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous. Let's > >> >> > take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's assume > that > >> >> > maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and > >> >> > that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x > >> >> > 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to > work > >> >> > out! > >> >> > > >> >> > Soo.... 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very > roughly. > >> >> > If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an 80/20 > >> >> > and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system. > >> >> > > >> >> > 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up > >> >> > 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up > >> >> > > >> >> > Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp, > >> >> > giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives > >> >> > you > >> >> > 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming. > >> >> > > >> >> > That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and > >> >> > subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a > "perfect > >> >> > storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take > >> >> > advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be > >> >> > hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available, > or > >> >> > just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 > >> >> > Mimosas > >> >> > or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible > >> >> > subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range > >> >> > (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly > reduced > >> >> > cost. > >> >> > > >> >> > Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral > >> >> > efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx > >> >> > chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per > client > >> >> > snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will > >> >> > always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps > service > >> >> >> to > >> >> >> all > >> >> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a > >> >> >> sweat is > >> >> >> worth every penny. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for > >> >> >> every > >> >> >> deployment. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 2 cents > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -sean > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds > >> >> >> <j...@kyneticwifi.com> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that > >> >> >>> great. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions > in > >> >> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett < > dmmoff...@gmail.com> > >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't. > >> >> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing......ePMP will > probably > >> >> >>> > never > >> >> >>> > have > >> >> >>> > something like that. > >> >> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements > >> >> >>> > over > >> >> >>> > these > >> >> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the > >> >> >>> > value > >> >> >>> > it > >> >> >>> > provides. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > ------ Original Message ------ > >> >> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> > >> >> >>> > To: af@afmug.com > >> >> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM > >> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell > >> >> >>> > to > >> >> >>> > those > >> >> >>> > 25? > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > Packetflux GPS sync. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > From: Joe Novak > >> >> >>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM > >> >> >>> > To: af@afmug.com > >> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way > >> >> >>> > since > >> >> >>> > the > >> >> >>> > early > >> >> >>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people > are > >> >> >>> > having > >> >> >>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have > this > >> >> >>> > problem > >> >> >>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid > though. > >> >> >>> > That is > >> >> >>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I > don't > >> >> >>> > exactly > >> >> >>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting > right > >> >> >>> > around > >> >> >>> > 25 > >> >> >>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit > of > >> >> >>> > room. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza > >> >> >>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> > >> >> >>> > wrote: > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on > AFx5s...On > >> >> >>> >> Rockets > >> >> >>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on > >> >> >>> >> APs > >> >> >>> >> and > >> >> >>> >> on > >> >> >>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since > >> >> >>> >> August of > >> >> >>> >> 2017 > >> >> >>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to > >> >> >>> >> change > >> >> >>> >> them > >> >> >>> >> since. Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on > >> >> >>> >> issues. > >> >> >>> >> The > >> >> >>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and > >> >> >>> >> works > >> >> >>> >> with > >> >> >>> >> us as > >> >> >>> >> well. Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but > >> >> >>> >> still > >> >> >>> >> no > >> >> >>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as > well. > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> Jaime Solorza > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" > >> >> >>> >> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> > >> >> >>> >> wrote: > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft > away...all > >> >> >>> >>> other > >> >> >>> >>> radios within 4 mile radius... > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> Jaime Solorza > >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >>> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> > >> >> >>> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> All on the same tower, right? > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza > >> >> >>> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM > >> >> >>> >>>> To: Animal Farm > >> >> >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz > >> >> >>> >>>> off > >> >> >>> >>>> 4 > >> >> >>> >>>> APs > >> >> >>> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no > issues... > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> Jaime Solorza > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> > >> >> >>> >>>> wrote: > >> >> >>> >>>>> > >> >> >>> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp. He > is > >> >> >>> >>>>> about > >> >> >>> >>>>> 5.5 > >> >> >>> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection. I would suggest AF5X to > >> >> >>> >>>>> him > >> >> >>> >>>>> but > >> >> >>> >>>>> he is > >> >> >>> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. > >> >> >>> >>>>> > >> >> >>> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access > points > >> >> >>> >>>>> peacefully > >> >> >>> >>>>> coexist on a tower? > >> >> >>> >>>>> Very rural area. Not expecting much interference other > than > >> >> >>> >>>>> home > >> >> >>> >>>>> routers. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >
