How much total frequency are you using with 12 horns deployed at a site? What does your frequency re-use pattern look like?
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Rory Conaway <r...@triadwireless.net> wrote: > You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as > other products still coming out. > > We always looks at ROI. Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz > 450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting > from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability. I'm also not > convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in terms > of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products are cheap > to upgrade. > > As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA. New 802.11ac chipsets > are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features that will > change how we deploy on towers. RF Elements horns have already done that. > > For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering > 30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K. Even > if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least 1.2Gbps of > download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer average). Need > more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to double that. > What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down significantly > depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more capacity. > > We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120 > degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we needed, > meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees. If we added users that weren't > in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of Mimosa, swapped > out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more APs to expand > coverage . A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in the first 8 months > and 2 users Mimosa. I understand this doesn't work well for tower > deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that are billed by > cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc... which is also > why we rarely use towers. I'd rather find a few lower locations that have > easy access than a single tower but that's not always realistic. > > Rory > > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > > At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon > arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may give > a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at smaller > Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper than 450m > so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might densify at the > direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you could aggregate > them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up there. You only > need to bring 48V DC up to the tower. > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34 > > An: af@afmug.com > > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > > > > I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450. > > > > For greenfield? Probably not. > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup > > <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote: > > > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the > > > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs > > > in the > > same frame. > > > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right > > > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And > > > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need > > > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just > > > another > > tool in the toolbox. > > > > > > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > >> > > >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan" > > >> :) > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> 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. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > > >
