A neat product (which we couldn't use around here) would be a 5G 450 AP
with 900MHz OFDM PTP built in. Although you would have to use all the
available 900Mhz spectrum to make it worthwhile.
Perhaps a nLOS 3.65 or LTE PTP combined with 450 AP would work in some
areas.
On 6/8/2018 12:03 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
Yeah, "under the canopy" doesn't really happen around here, but
getting into the middle of the trees does work in some cases... if we
can get a point-to-point link working to one house in the middle of a
subdivision, you can often get LOS to several other houses and nLOS
will sometimes even work with 5ghz at that kind of range.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com
<mailto:bigd...@gmail.com>> wrote:
And in bands outside of 5GHz as well. I don't think there is such
a thing as "under the canopy" around here. When you're in the
trees, you're in the trees.
900 in a lite configuration would be ideal for us.
-Steve D
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 7:05 AM Matt <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com
<mailto:matt.mailingli...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Why not just make a PMP450i lite connectorized AP?
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Matt Mangriotis
<matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com
<mailto:matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com>> wrote:
> Very good question George…
>
>
>
> I am trying to gauge interest. Some folks would prefer that
they are using
> the same equipment throughout the network, and we don’t
really have an
> option right now for a lower priced (shorter range) but high
throughput
> extension of the network, but still a 450. Same SMs, etc…
>
>
>
> Really wondering if many folks can’t complete a certain
percentage of
> installs due to obstructions (foliage) using 5 GHz, but
could utilize an
> “under the canopy” type of solution to light up a
neighborhood. Is that a
> really common situation? How common?
>
>
>
> Any feedback is welcome, and I value your guys’ opinions
(more than some
> others)…
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> On Behalf Of George Skorup
> Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 9:48 PM
> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Subject: [ External ] Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Networks MicroPOP
survey
>
>
>
> Ok, I guess I have to be the one to say this. Why would we
want a 450-based
> micro-POP product when we have ePMP? Just askin'.
>
> On 6/7/2018 10:29 AM, Matt Mangriotis wrote:
>
> I would really like to get your opinions on this topic�
would a 450 device
> like this help you in your network?
>
> �
>
> Now�s you chance to comment and help direct us!
>
> �
>
> Please fill out the short survey and add any other info
you�d like.�
> It�s only 16 questions.
>
> �
>
> Matt
>
> �
>
> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> On Behalf Of Ray Savich
> Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 10:08 AM
> To: 'af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>' <af@afmug.com
<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
> Subject [AFMUG] Cambium Networks MicroPOP survey
>
> �
>
> Add your input to the Cambium Networks MicroPOP survey.
>
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CambiumMicroPOP
<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CambiumMicroPOP>
>
> �
>
> �
>
> Join the Conversation
>
> Cambium Networks Community Forum
>
> �
>
>
