Re: [AFMUG] OT One bad cell kills Tesla

[George Skorup]

I figured you'd pick on me. 😆

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020, 8:40 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> How are you going to roll coal in that?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
>
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> --
> *From: *"George Skorup" 
> *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
> *Sent: *Friday, November 27, 2020 8:24:01 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT One bad cell kills Tesla
>
> I went the other way a couple months ago and got a diesel. Me and three
> others got plowed by a semi driver not paying attention doing about 40mph
> while we were all basically stopped in a construction zone. I was last in
> line. Enough damage that my insurance co totaled my 2011 Silverado and cut
> a check. Opted for the new 2020 Silverado with the 3.0 Duramax. The 30 MPG
> ain't bad. It doesn't have the diesel stank or the black clouds. Is that
> like a hipster diesel? Maybe not Murica enough either?
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] OT One bad cell kills Tesla

[George Skorup]

I went the other way a couple months ago and got a diesel. Me and three
others got plowed by a semi driver not paying attention doing about 40mph
while we were all basically stopped in a construction zone. I was last in
line. Enough damage that my insurance co totaled my 2011 Silverado and cut
a check. Opted for the new 2020 Silverado with the 3.0 Duramax. The 30 MPG
ain't bad. It doesn't have the diesel stank or the black clouds. Is that
like a hipster diesel? Maybe not Murica enough either?
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Virtual machines

[George Skorup]

I played around with Hyper-V Server a bit and wasn't real thrilled with it.
That was a couple years ago now though.

I switched to XCP-ng about a year ago after Citrix crippled XenServer.
Installed it right over the top on a couple nodes and had zero issues. All
the bells and whistles back without the cost. XenOrchestra installed from
sources does more than enough for me. XenOrchestra updater/installer
project on GitHub makes it stupid simple.

On Sun, Sep 27, 2020, 12:13 PM Erich Kaiser 
wrote:

> Nothing wrong with Hyper-v, been running it for 3 yrs, no issues.   If i
> did it over i would probably go with VMWare.
>
>
> Erich Kaiser
> North Central Tower
> er...@northcentraltower.com
> Office: 815-570-3101
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 9:56 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> I know of a couple people using Hyper-V. I just don't trust Microsoft to
>> be my hypervisor. That may be ildeserved, but it is what it is.
>>
>> Proxmox is based on Debian, so quite stable and supports both VMs and
>> containers.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Ken Hohhof" 
>> *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
>> *Sent: *Sunday, September 27, 2020 9:48:14 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Virtual machines
>>
>> I never hear anyone say they are using Hyper-V, I assume that is not even
>> in the running unless you are a hardcore Microsoft shop or want to host in
>> the Azure cloud?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>> *Sent:* Sunday, September 27, 2020 9:40 AM
>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Virtual machines
>>
>>
>>
>> Proxmox for sure. I've used Proxmox for 10+ years and VMWare for probably
>> 8 years. I'm phasing out VMWare in favor of Proxmox.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Lewis Bergman" 
>> *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
>> *Sent: *Sunday, September 27, 2020 9:27:22 AM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] Virtual machines
>>
>> I have decided I needed to get on the VM train. I know, I am only 15
>> years behind. Honestly, till now I haven't had a compelling reason.
>>
>>
>>
>> I want something that will at least do some monitoring of VM's, backups,
>> snapshots, etc. Managed upgrading would be great but not as big a priority
>> for me (at least I don't think so).
>>
>>
>>
>> Since I don't know what I don't know, I am asking the experienced crowd.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems the two real choices are VMWare and Zen. Are there others?
>> Commercial support seems nice, is it worth paying for? What I will run is
>> important for sure.
>>
>>
>>
>> I spent a few hours last night and I more confused now than when I
>> started.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] -48 noob questions (mikrotik)

[George Skorup]

820C/S most definitely tie DC plug + to chassis. Believe me. I smoked a
RackInjector PDU board not paying attention. POE into those is floating.
They'll basically take any 4pr scheme you throw at it. I have a couple
820S's running on AirFiber POE bricks.

Yes, I still do red for +24, orange for +48 and blue for -48 at mixed
sites. Just makes sense to me. A wise man will use a labeler too. Which I
*always* do. [sarcasm emoji]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:25 PM Mathew Howard  wrote:

> hmm... that's an interesting point about the direct DC input... I suppose
> it would be possible to have POE floating and the direct DC input tied to
> ground. Without thinking about it too much, it seems to me that would
> probably require some somewhat complicated circuitry that most likely isn't
> there though...
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:01 AM Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> I can’t comment specifically on DC direct power to an Aviat radio.  Most
>> 802.3 POE powered radios are in fact floating and don’t care, but I’m not
>> sure about the direct DC input.
>>
>>
>>
>> As far as does one radio dictate how you power everything else?  No, but
>> it does complicate things.  I have a site that was built with Eltek -48 VDC
>> because we had a Purewave WiMax basestation which required -48V DC direct
>> power.  We had several things like Mikrotik, Packetflux, Cambium and
>> Ubiquiti that needed +24, so we have a Traco DC-DC converted that generates
>> +24 from the -48  Actually it just generates 24 volts floating and we
>> connect the – side to ground.  Then we got rid of the Purewave and replaced
>> it with Cambiumj 450i which needs +48 (or +56), so we added a Mean Well
>> DC-DC converter to give us +48.  So now we have -48, +24 and +48 in the
>> same enclosure, each with their own bank of dual level DIN rail fuses for
>> distribution.  The DC-DC converters are relatively small DIN rail supplies,
>> so all of this takes us less room than it sounds like.
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually we now feed this site with an 11 GHz PTP820S, and we used one of
>> the DC powered POE injectors that can take + or – 24 or 48 volts, connected
>> to the Eltek -48V.  Could have also used a Cat6-POE-APC off the +48V rail.
>> At some point we will probably switch to a +48V battery system since we
>> don’t specifically need -48 anymore.  But this should demonstrate that you
>> can have all sorts of DC voltages at a site, some with the + side connected
>> to ground, some with the – side connected to ground.  You just need to keep
>> your documentation straight.  The most complicated thing is probably
>> choosing wire colors.  I use a lot of red/black zip cord so I’ve just
>> accepted that red is + and black is – and you can’t make assumptions about
>> which side is grounded.  You could make a different decision and red is
>> always hot and black is always ground.  Or don’t use zip cord and buy lots
>> of colors of wire.  For awhile I was doing stuff like blue was -48 and red
>> was +24 and yellow was +48 and orange was from the charger to the batteries
>> and it got really confusing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Josh Baird
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 21, 2020 10:07 AM
>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] -48 noob questions (mikrotik)
>>
>>
>>
>> I run WTM4200's off of +48VDC plants.  Reach out to Ken Ruppel if you
>> want/need more details.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:05 AM Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>>
>> These are wtm4200. He told me the connector in the radio bonds + to
>> ground at the radio. Could be wrong. I'm outside my wheelhouse anyway with
>> this being our first direct dc radios.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020, 10:00 AM Josh Baird  wrote:
>>
>> I should have said -- at least the WTM4200 and WTM4800, both of which I
>> have used.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 10:59 AM Josh Baird  wrote:
>>
>> Aviat radios don't bond + or - to the chassis.  You can run them at
>> -48VDC or +48VDC.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 10:45 AM Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>>
>> So, like on these aviats, my contractor says they're -48v, but the
>> connector in the radio bonds to ground. Does that mean my whole site has to
>> have -48v or just radios powered by that particular psu?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020, 8:59 AM Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>> Now if we could get the manufacturers to be less secretive about their
>> POE schemes.  They mostly want you to use their POE device and don’t want
>> to document the pinouts or explain if it matters which side is referenced
>> to ground.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mostly I find that using a Cat6-POE-APC with the jumpers as set at the
>> factory and + and – hooked up per the markings works.  Which is basically
>> 802.3at.  It works with the – side grounded, I suspect it would also work
>> with the + side grounded, or neither.  I was hesitant to use this on a
>> PTP820 but it works fine.  I don’t know why they make their POE scheme
>> sound so mysterious.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* AF  *On Behalf

[AFMUG] RackInjector Reboot

[George Skorup]

Got a RackInjector that's acting weird. I believe it's on the latest
version. But ICMP latency to it is all over the place (vs others that
respond 1ms or less continuously). HTTP responds-ish, sometimes. Pages
won't fully load. Then it will eventually not respond at all. Give it a
while and it will half respond again. But SNMP seems fine, at least
get/walk. I looked through the MIB and couldn't find anything that stood
out for reboot. Am I just not finding the correct OID, or is a reboot via
SNMP not possible? I would rather not like to send someone to power cycle
it, not to mention all of the gear powered by it.
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] [ External ] Re: Cambium Webinar tomorrow

[George Skorup]

Cambium is sooo *NOT* Motorola anymore. And I don't think it's fair for us
to keep throwing that in their face. There's still some Motorola technical
DNA, and that is good. Just my opinion.

*George Skorup*
*Network Engineer*
(219)326-5252 x7105
<https://www.surfbroadband.com/>


On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:02 PM Matt Mangriotis via AF 
wrote:

> Chuck – In all seriousness, we don’t mean to offend, knock off or breach
> any kind of trust...
>
>
>
> This *is* the WISPAmerica Animal Farm session (a direct descendant of
> yours and Jaime’s creation).
>
>
>
> Everyone is welcome. If you’ve not attended the last couple of years, I
> always give you credit during my introduction.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of * Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2020 11:53 AM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [ External ] Re: Cambium Webinar tomorrow
>
>
>
> I got a big angry lawyer letter for sharing a Moto/Cambium firmware link.
> We should start a club :)
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:51 AM  wrote:
>
> It was first held at the Airport Hilton, it was called AnimalFarm and that
> suggestion came from Jaime.  It was later held at several other venues.
> It
> was only the latter days where it was held at the fairpark.
>
> Motorola expressly and specifically disavowed any connection with
> AnimalFarm
> but they did send people.  I tried to get Mot to sponsor a users group
> meeting during the Tucson channel partner meetings and Mot said legally
> there were too many problems.
>
> So, I took it upon myself to rent the conference room and invite everyone
> to
> come.  We were the pigs taking over the farm from the farmer.  Thus
> AnimalFarm.  And thus trademarked by WB Manufacturing as it was our trade
> show and our main means of marketing each year.
>
> But not the first time I have been knocked off by Mot and its
> descendants...
> At least WispAmerica asked permission...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Mangriotis via AF
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 8:10 AM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
> Cc: Matt Mangriotis
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ External ] Re: Cambium Webinar tomorrow
>
> Someone??? It's me, Chuck!
>
> We've called it Animal Farm since it was held at the Utah State
> Fairpark...
> you used to join us and speak about the history, etc. I miss that.
>
> In any case, we've virtualized it this year. As such, we'll record it and
> post it to our forum.
>
> If you'd like to attend, please visit our website to see what we're doing
> to
> virualize the WISPAmerica experience (and sign up to attend):
> https://www.cambiumnetworks.com/wispamerica2020/
> <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cambiumnetworks.com%2Fwispamerica2020%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Caaa905dc6c194564888108d7ca93da8f%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637200608703498417&sdata=9aMmbQ7Sq017MKN782OJWF7xYovLBFDOC665hqZwxZo%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Thanks!
> Matt
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 8:49 AM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> Subject: [ External ] Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Webinar tomorrow
>
> Really, someone is using my AnimalFarm trademark without permission?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 17, 2020, at 2:32 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account)
> >  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > I just registered for the cambium "Animal Farm" webinar, however it's at
> 8
> > central which is 7am my time.
> >
> > Does anyone know if they record these for later playback?   I'm not
> > particularly thrilled about getting up that early, considering I've been
> > on the "go to bed at 4am" schedule recently.
> >
> > --
> > - Forrest
> > --
> > AF mailing list
> > AF@af.afmug.com
> >
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Ca0675d866427407b197d08d7ca7a1067%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637200497932895210&sdata=4Hgi24aCEX3tkp0wUwn9v8B%2F8o7TMubufYR%2FfiQPQM0%3D&reserved=0
> <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Caaa905dc6c194564888108d7ca93

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE

[George Skorup]

About 70. Regularly hits 100Mbps DL. 20MHz channel. Surprisingly only 3 or
4 SMs worse than 6X MIMO-B downlink.

450m is definitely worth the cost where you have the density. And it's a
night/day difference especially when you upgrade from regular ol 450 APs.

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 6:38 PM Josh Baird  wrote:

> Do tell.  Number of SM's and throughput for the sector?!
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 5:22 PM George Skorup 
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, RackInjetor w/ PDU card.
>>
>> There are, umm, a *lot* of SMs on that sector which is why it's pulling
>> 125-140 watts. And man is that MU-MIMO puttin in work.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:09 PM Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> is that the packetflux interface?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:05 PM George Skorup 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Better put on your rectifier pants
>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:33 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is also the power consumption issue with the 3 GHz 450m.  Spec
>>>>> sheet says 140W typical.  That’s a lot, 560 watts for 4 sectors.
>>>>> Especially at sites where I only have a 360 watt power supply and 1000
>>>>> watt-hours of batteries.  The 5 GHz 450m I think is less than half the
>>>>> power consumption.  Presumably the difference is the power amps.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Under Part 90 it would have been even more painful to deploy Medusas,
>>>>> since we couldn’t even use the higher xmt power.  All my 3 GHz 450 APs 
>>>>> were
>>>>> deployed over a year ago.  With all the uncertainty over where CBRS was
>>>>> going, whether the mobile guys would totally take it away from us, and
>>>>> whether we would have to do a forklift upgrade of the Cambium equipment, 
>>>>> we
>>>>> really dialed back deployment the past 1-2 years.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Josh Baird
>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 26, 2020 3:13 PM
>>>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are you replacing?  PMP320?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Steve Jones 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>> we are taking the power hit on the 450i for most of our APs for the
>>>>> pricebreak. we have 20 some APs to replace in the next month or so, so 
>>>>> that
>>>>> kind of forces that. Im looking forward to there we have the Medusas along
>>>>> with the Is to see what the performance differences are
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Radabaugh 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Both 450i and 450m can run in CBRS.   Only the Medusa can go to high
>>>>> power.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Jason McKemie <
>>>>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What APs are you using 450M, or 450i as well? I'm wondering if the
>>>>> 450i can do the same power output.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, February 26, 2020, Mark Radabaugh 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not too many.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A few bugs in the beta code for the AP’s, nothing really a show
>>>>> stopper.   SM upload rate limit when in NAT mode appears to be broken, but
>>>>> works properly in bridge mode.   We are seeing AP’s rebooting somewhat
>>>>> randomly on the beta code when NOT running in CBRS - i.e. they have the
>>>>> beta code loaded but are not switched to CBRS operation yet.   I don’t
>>>>> think we have seen any crash reboots on the AP’s with beta code that ARE
>>>>> running in CBRS mode though.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grants / SAS / CNMaestro don’t seem to have many issues.   Things 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE

[George Skorup]

Yes, RackInjetor w/ PDU card.

There are, umm, a *lot* of SMs on that sector which is why it's pulling
125-140 watts. And man is that MU-MIMO puttin in work.

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:09 PM Steve Jones 
wrote:

> is that the packetflux interface?
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:05 PM George Skorup 
> wrote:
>
>> Better put on your rectifier pants
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:33 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>>> There is also the power consumption issue with the 3 GHz 450m.  Spec
>>> sheet says 140W typical.  That’s a lot, 560 watts for 4 sectors.
>>> Especially at sites where I only have a 360 watt power supply and 1000
>>> watt-hours of batteries.  The 5 GHz 450m I think is less than half the
>>> power consumption.  Presumably the difference is the power amps.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Under Part 90 it would have been even more painful to deploy Medusas,
>>> since we couldn’t even use the higher xmt power.  All my 3 GHz 450 APs were
>>> deployed over a year ago.  With all the uncertainty over where CBRS was
>>> going, whether the mobile guys would totally take it away from us, and
>>> whether we would have to do a forklift upgrade of the Cambium equipment, we
>>> really dialed back deployment the past 1-2 years.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Josh Baird
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 26, 2020 3:13 PM
>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What are you replacing?  PMP320?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Steve Jones 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> we are taking the power hit on the 450i for most of our APs for the
>>> pricebreak. we have 20 some APs to replace in the next month or so, so that
>>> kind of forces that. Im looking forward to there we have the Medusas along
>>> with the Is to see what the performance differences are
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>>>
>>> Both 450i and 450m can run in CBRS.   Only the Medusa can go to high
>>> power.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Jason McKemie <
>>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What APs are you using 450M, or 450i as well? I'm wondering if the 450i
>>> can do the same power output.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, February 26, 2020, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>>>
>>> Not too many.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A few bugs in the beta code for the AP’s, nothing really a show stopper.
>>>   SM upload rate limit when in NAT mode appears to be broken, but works
>>> properly in bridge mode.   We are seeing AP’s rebooting somewhat randomly
>>> on the beta code when NOT running in CBRS - i.e. they have the beta code
>>> loaded but are not switched to CBRS operation yet.   I don’t think we have
>>> seen any crash reboots on the AP’s with beta code that ARE running in CBRS
>>> mode though.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Grants / SAS / CNMaestro don’t seem to have many issues.   Things are
>>> still a bit klunky and having to deal with CPAS more often that I would
>>> expect is a nuisance but it’s functional.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So you're running this CBRS with the open spectrum, right?  Have you
>>> seen any issues in the 2 weeks?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> Suite 1337
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>>>
>>> 30Mhz at +49dBm versus 20Mhz at +40dBm.Some of the improvement in
>>> airtime obviously comes f

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE

[George Skorup]

Better put on your rectifier pants
[image: image.png]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:33 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> There is also the power consumption issue with the 3 GHz 450m.  Spec sheet
> says 140W typical.  That’s a lot, 560 watts for 4 sectors.  Especially at
> sites where I only have a 360 watt power supply and 1000 watt-hours of
> batteries.  The 5 GHz 450m I think is less than half the power
> consumption.  Presumably the difference is the power amps.
>
>
>
> Under Part 90 it would have been even more painful to deploy Medusas,
> since we couldn’t even use the higher xmt power.  All my 3 GHz 450 APs were
> deployed over a year ago.  With all the uncertainty over where CBRS was
> going, whether the mobile guys would totally take it away from us, and
> whether we would have to do a forklift upgrade of the Cambium equipment, we
> really dialed back deployment the past 1-2 years.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Josh Baird
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 26, 2020 3:13 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE
>
>
>
> What are you replacing?  PMP320?
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> we are taking the power hit on the 450i for most of our APs for the
> pricebreak. we have 20 some APs to replace in the next month or so, so that
> kind of forces that. Im looking forward to there we have the Medusas along
> with the Is to see what the performance differences are
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
> Both 450i and 450m can run in CBRS.   Only the Medusa can go to high power.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> What APs are you using 450M, or 450i as well? I'm wondering if the 450i
> can do the same power output.
>
> On Wednesday, February 26, 2020, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
> Not too many.
>
>
>
> A few bugs in the beta code for the AP’s, nothing really a show stopper.
> SM upload rate limit when in NAT mode appears to be broken, but works
> properly in bridge mode.   We are seeing AP’s rebooting somewhat randomly
> on the beta code when NOT running in CBRS - i.e. they have the beta code
> loaded but are not switched to CBRS operation yet.   I don’t think we have
> seen any crash reboots on the AP’s with beta code that ARE running in CBRS
> mode though.
>
>
>
> Grants / SAS / CNMaestro don’t seem to have many issues.   Things are
> still a bit klunky and having to deal with CPAS more often that I would
> expect is a nuisance but it’s functional.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> So you're running this CBRS with the open spectrum, right?  Have you seen
> any issues in the 2 weeks?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> 
> Suite 1337
> 
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
> 30Mhz at +49dBm versus 20Mhz at +40dBm.Some of the improvement in
> airtime obviously comes from the wider channel size but the bigger change
> was the higher power and quieter spectrum moving everyone into 6x/8x
> modulation.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>
>
>
> What's the actual TX power in that case before and after? I thought the
> number I had heard for CBRS was 47db EIRP in a 20mhz channel... although I
> have no idea where that number came from, so it could very well be wrong .
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:26 AM Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
> Way more than 5db, 10dB is more realistic.   This is a typical customer
> off a 450m 3.65 CBRS AP running at full power:
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Even more interesting:
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> This shows frame utilization of the 450m before and after the switch to
> CBRS.   The higher power and cleaner spectrum greatly increased the
> modulation of the customers resulting in greatly reduced airtime
> utilization.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:14 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>
>
>
> It's a 5-6db increase, if I remember correctly, so that could certainly be
> enough to make the difference in a lot of cases.
>
>
>
> Of course there's also the fact that half of the people running Baicells
> radios with sectors are probably already running (illegally) at that power
> level anyway...
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 7:50 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> Is the CBRS power that much higher where a 450 at CBRS power makes up for
> the lack of nLOS capability as compared to LTE on NN?
>
>
>
> Obviously LTE at CBRS power would be that much better, but maybe it's a
> good fit where people need just a little more nLOS capability than 450
> provides and the extra 

Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues

[George Skorup]

Yes. Most sites were tracking either zero or 1-2 GLONASS sats until they
all suddenly came back this afternoon.

GLONASS was not tracking nearly as many sats during the PRN#29 event
either, or we wouldn't have had so many issues. We had many RackInjectors
showing a 2D lock and no timing pulse. 2 GLONASS sats and one GPS sat
tracked intermittently. Same with a handful of ePMP APs that also needed
reboots to clear the GPS error. So much for multi-GNSS fault tolerance.

Why did both of these things happen at the same time? Coincidence or
conspiracy?

On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:18 PM Nate Burke  wrote:

> No user intervention on my part.
>
> Visible satellites returned to normal levels over a few hours this
> morning.   Tracked satellites returned to normal suddenly at 3pm CST
> (21:00 UTC)
>
> Everyone else see something similar?  All my data is from EPMP 1k, 2k,
> 3k radios.  They all did the same thing at the same time.
>
> On 1/1/2020 11:14 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> > Look through this Twitter account and the replies to the tweets for more
> information on yesterday's GPS outage.
> >
> > https://twitter.com/GalileoSats/status/1212337302460080130?s=19
> >
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > Midwest Internet Exchange
> > The Brothers WISP
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Eric Muehleisen 
> > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> > Sent: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 15:17:39 -0600 (CST)
> > Subject: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
> >
> > Anyone else having GPS issues this afternoon? Nearly every tower I have
> > across western Kansas is having GPS issues. Start around 3pm CST.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues

[George Skorup]

...That they want to admit...

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 5:14 PM Brian Webster 
wrote:

> This page lists the US GPS system status, showing nothing out of the
> ordinary from what I can tell.
>
>
>
> https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?Do=constellationStatus
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brian Webster
>
> www.wirelessmapping.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 6:06 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Until we hear something from Forrest, I’m guessing based on which of our
> sites have been  affected that it’s not the Syncinjector/Rackinjector but
> the Syncbox it’s using for GPS, and that the ones affected have the newer
> chip.  I’m guessing since I had a cnPulse affected and that’s the newest
> version of the uGPS, that it also uses the same or similar chip.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *John Babineaux
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:48 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Never mind still happening
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *John Babineaux
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:16 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Looks like its stabilizing for us.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Nate Burke
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:13 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> I only dropped sattelites for 5-10 min (Didn't drop sync because of the
> holdoff timer).  Everything has now been back for about an hour.
>
> All my EPMP radios are reporting happy.
>
> Sync Pipe radios are reporting happy too.
>
> On 12/31/2019 4:08 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> I’ve got a Cambium cnPulse (uGPS) apparently with the same problem, so
> it’s not just Packetflux.  I’m trying the power cycle thing on the cnPulse
> now.  It’s saying 24 sats visible 12 tracked so maybe I’ve got to power
> cycle all of them?  That’s going to be a problem since I’ve got some
> Syncpipe/Syncbox Parasitics that can only be power cycled by being
> physically onsite.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF   *On Behalf
> Of *Ken Hohhof
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:57 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
> 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> I’ve got Packetflux Rackinjectors only seeing GLONASS satellites and no
> 1pps pulse.  I’ve powered the GPS port power off and back on for 2 of them
> and that seemed to make them happy, can’t guarantee yet that actually fixed
> it.
>
>
>
> (this is in Illinois)
>
>
>
> I still have a couple CTMs I need to check, and some APs with standalone
> Syncpipes or Cambium sync devices.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Nate Burke
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:50 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Yes, Native EPMP GPS.
>
> An EPMP 3000 AP lost half it's tracked satellites and has not yet
> recovered.
>
> Isn't a new GPS constellation coming online sometime soon.  China, Russia,
> someone like that.
>
> On 12/31/2019 3:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> Doing native ePMP 1000 GPS?
>
>
> I've heard from others on Facebook reporting CMM4\CMM5 losses as well.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Nate Burke"  
> *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
> 
> *Sent: *Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:39:39 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
> West of Chicago EPMP1000 GPS.  Lots of sites lost satellites/sync.  Now
> they are back seeing about 25% more than they ever have before.
>
> On 12/31/2019 3:35 PM, John Babineaux wrote:
>
> We are seeing it happening with PacketFlux is that true with you all?
> CMMs seem to be stable
>
> 
>
> John Babineaux
>
> *System Administrator*
>
> REACH4 Communications | Website: *www.REACH4Com.com
> *
>
> Phone: 337-783-3436 x105 | Email: *john.babine...@reach4com.com
> *
>
> 927 N Parkerson Ave, Crowley, LA 70526
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *castarritt .
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:30 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass

Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues

[George Skorup]

I don't see a leap second being introduced today. No problems reported at
GPS.gov either. Clearly something triggered a bug in the latest GTop
receivers that Forrest, Cambium and others are using. I'm seeing low SNR
and a lot less tracked GLONASS sats after this event.

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 4:52 PM Matt Hoppes <
mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote:

> I’m going out on a limb and saying this is a software bug with the chip.
> Cambium and packet flux are using.
>
> No cellular issues. No BaiCells issues. No Ubiquiti issues. No Stratum
> issues.
>
> On Dec 31, 2019, at 5:47 PM, John Babineaux 
> wrote:
>
> Never mind still happening
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *John Babineaux
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:16 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Looks like its stabilizing for us.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Nate Burke
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:13 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> I only dropped sattelites for 5-10 min (Didn't drop sync because of the
> holdoff timer).  Everything has now been back for about an hour.
>
> All my EPMP radios are reporting happy.
>
> Sync Pipe radios are reporting happy too.
>
> On 12/31/2019 4:08 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> I’ve got a Cambium cnPulse (uGPS) apparently with the same problem, so
> it’s not just Packetflux.  I’m trying the power cycle thing on the cnPulse
> now.  It’s saying 24 sats visible 12 tracked so maybe I’ve got to power
> cycle all of them?  That’s going to be a problem since I’ve got some
> Syncpipe/Syncbox Parasitics that can only be power cycled by being
> physically onsite.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF   *On Behalf
> Of *Ken Hohhof
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:57 PM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
> 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> I’ve got Packetflux Rackinjectors only seeing GLONASS satellites and no
> 1pps pulse.  I’ve powered the GPS port power off and back on for 2 of them
> and that seemed to make them happy, can’t guarantee yet that actually fixed
> it.
>
>
>
> (this is in Illinois)
>
>
>
> I still have a couple CTMs I need to check, and some APs with standalone
> Syncpipes or Cambium sync devices.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Nate Burke
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:50 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> Yes, Native EPMP GPS.
>
> An EPMP 3000 AP lost half it's tracked satellites and has not yet
> recovered.
>
> Isn't a new GPS constellation coming online sometime soon.  China, Russia,
> someone like that.
>
> On 12/31/2019 3:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> Doing native ePMP 1000 GPS?
>
>
> I've heard from others on Facebook reporting CMM4\CMM5 losses as well.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Nate Burke"  
> *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
> 
> *Sent: *Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:39:39 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
> West of Chicago EPMP1000 GPS.  Lots of sites lost satellites/sync.  Now
> they are back seeing about 25% more than they ever have before.
>
> On 12/31/2019 3:35 PM, John Babineaux wrote:
>
> We are seeing it happening with PacketFlux is that true with you all?
> CMMs seem to be stable
>
> 
>
> John Babineaux
>
> *System Administrator*
>
> REACH4 Communications | Website: *www.REACH4Com.com
> *
>
> Phone: 337-783-3436 x105 | Email: *john.babine...@reach4com.com
> *
>
> 927 N Parkerson Ave, Crowley, LA 70526
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *castarritt .
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 31, 2019 3:30 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mass GPS issues
>
>
>
> We had three APs on three different towers all drop sync at the same time.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 3:26 PM Roland Houin  wrote:
>
> We are seeing an increasing number of ap's not getting sync, now more than
> 50 in the last 25 minutes,
> We're in northern Indiana
>
> roland
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes
> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2019 4:22 PM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mass 

Re: [AFMUG] MTU settings on CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07

[George Skorup]

I'm logged into a Lumina and don't see anything special. I don't think
there are any settings, because it's just a managed switch with a
stated max frame size.

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 9:34 PM Paul McCall  wrote:
>
> Natively, without  any settings?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of George Skorup
> Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 10:32 PM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] MTU settings on CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07
>
> I believe the Lumina supports 9600-byte jumbo frames.
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 8:55 PM Paul McCall  wrote:
> >
> > We have some SAF CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07 that I am wanting to verify 
> > the MTU settings on.  Looking to make sure that the MTU is 2000 or better.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not seeing an option for it in the firmware.  I know this is probably old 
> > firmware but its been running for years so we haven’t messed with it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anybody have insight as to their MTU settings?
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul McCall, President
> >
> > Florida Broadband / PDMNet
> >
> > 658 Old Dixie Highway
> >
> > Vero Beach, FL 32962
> >
> > 772-564-6800
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > AF mailing list
> > AF@af.afmug.com
> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] MTU settings on CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07

[George Skorup]

Nope, bigger.

Up to 4094 concurrent VLAN traffic allows building many port-to-port
networks paths for specific client services;
Jumbo frame size supports up to 9728 bytes, which allows using longer
header info (VLAN, MPLS) and transmitting more useful content and less
headers, thus gaining on total throughput;

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 9:32 PM George Skorup  wrote:
>
> I believe the Lumina supports 9600-byte jumbo frames.
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 8:55 PM Paul McCall  wrote:
> >
> > We have some SAF CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07 that I am wanting to verify 
> > the MTU settings on.  Looking to make sure that the MTU is 2000 or better.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not seeing an option for it in the firmware.  I know this is probably old 
> > firmware but its been running for years so we haven’t messed with it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anybody have insight as to their MTU settings?
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul McCall, President
> >
> > Florida Broadband / PDMNet
> >
> > 658 Old Dixie Highway
> >
> > Vero Beach, FL 32962
> >
> > 772-564-6800
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > AF mailing list
> > AF@af.afmug.com
> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] MTU settings on CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07

[George Skorup]

I believe the Lumina supports 9600-byte jumbo frames.

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 8:55 PM Paul McCall  wrote:
>
> We have some SAF CFIP Lumina FODU - v2.71.07 that I am wanting to verify the 
> MTU settings on.  Looking to make sure that the MTU is 2000 or better.
>
>
>
> Not seeing an option for it in the firmware.  I know this is probably old 
> firmware but its been running for years so we haven’t messed with it.
>
>
>
> Anybody have insight as to their MTU settings?
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Paul McCall, President
>
> Florida Broadband / PDMNet
>
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>
> 772-564-6800
>
>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cable for using Packetflux JR AUX on legacy 450

[George Skorup]

http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-FAQ/Cable-Diagram-for-450i-and-450m-to-UGPS/m-p/52198#U52198


On 6/7/2019 12:58 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
Anyone have the pinouts to make a JR AUX to legacy 450 timing cable?  
We have a 450 with a fritzy gps and only have JR AUX in stock.


Forrest says:

  * Can also be used with earlier radios which have a 6p6c timing port
by using a special cable (documented in the Cambium user guide) to
convert the pinning from the Aux Port pinout to the 6p6c pinout,
although our Syncbox Junior Timing Port version
 may
be easier to use for this application.

--

Carl Peterson

*PORT NETWORKS*

401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553

Baltimore, MD 21202

(410) 637-3707


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] BiDi wavelengths

[George Skorup]

Those Calix 844GE's auto-detect GPON or AE mode when they boot up. Throw 
in splitters and a GPON shelf, mass reboot the subs, then just move 
patch cables. That network is less than 100 customers, so we haven't 
bothered yet.


On 5/30/2019 5:42 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
How will it make a GPON transition easier?  Not saying you're wrong; I 
just don't get it.


On 5/29/2019 5:46 PM, George Skorup wrote:
1310/1490 is the GPON uplink/downlink wavelengths. I have a number of 
those FS modules deployed in Planet switches to talk to Calix 844GE's 
in BiDi AE mode to make it easier to cut over to GPON later.


On 5/29/2019 4:09 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
I'd been buying BiDi's all along that use 1310 and 1550nm (blue and 
yellow).


I just got some pairs that are 1310 and 1490 (blue and purple).

I didn't really know that 1310/1490 was an option until I bought 
them accidentally.  Is there any particular reason to pick 1490 over 
1550?  They're the same price on FS.com.


Thanks,
Adam









--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] BiDi wavelengths

[George Skorup]

1310/1490 is the GPON uplink/downlink wavelengths. I have a number of 
those FS modules deployed in Planet switches to talk to Calix 844GE's in 
BiDi AE mode to make it easier to cut over to GPON later.


On 5/29/2019 4:09 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
I'd been buying BiDi's all along that use 1310 and 1550nm (blue and 
yellow).


I just got some pairs that are 1310 and 1490 (blue and purple).

I didn't really know that 1310/1490 was an option until I bought them 
accidentally.  Is there any particular reason to pick 1490 over 1550?  
They're the same price on FS.com.


Thanks,
Adam




--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

[George Skorup]

No license. 151.82, 151.88, 151.94 were taken from the old business-band 
color/dot system. 11.25khz FM narrow only today. 154.57 and 154.6 are 
allowed 20khz bandwidth, but still FM narrow for voice (not the full 
25khz and FM wide at 5khz deviation). Those two are more or less for 
telemetry and remote control, but that's not a "rule" of the service. 
Stick to FM-N and 11.25k bandwidth on all 5 frequencies and nobody will 
care if you're not being a jackass when you key up.


On 5/17/2019 12:09 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

So, as long as I use the MURS VHF frequencies, no license is needed?
*From:* Brian Webster
*Sent:* Friday, May 17, 2019 8:23 AM
*To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

The cheap HT’s will program up on those channels just fine. Watch the 
per channel requirements. In MURS there are I think two wideband 
channels and three narrow band. The radios have settings for narrow or 
wide. If you are going to be using these for job site specific work 
all over the MURS is the way to go to stay legal. Nice thing is the 
radios you purchased will work for both GMRS and MURS.


Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>

www.Broadband-Mapping.com 

*From:*AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
*Sent:* Friday, May 17, 2019 12:22 AM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

Any FCC ID on the back of the radios under the battery? Search that to 
see what they were certified for. You might not find anything if 
they're marketed to hams (saves China money on the labs and certs). In 
reality, who will know and who will care what model radios you're 
using? Just sayin' (not endorsing).


I did our Part 90 601 a few years ago in about an hour and the $260 or 
whatever it was at the time. WQYC725 if you want to look it up. The 
cheap $15-20 Baofeng 888's or whatever they're called for the field 
guys. You just throw them away when they fall apart.


The other option would be MURS. Falls under Part 95 like GMRS, but no 
license is required. FM-N voice only. Think of it like VHF-FM citizens 
band w/ 2-watts output into gain antennas. It's pretty much dead quiet 
on all 5 channels around me, except for some bursts of telemetry once 
in a while. But there's that Part 95 certified device requirement. I 
see businesses using the Baofengs and similar on MURS all the time, so 
again... who knows/cares.


On 5/16/2019 8:57 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

Can I use these cheap HTs on these frequencies?

*From:*George Skorup

*Sent:*Thursday, May 16, 2019 7:35 PM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

Part 90 business itinerant allows you to do FM-Narrow and/or
digital voice+data (including encryption) across the lower 48 for
practically nothing for 10 years. There are 8 VHF and 8 UHF shared
frequencies. Do the form 601 yourself and pay the FCC. No
coordination required. No GMRS licensing nonsense for employees.

On 5/16/2019 3:16 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

On our community emergency list I think all the people with
call signs use them. At least intermittently. There are a few
people who don't use their call signs. Nobody asks.

bp



  


On 5/16/2019 11:47 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I am gonna try a pair of Baofengs and  a pair of the
Retevis and see how my guys like them.  I got a license so
that will cover family.  I guess I will claim the guys are
adopted if we get busted.  Will probably buy them licenses
as time goes on.

Does anyone really use their callsigns in a legal manner
on GMRS?  My wife and I are used to it being hams for
decades but not sure how well it will go over with the
guys.  I guess telling them it is a $25K and 10 years
penalty might get them to do it.  Seems silly.

*From:*Lewis Bergman

*Sent:*Tuesday, May 7, 2019 7:10 PM

*To:*AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

I would be careful about any of the Chinese radios. I
don't know anything about Ham stuff and they may meet that
are off rules. I know a few of the people that head up
licensing agencies and they say many, like Baofung,
violate FCC rules. Those rules may not apply to you though
so take that for what it is worth.

On Tue, May 7, 2019, 12:15 PM Bill Prince
 wrote:

We use the Baofeng UV-5R with a 15" whip. Using the
available programming software makes them relatively
easy to set up. We ran a radio drill this last weekend
through our new repeater, a

Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

[George Skorup]

Any FCC ID on the back of the radios under the battery? Search that to 
see what they were certified for. You might not find anything if they're 
marketed to hams (saves China money on the labs and certs). In reality, 
who will know and who will care what model radios you're using? Just 
sayin' (not endorsing).


I did our Part 90 601 a few years ago in about an hour and the $260 or 
whatever it was at the time. WQYC725 if you want to look it up. The 
cheap $15-20 Baofeng 888's or whatever they're called for the field 
guys. You just throw them away when they fall apart.


The other option would be MURS. Falls under Part 95 like GMRS, but no 
license is required. FM-N voice only. Think of it like VHF-FM citizens 
band w/ 2-watts output into gain antennas. It's pretty much dead quiet 
on all 5 channels around me, except for some bursts of telemetry once in 
a while. But there's that Part 95 certified device requirement. I see 
businesses using the Baofengs and similar on MURS all the time, so 
again... who knows/cares.


On 5/16/2019 8:57 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

Can I use these cheap HTs on these frequencies?
*From:* George Skorup
*Sent:* Thursday, May 16, 2019 7:35 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

Part 90 business itinerant allows you to do FM-Narrow and/or digital 
voice+data (including encryption) across the lower 48 for practically 
nothing for 10 years. There are 8 VHF and 8 UHF shared frequencies. Do 
the form 601 yourself and pay the FCC. No coordination required. No 
GMRS licensing nonsense for employees.


On 5/16/2019 3:16 PM, Bill Prince wrote:


On our community emergency list I think all the people with call 
signs use them. At least intermittently. There are a few people who 
don't use their call signs. Nobody asks.


bp


On 5/16/2019 11:47 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I am gonna try a pair of Baofengs and  a pair of the Retevis and see 
how my guys like them.  I got a license so that will cover family.  
I guess I will claim the guys are adopted if we get busted.  Will 
probably buy them licenses as time goes on.
Does anyone really use their callsigns in a legal manner on GMRS?  
My wife and I are used to it being hams for decades but not sure how 
well it will go over with the guys.  I guess telling them it is a 
$25K and 10 years penalty might get them to do it.  Seems silly.

*From:* Lewis Bergman
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 7, 2019 7:10 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies
I would be careful about any of the Chinese radios. I don't know 
anything about Ham stuff and they may meet that are off rules. I 
know a few of the people that head up licensing agencies and they 
say many, like Baofung, violate FCC rules. Those rules may not apply 
to you though so take that for what it is worth.

On Tue, May 7, 2019, 12:15 PM Bill Prince  wrote:

We use the Baofeng UV-5R with a 15" whip. Using the available
programming software makes them relatively easy to set up. We
ran a radio drill this last weekend through our new repeater,
and everything seemed to work pretty well. I've got some
concerns about the location the group picked for the repeater,
but overall, not bad at all.

bp


On 5/6/2019 1:22 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

Baofeng are hard to program.  They seem to work ok.


Sent from my iPhone

On May 6, 2019, at 2:09 PM, Brian Webster
 wrote:


Technically you are supposed to only use radios on GMRS that
have FCC type certification for GMRS service. Some will say
that part 90 certified UHF radios are allowed to be used in
GMRS, I recall that rule was only for radios that were
certified part 90 before the part 95A (I think that’s the
section for GMRS) was set up as a requirement. Now if you
aren’t so concerned about that certification use these. I have
quite a few various Chinese radios and I have never heard of
this brand, so personally at that price I would go with a more
known Chinese brand such as Baofeng or Woxoun. Since there are
actually still wide band GMRS channels (not the splinter
channels for portable to portable comms only), I would shop
around for some real radios such as Motorola UHF portables
that will be more durable. You should be able to get the old
wide band versions cheap. Likely will need new batteries and
maybe antennas but they should last. Commercial radio services
are all narrow band now so wide band only radios are no longer
legal in those services. Sometimes you can find a nice deal on
a set in a gang charger. If you do look at any particular
models ping me off list and I can let you know which models
are good and bad to use. I can point you in the right
direction for programming and such as well.

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>

  

Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

[George Skorup]

Part 90 business itinerant allows you to do FM-Narrow and/or digital
voice+data (including encryption) across the lower 48 for practically
nothing for 10 years. There are 8 VHF and 8 UHF shared frequencies. Do the
form 601 yourself and pay the FCC. No coordination required. No GMRS
licensing nonsense for employees.
On 5/16/2019 3:16 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

On our community emergency list I think all the people with call signs use
them. At least intermittently. There are a few people who don't use their
call signs. Nobody asks.


bp



On 5/16/2019 11:47 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I am gonna try a pair of Baofengs and  a pair of the Retevis and see how my
guys like them.  I got a license so that will cover family.  I guess I will
claim the guys are adopted if we get busted.  Will probably buy them
licenses as time goes on.

Does anyone really use their callsigns in a legal manner on GMRS?  My wife
and I are used to it being hams for decades but not sure how well it will
go over with the guys.  I guess telling them it is a $25K and 10 years
penalty might get them to do it.  Seems silly.

*From:* Lewis Bergman
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 7, 2019 7:10 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies

I would be careful about any of the Chinese radios. I don't know anything
about Ham stuff and they may meet that are off rules. I know a few of the
people that head up licensing agencies and they say many, like Baofung,
violate FCC rules. Those rules may not apply to you though so take that for
what it is worth.

On Tue, May 7, 2019, 12:15 PM Bill Prince  wrote:

> We use the Baofeng UV-5R with a 15" whip. Using the available programming
> software makes them relatively easy to set up. We ran a radio drill this
> last weekend through our new repeater, and everything seemed to work pretty
> well. I've got some concerns about the location the group picked for the
> repeater, but overall, not bad at all.
>
>
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 5/6/2019 1:22 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>
> Baofeng are hard to program.  They seem to work ok.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 6, 2019, at 2:09 PM, Brian Webster 
> wrote:
>
> Technically you are supposed to only use radios on GMRS that have FCC type
> certification for GMRS service. Some will say that part 90 certified UHF
> radios are allowed to be used in GMRS, I recall that rule was only for
> radios that were certified part 90 before the part 95A (I think that’s the
> section for GMRS) was set up as a requirement. Now if you aren’t so
> concerned about that certification use these. I have quite a few various
> Chinese radios and I have never heard of this brand, so personally at that
> price I would go with a more known Chinese brand such as Baofeng or Woxoun.
> Since there are actually still wide band GMRS channels (not the splinter
> channels for portable to portable comms only), I would shop around for some
> real radios such as Motorola UHF portables that will be more durable. You
> should be able to get the old wide band versions cheap. Likely will need
> new batteries and maybe antennas but they should last. Commercial radio
> services are all narrow band now so wide band only radios are no longer
> legal in those services. Sometimes you can find a nice deal on a set in a
> gang charger. If you do look at any particular models ping me off list and
> I can let you know which models are good and bad to use. I can point you in
> the right direction for programming and such as well.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
>
> Brian Webster
>
> www.wirelessmapping.com
>
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>
>
>
> *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
> *Sent:* Monday, May 06, 2019 3:08 PM
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Hanoi talkies
>
>
>
> Hanoi handi potatoe potato
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On May 6, 2019, at 1:06 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
>
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Retevis-Radios-Range-Scrambler-Speaker/dp/B00PVQ5LO8/ref=asc_df_B00PVQ5LO8/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312039479427&hvpos=1o1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=15843251035210015126&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1013962&hvtargid=pla-569078696569&psc=1
>
>
>
>
>
> Gmrs?  Anyone know this radio?  I had it recommended to me this morning.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
--
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Compact rack injector?

[George Skorup]

Was the 12-port DIN PIPS scrapped? I would still really like to see that 
for existing smaller cabinets.
An 8-port injector module + 4-port DIN PIPS + fuse blocks is a lot of 
wiring and takes up quite a bit of space. And then I've got only 4 ports 
of Canopy Sync. So a 12-port PIPS would be great.


On 10/3/2018 8:40 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

I'm a bit confused

We've been shipping web-enabled cambium-compatible sync products in 
the DIN rail form factor for years.   It's called a SiteMonitor base 
unit  in combination with one or more powerinjector+sync products (and 
the SyncInjectors before them).  All a RackInjector is is the 
powerinjector+sync product in combination with what will become the 
Sitemonitor Base Unit III hardware.  But you don't get any real 
meaningful functionality difference between the 
been-shipping-for-years din mount product and a RackInjector other 
than the prettier web interface and a different form factor.  Heck, 
until just recently the RackInjector didn't have SNMP and the older 
hardware did.


The reason why I asked what product you were referring to is the only 
shortcoming of the din rail form factor has been the lack of 
cambium-style sync such as is used by the 450i/450m.  We launched that 
hardware in the RackInjector form factor because we knew we would 
need some more engineering work to be done to be able to fit it back 
in the power injector case.   We also wanted to make sure it could 
work standalone (without a base unit) and run off of either + or - 
supplies.   If you sniff around on the PacketFlux website over the 
next few days I have a feeling you'll find a cambium sync version of 
the PowerInjector which appears sometime shortly before WISPAPALOOZA, 
with shipments starting 30-45 days after.


The SiteMonitor III is going to be a while later.   We have 2 
additional updated products launching at WISPAPALOOZA, all of which 
are a result of the engineering which was done for the above product.  
  Specifically the SiteMontior single port din rail mount injector and 
the 5 channel PDU are both now polarity agnostic.   There might be 
another couple of products which come out in short succession 
afterwards, depending on how testing on prototype boards goes.     But 
this has all taken time away from the Base III, which sort of has been 
put on the back burner until we can clear these other products out.



--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Long Narrow Batteries

[George Skorup]

Not sure about a proper term, but typically large front-terminal 
batteries like that are designed for telco applications. The idea is to 
create a 48 volt bank easily with linking bars between them. Four will 
fit side-by-side on a battery shelf in a standard 19" rack. And even 
larger ones for standard 23" racking.


Interstate, Deka, and many other mfgs. Probably going to order some Deka 
Unigy 12AVR100-ET for my next site rebuild with a rectifier.


On 6/25/2018 12:44 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

Yeah that's the stuff.  Is there a proper term for that form factor?

-Adam


-- Original Message --
From: "Cassidy B. Larson" mailto:c...@infowest.com>>
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" >

Sent: 6/25/2018 1:25:20 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Long Narrow Batteries


How about:

https://tinyurl.com/ybzhdchr

The vendor has some other ones similar form factor, higher AH.



On Jun 25, 2018, at 11:17 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


I'm looking for stuff like this:
https://www.alpha.ca/solutions/solutions-alpha-catalog/batteries/batteries/item/alphacell-195-gxl-ft

The long narrow batteries seem like they would fit nicely in the 
bottom of a cabinet.  Front terminals should make installation and 
service easier.
I'm not looking for Gel specifically, just the Alpha ones happen to 
be gel.


What other sources are there besides Alpha?

Thanks,
Adam


--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com







-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] PacketFlux CambiumSync

[George Skorup]

Still on my wish list...

12-port DIN PIPS, the new hardware with -48 support would be great

Something I really want is a telemetry card for the RackInjector. Couple 
relays (could even be n/c only), a shunt input or two, a voltage monitor 
or two, and 3 or 4 switch inputs.


4, 5 or even 6ch PDU card w/ -48 support for the RackInjector would also 
be nice, and might make sense for it to have its own master input?


On 6/21/2018 9:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

Actually good timing on this question

Yes, there are plans.   Let me explain:

In the rackinjector, both the cambium sync and the polarity agnostic 
cards will pass through -48VDC just fine, and the 450i/450m's are fine 
with -48V.  This would permit you to skip having a big DC-DC converter 
to power these radios from a -48VDC source.   However, the existing 
(shipping in the past) control electronics in the rackinjector needs 
positive power, so you need to put at least a small DC-DC converter in 
place to power the control electronics from a positive source.  Our 
intent has always been to resolve this shortcoming at some point when 
we figure out a reasonable solution.


When we looked at rolling back the cambium sync technology into the 
din rail form factor, we decided that we really wanted to build an 
injector which didn't rely on positive power - so it could be powered 
from either positive or negative 48 with no requirement of a positive 
source.  So we went to work figuring out how to do this.  Which we 
have now done.


As of now, the rackinjector has a new version of the control board 
which doesn't require a positive power source. For 450i/450m radios, 
feed it positive or negative, it's fine, and will power on.  This 
applies to any control boards which have not yet shipped (we've got 
about a 1-2 week out of stock situation right now while we wait for 
the first batch of the new ones, all of the 'requires positive power' 
boards have been shipped).


Now that is (almost) shipping, I'll be rolling the cambium sync 
technology back into the rackmount form factor, along with the 
technology which allows powering from either negative or positive 
power.   This shouldn't be that long - probably 30-60 days, but 
definitely before the fall wispa show.



On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Matt > wrote:


Are there plans to have a DIN mount device that supports CambiumSync?
The Rackmount is too big to fit in certain places.

-- 
AF mailing list

AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 







-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: 450-900mhz significant latency after 5 SM's on AP

[George Skorup]

Seems related to 
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Low-speed-PMP450-15-1-1-when-connected-6-and-more-SM-ethernet/m-p/76606


On 6/21/2018 8:42 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:


Has anyone seen a huge jump in ping times to 450-900mhz SM's after you 
go beyond 5 SM's on the AP? I am running firmware 15.1 and I am seeing 
this on an AP. Screenshots attached. I can go back down to 5 SM's or 
less and latency goes back to normal.






-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP VLAN question

[George Skorup]

Doing the same. It'll work fine.

Management VLAN Access:
Configure the interface(s) through which the management interface of the 
SM can be accessed, when a Management VLAN is enabled. By default, 
management access is only allowed from the Wireless Interface of the SM.


Basically the same setting as MVID passthrough on a Canopy radio.

On 6/20/2018 10:01 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
Does the management VLAN exist on the ethernet side of a station? For 
example, if I add another AP on the ethernet side of a station, can 
that AP use the same management VLAN?


I know I can add a separate VLAN of course.  I'm just curious.

-Adam





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com