Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Josh Reynolds via Af]

That's fine.

We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable co 
and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... 
without sync.


On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger 
channels, which then need sync.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




*From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel, 
realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P


On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:

you can swap it all out with epmp


On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:

It may work, but it will tank your throughput.

On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:

Has anyone successfully implemented?

�

Jerry


-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer

spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com  




-- 
All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember

that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you.
Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a
reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance
manual, 1925


--
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com



--
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Mike Hammett via Af]

Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here. The 
physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as many bits 
through the air. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Josh Reynolds via Af"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium 

That's fine. 

We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable co and 
clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... without sync. 


On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: 



Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger channels, which 
then need sync. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Josh Reynolds via Af"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium 

Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel, realtime 
airview, and much better selectivity :P 


On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: 



you can swap it all out with epmp 




On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af < af@afmug.com > wrote: 



It may work, but it will tank you r throughput. 


On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote: 




Has anyone successfully implemented? 
� 
Jerry 


-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com 





-- 


All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts 
you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them 
together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- 
IBM maintenance manual, 1925 



-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com 



-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com 

[AFMUG] Transfer switch

[George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af]

Back to my generator and dual service/split building thing. We're going 
to put in a Generac QuietSource gen and a Nexus service transfer switch 
to handle that entire panel for minimal re-wiring. Then I'm going to 
bring a 50A/240 circuit off of that panel over to the other building 
where we have an old individual circuit manual transfer switch that the 
old generator was wired to.


So here's my question. To simplify things, and I only need to transfer 
specific things on the other side, just rip out the old manual transfer 
switch and put in an auto switch with integrated load center. I'm 
wondering if I can use the Generac 50A/12ckt EZ switch that's designed 
to go with their Guardian genset, but it obviously wouldn't be wired to 
a generator. Will that work?

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Caleb Knauer via Af]

If you two kids don't stop fighting I swear to god I'm pulling over this
car and slapping you with my ring hand.

On Saturday, November 22, 2014, Mike Hammett via Af  wrote:

> Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here. The
> physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as many bits
> through the air.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
> That's fine.
>
> We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable co
> and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... without
> sync.
>
>  On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>
> Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger channels,
> which then need sync.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
>  --
> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
> 
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
> Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
> realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P
>
> On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:
>
> you can swap it all out with epmp
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af  > wrote:
>
>>  It may work, but it will tank your throughput.
>>
>>  On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:
>>
>>  Has anyone successfully implemented?
>>
>> �
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>> --
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
>  All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
> parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>
>
> --
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>
>
>
> --
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Chuck Hogg via Af]

We had an implementation of UBNT sync that was less than favorable.  3
links in the same 90 degree plane...it helped slightly, reduced total
throughput, channel management still had to be done, and true Cambium-style
sync was never achieved.  It never worked in 2.4GHz IMO.

Regards,
Chuck

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Caleb Knauer via Af  wrote:

> If you two kids don't stop fighting I swear to god I'm pulling over this
> car and slapping you with my ring hand.
>
>
> On Saturday, November 22, 2014, Mike Hammett via Af  wrote:
>
>> Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here.
>> The physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as many
>> bits through the air.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>
>> That's fine.
>>
>> We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable co
>> and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... without
>> sync.
>>
>>  On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>>
>> Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger channels,
>> which then need sync.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>>  --
>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>
>> Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
>> realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P
>>
>> On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:
>>
>> you can swap it all out with epmp
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  It may work, but it will tank your throughput.
>>>
>>>  On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:
>>>
>>>  Has anyone successfully implemented?
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that
>> the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>>
>>
>> --
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[timothy steele via Af]

Only way to get sync to work on UBNT gear that I have found is the stuff 
bitlomat is working on

—
Sent from Mailbox

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Chuck Hogg via Af  wrote:

> We had an implementation of UBNT sync that was less than favorable.  3
> links in the same 90 degree plane...it helped slightly, reduced total
> throughput, channel management still had to be done, and true Cambium-style
> sync was never achieved.  It never worked in 2.4GHz IMO.
> Regards,
> Chuck
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Caleb Knauer via Af  wrote:
>> If you two kids don't stop fighting I swear to god I'm pulling over this
>> car and slapping you with my ring hand.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, November 22, 2014, Mike Hammett via Af  wrote:
>>
>>> Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here.
>>> The physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as many
>>> bits through the air.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>>
>>> That's fine.
>>>
>>> We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable co
>>> and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... without
>>> sync.
>>>
>>>  On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>>>
>>> Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger channels,
>>> which then need sync.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>  --
>>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>>
>>> Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
>>> realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P
>>>
>>> On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:
>>>
>>> you can swap it all out with epmp
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af 
>>> wrote:
>>>
  It may work, but it will tank your throughput.

  On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:

  Has anyone successfully implemented?

 �

 Jerry


 --
 josh reynolds :: chief information officer
 spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com


>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>>  All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that
>>> the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
>>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
>>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>>> spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com
>>>
>>>
>>>

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Peter Kranz via Af]

Jerry,

I don't think you'll ever be happy with the current non-AC
gear. The hardware airmax on the new AC gear is more promising however, but
the hardware version with GPS sync is not yet available.

 

-Peter

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson via Af
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 2:33 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

 

Has anyone successfully implemented?

 

Jerry

Re: [AFMUG] CNUT for Macintosh

[Gino Villarini via Af]

I run fusion, no issues with cnut or inbox



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr



From: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Friday, November 21, 2014 at 4:29 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CNUT for Macintosh

yes that's what i'm doing but i'd like for more of our office staff to be able 
to access CNUT and installing parallels and keeping windows working properly is 
an arduous task.

much easier to just run a native Mac app (well Java actually) than to fire up 
winblows etc etc.

there's a linux version so i don't see why it'd be difficult to make a mac 
version.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Eric Muehleisen via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
+1. I run CNUT in parallels with coherent mode. Looks just like a MAC window. I 
do the same with Winbox. The MAC ports for Winbox are awful. Very slow and 
buggy.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Stefan Englhardt via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
Or fire up Parallels …


Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag 
von Joe via Af
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. November 2014 20:26
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] CNUT for Macintosh

It would be cheaper if they bought you a netbook with windows and overnight 
shipped it to you.

$200 vs $20,000

And throw in a couple free $20 dollar license keys too!

((ducking))

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett via Af
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 1:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com; 
memb...@wispa.org
Subject: [AFMUG] CNUT for Macintosh

Dear Cambium,

Since CNUT is a Java program and you support the Macintosh with a lot of your 
other software (i.e. link planner) can you make a version of CNUT that runs on 
the Mac???

I know a few years ago someone hacked a version together and it worked so it 
should be possible since it's Java.

Thanks,
sean

Re: [AFMUG] Transfer switch

[Chuck McCown via Af]

Not sure I totally understand the schematic of that panel, but it looks like 
it will  work.

It will transfer on loss of  utility power?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af

Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 6:29 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] Transfer switch

Back to my generator and dual service/split building thing. We're going
to put in a Generac QuietSource gen and a Nexus service transfer switch
to handle that entire panel for minimal re-wiring. Then I'm going to
bring a 50A/240 circuit off of that panel over to the other building
where we have an old individual circuit manual transfer switch that the
old generator was wired to.

So here's my question. To simplify things, and I only need to transfer
specific things on the other side, just rip out the old manual transfer
switch and put in an auto switch with integrated load center. I'm
wondering if I can use the Generac 50A/12ckt EZ switch that's designed
to go with their Guardian genset, but it obviously wouldn't be wired to
a generator. Will that work? 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Paul McCall via Af]

For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
Everything is OSPF but logically...

Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
devices) is "fed" by...
Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 
Ghz
This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable 
bandwidth and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G   

Tower R then feeds...
Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)

To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  There 
are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each 
other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
backside links.

The challenge...

First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then I 
get customer complaints etc. I hate that.  

So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a ton 
of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.

The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
Latency with sync?

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

> Hi,
>
> Please allow me to clarify.
>
> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE 
> ports.
>
> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the 
> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. 
> GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board 
> GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
>
> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 
> and will apply to both products.

Reading this spec sheet.

http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf

>>>LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame 
>>>Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Josh Luthman via Af]

It'll sync with other force 110 ptp radios.  You'd have to replace all your
MTs for sync to factor in.  Or just unsync and get more bandwidth.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Nov 22, 2014 12:31 PM, "Paul McCall via Af"  wrote:

> For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other
> towers.  Everything is OSPF but logically...
>
> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several
> anti-twist devices) is "fed" by...
> Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik
> RB912 5 Ghz
> This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable
> bandwidth and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
> Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
> This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G
>
> Tower R then feeds...
> Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of
> usable bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of
> usable bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of
> usable bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of
> usable bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>
> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.
> There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to
> each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on
> the backside links.
>
> The challenge...
>
> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I
> need better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect
> and then I get customer complaints etc. I hate that.
>
> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than
> a ton of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.
>
> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?
>  Latency with sync?
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please allow me to clarify.
> >
> > The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100
> FE ports.
> >
> > The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
> > single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary
> PoE. GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on
> board GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
> >
> > The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release
> 2.4 and will apply to both products.
>
> Reading this spec sheet.
>
>
> http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf
>
> >>>LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
> >>>Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Gino Villarini via Af]

To syn you need to use APs on the master side, latency will jump to 20ms
avgŠ. Just use ptp450¹s!



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com  
@aeronetpr






On 11/22/14, 1:31 PM, "Paul McCall via Af"  wrote:

>For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other
>towers.  Everything is OSPF but logically...
>
>Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several
>anti-twist devices) is "fed" by...
>   Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5
>Ghz
>   This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth
>and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
>   Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
>   This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G   
>
>Tower R then feeds...
>   Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable
>bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>   Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable
>bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>   Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable
>bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>   Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable
>bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>
>To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.
>There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain)
>to each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios
>on the backside links.
>
>The challenge...
>
>First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I
>need better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect
>and then I get customer complaints etc. I hate that.
>
>So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than
>a ton of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is
>inexpensive.
>
>The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?
>  Latency with sync?
>
>Paul
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
>Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please allow me to clarify.
>>
>> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100
>>FE ports.
>>
>> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
>> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary
>>PoE. GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the
>>on board GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
>>
>> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release
>>2.4 and will apply to both products.
>
>Reading this spec sheet.
>
>http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP
>_Oct2014.pdf
>
LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists via Af]

The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without sync. 
 :-)

I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
sync from a different source, like a CMM4.


Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

> On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af  wrote:
> 
> For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
> Everything is OSPF but logically...
> 
> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
> devices) is "fed" by...
>Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
>This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth 
> and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
>Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
>This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G
> 
> Tower R then feeds...
>Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> 
> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  
> There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to 
> each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
> backside links.
> 
> The challenge...
> 
> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
> better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then 
> I get customer complaints etc. I hate that.  
> 
> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a 
> ton of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.
> 
> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
> Latency with sync?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Please allow me to clarify.
>> 
>> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE 
>> ports.
>> 
>> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the 
>> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. 
>> GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board 
>> GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
>> 
>> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 
>> and will apply to both products.
> 
> Reading this spec sheet.
> 
> http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf
> 
 LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame 
 Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Jerry Richardson via Af]

Thanks guys.

 

It's tempting to trade max throughput for less self-interference and
frequency re-use. It's getting crowded up on yonder mountain.

 

Putting up a Titanium radio/sector Monday. We shall see.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz via Af
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 7:50 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

 

Jerry,

I don't think you'll ever be happy with the current non-AC
gear. The hardware airmax on the new AC gear is more promising however, but
the hardware version with GPS sync is not yet available.

 

-Peter

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson via Af
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 2:33 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

 

Has anyone successfully implemented?

 

Jerry

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Josh Luthman via Af]

Good luck!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Nov 22, 2014 1:42 PM, "Jerry Richardson via Af"  wrote:

> Thanks guys.
>
>
>
> It’s tempting to trade max throughput for less self-interference and
> frequency re-use. It’s getting crowded up on yonder mountain…
>
>
>
> Putting up a Titanium radio/sector Monday. We shall see…
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz via Af
> *Sent:* Saturday, November 22, 2014 7:50 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
>
>
> Jerry,
>
> I don’t think you’ll ever be happy with the current non-AC
> gear. The hardware airmax on the new AC gear is more promising however, but
> the hardware version with GPS sync is not yet available.
>
>
>
> -Peter
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Jerry Richardson via Af
> *Sent:* Friday, November 21, 2014 2:33 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
>
>
> Has anyone successfully implemented?
>
>
>
> Jerry
>

[AFMUG] OT Barbie

[Chuck McCown via Af]

This made me laugh:
http://gizmodo.com/barbie-f-cks-it-up-again-1660326671

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Josh Reynolds via Af]

250 Mbps to the home is slower?

On 11/22/2014 03:48 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here. 
The physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as 
many bits through the air.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




*From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

That's fine.

We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable 
co and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... 
without sync.


On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:

Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger
channels, which then need sync.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





*From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P

On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:

you can swap it all out with epmp


On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:

It may work, but it will tank your throughput.

On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:

Has anyone successfully implemented?

�

Jerry


-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer

spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com  




-- 
All parts should go together without forcing. You must

remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled
by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there
must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM
maintenance manual, 1925


-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer

spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com



--
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com



--
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Gino Villarini via Af]

It's for the lower price point..

Gino A. Villarini
@gvillarini



On Nov 22, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:

The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without sync. 
 :-)

I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
sync from a different source, like a CMM4.


Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:

For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
Everything is OSPF but logically...

Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
devices) is "fed" by...
   Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
   This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth and 
feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
   Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
   This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G

Tower R then feeds...
   Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)

To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  There 
are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each 
other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
backside links.

The challenge...

First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then I 
get customer complaints etc. I hate that.

So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a ton 
of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.

The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
Latency with sync?

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

Hi,

Please allow me to clarify.

The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE ports.

The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. GPS 
capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board GPS 
chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).

The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 and 
will apply to both products.

Reading this spec sheet.

http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf

LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Paul McCall via Af]

Jeff,

It looks like you are saying that the connectorized radios withouth sync CAN 
indeed get sync from external source, CMM3, CMM4, sync injector.

I wasn’t aware that was the case

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists via 
Af
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without sync. 
 :-)

I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
sync from a different source, like a CMM4.


Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
Everything is OSPF but logically...

Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
devices) is "fed" by...
   Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
   This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth and 
feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
   Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
   This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G

Tower R then feeds...
   Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)

To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  There 
are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each 
other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
backside links.

The challenge...

First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then I 
get customer complaints etc. I hate that.

So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a ton 
of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.

The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
Latency with sync?

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force


Hi,

Please allow me to clarify.

The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE ports.

The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. GPS 
capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board GPS 
chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).

The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 and 
will apply to both products.

Reading this spec sheet.

http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf


LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists via Af]

That's what I learned in training this week.  There are known issues with the 
CMM3 and ePMP, but there is a workaround.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

> On Nov 22, 2014, at 5:32 PM, Paul McCall via Af  wrote:
> 
> Jeff,
>  
> It looks like you are saying that the connectorized radios withouth sync CAN 
> indeed get sync from external source, CMM3, CMM4, sync injector.
>  
> I wasn’t aware that was the case
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
> via Af
> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:36 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>  
> The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
> buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without 
> sync.  :-)
>  
> I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
> sync from a different source, like a CMM4.
>  
> 
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 Office
> 574-220-7826 Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
> 
> On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af  wrote:
> 
> For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
> Everything is OSPF but logically...
> 
> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
> devices) is "fed" by...
>Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
>This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth 
> and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
>Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
>This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G
> 
> Tower R then feeds...
>Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> 
> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  
> There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to 
> each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
> backside links.
> 
> The challenge...
> 
> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
> better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then 
> I get customer complaints etc. I hate that.  
> 
> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a 
> ton of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.
> 
> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
> Latency with sync?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
> 
> 
> Hi,
>  
> Please allow me to clarify.
>  
> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE 
> ports.
>  
> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. 
> GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board 
> GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
>  
> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 
> and will apply to both products.
> 
> Reading this spec sheet.
> 
> http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf
> 
> 
> LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
> Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Gino Villarini via Af]

I don't think either

Gino A. Villarini
@gvillarini



On Nov 22, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Paul McCall via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:

Jeff,

It looks like you are saying that the connectorized radios withouth sync CAN 
indeed get sync from external source, CMM3, CMM4, sync injector.

I wasn’t aware that was the case

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists via 
Af
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without sync. 
 :-)

I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
sync from a different source, like a CMM4.


Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af 
mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
Everything is OSPF but logically...

Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
devices) is "fed" by...
   Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
   This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth and 
feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
   Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
   This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G

Tower R then feeds...
   Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
   Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)

To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  There 
are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each 
other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
backside links.

The challenge...

First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then I 
get customer complaints etc. I hate that.

So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a ton 
of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.

The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
Latency with sync?

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force


Hi,

Please allow me to clarify.

The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE ports.

The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. GPS 
capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board GPS 
chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).

The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 and 
will apply to both products.

Reading this spec sheet.

http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf


LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force

[Tyson Burris @ Internet Comm. Inc via Af]

Yes in training it was confirmed that the ePmP can get power and sync through 
CMM 3&4 but the 3 may be tricky to workaround. 

Also you can gps time your PTP link but it wasn't recommend.  You should use 
the Mac level for your ptp 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 22, 2014, at 5:32 PM, Paul McCall via Af  wrote:
> 
> Jeff,
>  
> It looks like you are saying that the connectorized radios withouth sync CAN 
> indeed get sync from external source, CMM3, CMM4, sync injector.
>  
> I wasn’t aware that was the case
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
> via Af
> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:36 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
>  
> The 110 PTP unit has sync on board...disabled...expect that's to keep us from 
> buying that unit and swapping the radios for a connectorized unit without 
> sync.  :-)
>  
> I expect that, like the connectorized radio without sync, that you can take 
> sync from a different source, like a CMM4.
>  
> 
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 Office
> 574-220-7826 Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
> 
> On Nov 22, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Paul McCall via Af  wrote:
> 
> For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers.  
> Everything is OSPF but logically...
> 
> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist 
> devices) is "fed" by...
>Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz
>This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth 
> and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A
>Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5
>This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G
> 
> Tower R then feeds...
>Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
>Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable 
> bandwidth.  (Rohn 25G 120 ft.)
> 
> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act.  
> There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to 
> each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the 
> backside links.
> 
> The challenge...
> 
> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C.  And, I need 
> better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then 
> I get customer complaints etc. I hate that.  
> 
> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a 
> ton of licensed links?  Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive.
> 
> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow?   
> Latency with sync?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force
> 
> 
> Hi,
>  
> Please allow me to clarify.
>  
> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE 
> ports.
>  
> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the
> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. 
> GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board 
> GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates).
>  
> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 
> and will apply to both products.
> 
> Reading this spec sheet.
> 
> http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf
> 
> 
> LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame
> Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode)

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[Mike Hammett via Af]

Neither incumbent I checked have anything anywhere near that. One maxed at 22 
meg and I forget the other.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




- Original Message -
From: Josh Reynolds via Af 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:10:26 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

250 Mbps to the home is slower?

On 11/22/2014 03:48 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
> Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is here. 
> The physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as 
> many bits through the air.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
>
> 
> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
> That's fine.
>
> We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable 
> co and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years... 
> without sync.
>
> On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>
> Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger
> channels, which then need sync.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
>
> 
> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
> Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
> realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P
>
> On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:
>
> you can swap it all out with epmp
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af
> mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
>
> It may work, but it will tank your throughput.
>
> On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:
>
> Has anyone successfully implemented?
>
> �
>
> Jerry
>
>
> -- 
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com 
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> All parts should go together without forcing. You must
> remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled
> by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there
> must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM
> maintenance manual, 1925
>
>
> -- 
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com
>
>
>
> -- 
> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com
>

-- 
josh reynolds :: chief information officer
spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

[AFMUG] I know a programmer looking for a Job

[timothy steele via Af]

Hey Guys

I know A guy that I worked with before that is a awesome programmer and
website designer
the company he works for is moving from Laporte IN to FL & dose not want
any remote programmers..

he is the only programmer I have met that can acctually hit deadlines & I
have seen some amazing programes he has made can not say what due to my NDA
 if any of you are looking for someone like that his name is Robert Snyder
his E-Mail is immeraufdemh...@hotmail.com
& I attached his resume

Thanks!,


Robert Snyder Resume.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium

[josh--- via Af]

GCI just rolled out new fiber this summer. 250Mbps in certain markets. Still 
docsis3 plants though.

On November 22, 2014 3:30:58 PM AKST, Mike Hammett via Af  wrote:
>Neither incumbent I checked have anything anywhere near that. One maxed
>at 22 meg and I forget the other.
>
>
>
>-
>Mike Hammett
>Intelligent Computing Solutions
>http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: Josh Reynolds via Af 
>To: af@afmug.com
>Sent: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:10:26 -0600 (CST)
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>
>250 Mbps to the home is slower?
>
>On 11/22/2014 03:48 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>> Your cable and DSL is a lot slower and more expensive than it is
>here. 
>> The physics are easier to accomplish when you don't have to move as 
>> many bits through the air.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>
>>
>>
>
>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, November 22, 2014 3:13:19 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>
>> That's fine.
>>
>> We'll go back to running the same wisp that is taking both the cable 
>> co and clec's in-town customers and has been for the past 10 years...
>
>> without sync.
>>
>> On 11/21/2014 06:39 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
>>
>> Those are very compelling, but not enough bits without bigger
>> channels, which then need sync.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>
>>
>>
>
>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds via Af" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, November 21, 2014 7:19:14 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Sync on UBNT Titanium
>>
>> Or you can swap it out with -AC and get 65Mbps on a 10MHz channel,
>> realtime airview, and much better selectivity :P
>>
>> On 11/21/2014 03:10 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote:
>>
>> you can swap it all out with epmp
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af
>> mailto:af@afmug.com>> wrote:
>>
>> It may work, but it will tank your throughput.
>>
>> On 11/21/2014 01:32 PM, Jerry Richardson via Af wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone successfully implemented?
>>
>> �
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> All parts should go together without forcing. You must
>> remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled
>> by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there
>> must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM
>> maintenance manual, 1925
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>> spitwspots ::www.spitwspots.com
>>
>
>-- 
>josh reynolds :: chief information officer
>spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.