Re: [AFMUG] Epmp recovery?
Hi TJ, What state is the SM in right now? Does it boot up on the older load? Have you tried a factory reset yet? What was the upgrade failure? Was it the GUI indicating an upgrade failure during a normal upgrade or did you have some sort of a power failure during the upgrade? Are you able to access the radio via its default or fallback IP? A lot questions before determining its not recoverable and going the RMA route :) Alternately, you can contact our support engineers for this as you'll have to go through them to determine the RMA anyway. Thanks, Sriram On Dec 8, 2014, at 11:50 AM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Seriously? How can that be? On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Nope, RMA :( Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 7, 2014 10:07 PM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I have a SM that failed upgrade, is it possible to recover? TJ
[AFMUG] Fwd: [Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc)
It looks like Observium is expanding a bit. In what direction, I'm not certain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Forwarded Message - From: ad...@observium.org To: Observium Network Observation System observ...@observium.org Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:35:44 AM Subject: [Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc) Hi All, Could those of you who are interested in wireless support email me off-list? I've totally lost track of who has offered to financially sponsor development and/or provide access to test hardware. Please include the following information : Contact/Company/Subscriber information What type of support you'd be willing to provide What type of hardware you use What you use the hardware for (WISP, Enterprise, etc) Additionally if you already use some other platform with your wireless kit, perhaps some screenshots and description of how you use the platform would be useful, as would any suggestions on how a wifi infrastructure management interface might be structured. We're not wireless infrastructure experts, but you guys might be! :) Depending upon the level of interest when everyone is accounted for, we might consider building specific wireless support into Observium. Please reply to this mail but change the to field to ad...@observium.org. If you use a different subject, your mail might be lost forever :) Thanks, adam. ___ observium mailing list observ...@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
Re: [AFMUG] Epmp recovery?
On the forum it says if the upgrade fails and it didn't boot you have to RMA? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 8, 2014 3:52 AM, Sriram Chaturvedi via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Hi TJ, What state is the SM in right now? Does it boot up on the older load? Have you tried a factory reset yet? What was the upgrade failure? Was it the GUI indicating an upgrade failure during a normal upgrade or did you have some sort of a power failure during the upgrade? Are you able to access the radio via its default or fallback IP? A lot questions before determining its not recoverable and going the RMA route :) Alternately, you can contact our support engineers for this as you'll have to go through them to determine the RMA anyway. Thanks, Sriram On Dec 8, 2014, at 11:50 AM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Seriously? How can that be? On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Nope, RMA :( Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 7, 2014 10:07 PM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I have a SM that failed upgrade, is it possible to recover? TJ
Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available
In TX they have to have a specific sign with specific wording otherwise it is invalid, although a business is treated much like a home. If they post a no weapons sign, it is probably in your best interest to either not carry inside or not patronize the business. On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Do you have to obey that sign? In Illinois you do, but in other states, they serve no legal purpose. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *James Howard via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Friday, December 5, 2014 1:54:44 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available I agree and don’t personally think open carry is a very good idea typically. I just had a conversation with the night manager at the local grocery store when I stopped in for something (my wife tends to stop there more than I do) and they had very prominent “no weapons allowed in store” on the doors. I told him they’re basically announcing to criminals that there won’t be anyone in their store with a weapon to defend against a robbery, plus they make themselves liable for my safety by not allowing me to protect myself. Anyway, his response was that if they’re robbed they’re supposed to hit the panic button and give the robbers anything they want. I asked him what they do if the robber decides to start shooting people. He says “wait for the police”. Nice….. I agree with Chuck about there being no bright lines. The fact that this police chief said that this was their policy if they see anyone carrying a gun, not doing anything illegal is what I have a problem with. Josh you probably wouldn’t like him but you’d probably like Sheriff David Clarke. He actually wrote a letter to congress apologizing for what this guy said when he testified before a congressional subcommittee about gun control. He pointed out that the police chief is appointed and doesn’t answer to or speak for the people. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds via Af *Sent:* Friday, December 05, 2014 1:27 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available If you're going to carry (and I do), carry concealed as possible. Here in Alaska there is concealed carry without a license (which is *awesome* btw). You'd be amazed at how much nicer it makes people. That said, walking around with a visable piece is just asking for trouble. It gives you quick access to the weapon, but removes the element of surprise. It also can make you a target if somebody wants your weapon to commit a crime. josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/05/2014 10:23 AM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote: It is all how you “carry” a weapon. Holstered weapons should not be a reason for a takedown. Pulling it out and pointing it around is a different thing. Deer rifle slung across your back during hunting season is one thing. Deer rifle being use as a spotting scope around people is a different thing... And so on. 50 shades of gray. No bright lines in my opinion. *From:* Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com *Sent:* Friday, December 05, 2014 12:13 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available There is a very prominent come and take them sticker on the back of my jeep, right next to a sergeant rank sticker. I don't think I'd like that guy. josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/05/2014 08:51 AM, James Howard via Af wrote: So now I was interested in who he is. I disagree about him being cool. Here’s a quote from him. Keep in mind that in Wisconsin we’ve had an “open carry” law for years. It’s legal to carry a firearm (assuming you are of legal age and aren’t a felon). There are lots of other quotes from him as well but this shows his regard for the law IMO. My message to my troops is if you see anybody carrying a gun on the streets of Milwaukee, we’ll put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide whether you have a right to carry it. . . . It’s irresponsible to send a message to them that if they just carry it openly no one can bother them. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *James Howard via Af *Sent:* Friday, December 05, 2014 11:39 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available We never hear anything about him here in Wisconsin. I actually had to look up who he is. I see that he had a 100% no confidence vote from the police union but was backed by Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett recently (being backed by Tom Barrett isn’t necessarily a good thing IMO). Oh…. He’s the one that was on his cell phone during a meeting. I didn’t realize that was in Milwaukee. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *That One
Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available
Well agreed on that latter part. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Cameron Crum via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 9:17:33 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available In TX they have to have a specific sign with specific wording otherwise it is invalid, although a business is treated much like a home. If they post a no weapons sign, it is probably in your best interest to either not carry inside or not patronize the business. On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Do you have to obey that sign? In Illinois you do, but in other states, they serve no legal purpose. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: James Howard via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Friday, December 5, 2014 1:54:44 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available I agree and don’t personally think open carry is a very good idea typically. I just had a conversation with the night manager at the local grocery store when I stopped in for something (my wife tends to stop there more than I do) and they had very prominent “no weapons allowed in store” on the doors. I told him they’re basically announcing to criminals that there won’t be anyone in their store with a weapon to defend against a robbery, plus they make themselves liable for my safety by not allowing me to protect myself. Anyway, his response was that if they’re robbed they’re supposed to hit the panic button and give the robbers anything they want. I asked him what they do if the robber decides to start shooting people. He says “wait for the police”. Nice….. I agree with Chuck about there being no bright lines. The fact that this police chief said that this was their policy if they see anyone carrying a gun, not doing anything illegal is what I have a problem with. Josh you probably wouldn’t like him but you’d probably like Sheriff David Clarke. He actually wrote a letter to congress apologizing for what this guy said when he testified before a congressional subcommittee about gun control. He pointed out that the police chief is appointed and doesn’t answer to or speak for the people. From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds via Af Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 1:27 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available If you're going to carry (and I do), carry concealed as possible. Here in Alaska there is concealed carry witho ut a license (which is *awesome* btw). You'd be amazed at how much nicer it makes people. That said, walking around with a visable piece is just asking for trouble. It gives you quick access to the weapon, but removes the element of surprise. It also can make you a target if somebody wants your weapon to commit a crime. josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/05/2014 10:23 AM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote: blockquote It is all how you “carry” a weapon. Holstered weapons should not be a reason for a takedown. Pulling it out and pointing it around is a different thing. Deer rifle slung across your back during hunting season is one thing. Deer rifle being use as a spotting scope around people is a different thing... And so on. 50 shades of gray. No bright lines in my opinion. From: Josh Reynolds via Af Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 12:13 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available There is a very prominent come and take them sticker on the back of my jeep, right next to a sergeant rank sticker. I don't think I'd like that guy. josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/05/2014 08:51 AM, James Howard via Af wrote: blockquote So now I was interested in who he is. I disagree about him being cool. Here’s a quote from him. Keep in mind that in Wisconsin we’ve had an “open carry” law for years. It’s legal to carry a firearm (assuming you are of legal age and aren’t a felon). There are lots of other quotes from him as well but this shows his regard for the law IMO. My message to my troops is if you see anybody carrying a gun on the streets of Milwaukee, we’ll put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide whether you have a right to carry it. . . . It’s irresponsible to send a message to them that if they just carry it openly no one can bother them. From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of James Howard via Af Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 11:39 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available We never hear anything about him here in Wisconsin. I actually had to look up who he is. I see that he had a 100% no confidence vote from the police union but was backed by Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett recently (being backed by Tom Barrett isn’t necessarily a good thing
Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available
I think like Barney Fife, you should only get one bullet, and you have to keep it in your pocket. From: Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 9:22 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available Well agreed on that latter part. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Cameron Crum via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 9:17:33 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available In TX they have to have a specific sign with specific wording otherwise it is invalid, although a business is treated much like a home. If they post a no weapons sign, it is probably in your best interest to either not carry inside or not patronize the business. On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Do you have to obey that sign? In Illinois you do, but in other states, they serve no legal purpose. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: James Howard via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Friday, December 5, 2014 1:54:44 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available I agree and don’t personally think open carry is a very good idea typically. I just had a conversation with the night manager at the local grocery store when I stopped in for something (my wife tends to stop there more than I do) and they had very prominent “no weapons allowed in store” on the doors. I told him they’re basically announcing to criminals that there won’t be anyone in their store with a weapon to defend against a robbery, plus they make themselves liable for my safety by not allowing me to protect myself. Anyway, his response was that if they’re robbed they’re supposed to hit the panic button and give the robbers anything they want. I asked him what they do if the robber decides to start shooting people. He says “wait for the police”. Nice….. I agree with Chuck about there being no bright lines. The fact that this police chief said that this was their policy if they see anyone carrying a gun, not doing anything illegal is what I have a problem with. Josh you probably wouldn’t like him but you’d probably like Sheriff David Clarke. He actually wrote a letter to congress apologizing for what this guy said when he testified before a congressional subcommittee about gun control. He pointed out that the police chief is appointed and doesn’t answer to or speak for the people. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds via Af Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 1:27 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available If you're going to carry (and I do), carry concealed as possible. Here in Alaska there is concealed carry without a license (which is *awesome* btw). You'd be amazed at how much nicer it makes people. That said, walking around with a visable piece is just asking for trouble. It gives you quick access to the weapon, but removes the element of surprise. It also can make you a target if somebody wants your weapon to commit a crime. josh reynolds :: chief information officerspitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 12/05/2014 10:23 AM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote: It is all how you “carry” a weapon. Holstered weapons should not be a reason for a takedown. Pulling it out and pointing it around is a different thing. Deer rifle slung across your back during hunting season is one thing. Deer rifle being use as a spotting scope around people is a different thing... And so on. 50 shades of gray. No bright lines in my opinion. From: Josh Reynolds via Af Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 12:13 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Positions Available There is a very prominent come and take them sticker on the back of my jeep, right next to a sergeant rank sticker. I don't think I'd like that guy. josh reynolds :: chief information officerspitwspots :: www.spitwspots.comOn 12/05/2014 08:51 AM, James Howard via Af wrote: So now I was interested in who he is. I disagree about him being cool. Here’s a quote from him. Keep in mind that in Wisconsin we’ve had an “open carry” law for years. It’s legal to carry a firearm (assuming you are of legal age and aren’t a felon). There are lots of other quotes from him as well but this shows his regard for the law IMO. My message to my troops is if you see anybody carrying a gun on the streets of Milwaukee, we’ll put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide whether you have a right to carry it. . . . It’s irresponsible to send a message to them that if they just carry it openly no one can bother them. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On
Re: [AFMUG] SM 450 internal connector
You mean the MCX? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Gino Villarini via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Whats the internal connector on the Connectorized 450 SM? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr
Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: [Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc)
(sent to wispa/wireless) That's good news... to a certain extent. Observium is (fairly) excellent at monitoring wired infrastructure. It's interface also moves us out of the Dark Ages of Nagios and others, which is a plus. What Observium is not good at: it's not very flexible in monitoring it's not very flexible in alerting it doesn't support broken snmp mibs that work with cacti and a few others it can't control devices it can't upgrade devices it doesn't bring any new features to the table for any specific product line it is a very talkative and network inefficient protocol - a single device can easily cause 500 round-trips very 5 minutes, that doesn't scale well new device support and feature graphing has to be explicitly coded in josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/08/2014 05:04 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: It looks like Observium is expanding a bit. In what direction, I'm not certain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *ad...@observium.org *To: *Observium Network Observation System observ...@observium.org *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:35:44 AM *Subject: *[Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc) Hi All, Could those of you who are interested in wireless support email me off-list? I've totally lost track of who has offered to financially sponsor development and/or provide access to test hardware. Please include the following information : Contact/Company/Subscriber information What type of support you'd be willing to provide What type of hardware you use What you use the hardware for (WISP, Enterprise, etc) Additionally if you already use some other platform with your wireless kit, perhaps some screenshots and description of how you use the platform would be useful, as would any suggestions on how a wifi infrastructure management interface might be structured. We're not wireless infrastructure experts, but you guys might be! :) Depending upon the level of interest when everyone is accounted for, we might consider building specific wireless support into Observium. Please reply to this mail but change the to field to ad...@observium.org. If you use a different subject, your mail might be lost forever :) Thanks, adam. ___ observium mailing list observ...@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: [Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc)
Observium is nice (we use it), but like you said, it's not very flexible at ALL in terms of device support since you can't specify custom data sources like virtually every other monitoring system. If you are looking for custom device support, better alerting, etc - there are many better options. Josh On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com wrote: (sent to wispa/wireless) That's good news... to a certain extent. Observium is (fairly) excellent at monitoring wired infrastructure. It's interface also moves us out of the Dark Ages of Nagios and others, which is a plus. What Observium is not good at: it's not very flexible in monitoring it's not very flexible in alerting it doesn't support broken snmp mibs that work with cacti and a few others it can't control devices it can't upgrade devices it doesn't bring any new features to the table for any specific product line it is a very talkative and network inefficient protocol - a single device can easily cause 500 round-trips very 5 minutes, that doesn't scale well new device support and feature graphing has to be explicitly coded in josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/08/2014 05:04 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: It looks like Observium is expanding a bit. In what direction, I'm not certain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *ad...@observium.org *To: *Observium Network Observation System observ...@observium.org observ...@observium.org *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:35:44 AM *Subject: *[Observium] Wireless Support (Aruba, Ruckus, Trapeze, Cisco, etc) Hi All, Could those of you who are interested in wireless support email me off-list? I've totally lost track of who has offered to financially sponsor development and/or provide access to test hardware. Please include the following information : Contact/Company/Subscriber information What type of support you'd be willing to provide What type of hardware you use What you use the hardware for (WISP, Enterprise, etc) Additionally if you already use some other platform with your wireless kit, perhaps some screenshots and description of how you use the platform would be useful, as would any suggestions on how a wifi infrastructure management interface might be structured. We're not wireless infrastructure experts, but you guys might be! :) Depending upon the level of interest when everyone is accounted for, we might consider building specific wireless support into Observium. Please reply to this mail but change the to field to ad...@observium.org. If you use a different subject, your mail might be lost forever :) Thanks, adam. ___ observium mailing list observ...@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
[AFMUG] ISP Radio Wednesday -- Matt Larson Jack Unger on LTE-U
http://www.ispradio.com/ http://www.ispradio.com/images/ispLogoWoodWhite.PNGThis week we will be talking Co-Founder of WISPA Matt Larson, and WISPA FCC Technical Consultant Jack Unger about LTE-U. We will also talk about Spectrum Databases and Harm Claim Thresholds! Should be a great session, be sure to chat with us on the chat page! Wednesday 11am CST Don’t forgot you can download the previous episodes to put on your media player and listen while in your car free of charge by going to http://www.ispradio.com www.ispradio.com Remember to sign into the live chat to ask questions!You can find our Podcast on I-Tunes ! n UPCOMMING SHOWS! n December 17th – Daina Larken with NetSapians n December 24th – No Show –Happy Holidays n January 14th – Nathan Stooke from WISPERISP will be talking about “Over the Top TV” n January 28th – Patrick Leary with Telrad Dennis Burgess, Co-Host of ISP Radio! http://www.ispradio.com http://www.ispradio.com
[AFMUG] ePMP Force 110
I just put together my first Force 110... definitely a huge improvement over the 100, it's still not quite as simple as throwing together a Nano/PowerBeam, but not bad at all, I think it's actually easier to put together than a NanoBridge... and the fact that I didn't look at the instructions until I was done is a good sign. I'm not sure how much I like the crazy wire thing on the front, but I can live with that, and otherwise, it seems like a pretty good design. The fact that they used carriage bolts for the pole mount instead of a u-bolt makes me very happy... I suspect we're going to be putting a lot of these things up on towers for PtP links. One question... are these dual slant or Horizontal/Vertical polarity? I know it doesn't really matter much for ePMP, but since they are connectorized, it's likely they'll get used with other radios at some point.
[AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
[AFMUG] Mikrotik and Simple Queues - Download not working
I have a simple queue configured to limit upload to 2mbps and download to 10mbps on a specific IP address. It limits the upload speed perfectly, but the download traffic remains unthrottled. Download packets are not graphed in the simple queue Traffic tab, yet the interface itself shows Tx speeds through the roof. Thoughts? [admin@MikroTik] /queue simple print Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid, D - dynamic 0name=10/2 target=xxx.xxx.xxx.249/32 parent=none packet-marks= priority=8/8 queue=default-small/default-small limit-at=0/0 max-limit=2M/10M burst-limit=0/0 burst-threshold=0/0 burst-time=0s/ Chris Wright Velociter Wirelesshttp://www.velociter.net/
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110
I told them to make a snap-on radome with the sub-reflector integrated into it. That would provide less wind load and keep ice off of the feedhorn, plus speed up assembly. I'm not sure what the polarization is. I thought the Force100 was -/+45, so the 110 is probably the same, but there's no way to tell. On 12/8/2014 11:46 AM, Mathew Howard via Af wrote: I just put together my first Force 110... definitely a huge improvement over the 100, it's still not quite as simple as throwing together a Nano/PowerBeam, but not bad at all, I think it's actually easier to put together than a NanoBridge... and the fact that I didn't look at the instructions until I was done is a good sign. I'm not sure how much I like the crazy wire thing on the front, but I can live with that, and otherwise, it seems like a pretty good design. The fact that they used carriage bolts for the pole mount instead of a u-bolt makes me very happy... I suspect we're going to be putting a lot of these things up on towers for PtP links. One question... are these dual slant or Horizontal/Vertical polarity? I know it doesn't really matter much for ePMP, but since they are connectorized, it's likely they'll get used with other radios at some point.
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110
A radome would be nice, I hope they do come out with one. The Force100 was definitely slant, so yeah, I'm guessing these are too... but there's no way to tell by looking at them, as far as I can see. I guess it doesn't really matter a whole lot. From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:24 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110 I told them to make a snap-on radome with the sub-reflector integrated into it. That would provide less wind load and keep ice off of the feedhorn, plus speed up assembly. I'm not sure what the polarization is. I thought the Force100 was -/+45, so the 110 is probably the same, but there's no way to tell. On 12/8/2014 11:46 AM, Mathew Howard via Af wrote: I just put together my first Force 110... definitely a huge improvement over the 100, it's still not quite as simple as throwing together a Nano/PowerBeam, but not bad at all, I think it's actually easier to put together than a NanoBridge... and the fact that I didn't look at the instructions until I was done is a good sign. I'm not sure how much I like the crazy wire thing on the front, but I can live with that, and otherwise, it seems like a pretty good design. The fact that they used carriage bolts for the pole mount instead of a u-bolt makes me very happy... I suspect we're going to be putting a lot of these things up on towers for PtP links. One question... are these dual slant or Horizontal/Vertical polarity? I know it doesn't really matter much for ePMP, but since they are connectorized, it's likely they'll get used with other radios at some point.
[AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
The U-verse TV boxes have to get IPs from the gateway (3600HGV or 3800HGV, I'm assuming?) hence there is no way to disable the dhcp server. You'll have to keep the U-verse gateway on a different sub-net, DMZPlus another router so it gets an outside IP to it's WAN and you should be good to go. -Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any typos On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? -- *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [ af@afmug.com] *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason -- Bryan Fussell *TechWork Solutions* T: (719) 629-7550 C: (386) 275-8047 E: br...@techworkonline.com
[AFMUG] PTP230 Log Entries
Can someone tell me what the following means: 12/08/2014 : 13:32:40 MDT : Event: SMSESMSG, MsgType: KARSP, NewState: REGISTERED, Flag 0 12/08/2014 : 13:32:48 MDT : Event: SMSESMSG, MsgType: KAREQTO, NewState: REGISTERED, Flag 0
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
I'll give this a try, thanks. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Bryan via Af af@afmug.com wrote: The U-verse TV boxes have to get IPs from the gateway (3600HGV or 3800HGV, I'm assuming?) hence there is no way to disable the dhcp server. You'll have to keep the U-verse gateway on a different sub-net, DMZPlus another router so it gets an outside IP to it's WAN and you should be good to go. -Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any typos On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? -- *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com');] *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason -- Bryan Fussell *TechWork Solutions* T: (719) 629-7550 C: (386) 275-8047 E: br...@techworkonline.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','br...@techworkonline.com');
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
The model of this router is 5031nv, FYI. Internet only. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Bryan via Af af@afmug.com wrote: The U-verse TV boxes have to get IPs from the gateway (3600HGV or 3800HGV, I'm assuming?) hence there is no way to disable the dhcp server. You'll have to keep the U-verse gateway on a different sub-net, DMZPlus another router so it gets an outside IP to it's WAN and you should be good to go. -Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any typos On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? -- *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com');] *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason -- Bryan Fussell *TechWork Solutions* T: (719) 629-7550 C: (386) 275-8047 E: br...@techworkonline.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','br...@techworkonline.com');
Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
Matt, We are not able to reproduce your issue. We have some questions for you. Q1) Is your radio's SNMP setting set to R/W? Q2) Is the radios' SNMP Community string set to Canopy? Q3) Is the SNMP filter enabled? Q4) Are you rebooting the SM after sending the SNMP OID? Q5) Are you trying this to the SM over the SNMP proxy? Q6) What is the error that snmpset provides after issuing the command? Best, Cambium Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:01 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
[AFMUG] Now that's a lot of GPS Satellites
13.2 (Build 40). How come I can only see 8 out of 1.8 million? Mark
Re: [AFMUG] Now that's a lot of GPS Satellites
You have an interesting GPS system up north. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Mark Radabaugh via Af af@afmug.com wrote: 13.2 (Build 40). How come I can only see 8 out of 1.8 million? Mark
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
“UVerse Business Service” is an oxymoron. Comcast not much different. Used to be the big guys wanted business customers. Now they design everything for the residential customer because that’s who will order the triple or quadruple play bundle, plus there are a lot of residential customers out there. They don’t know how to cater to businesses anymore. If you don’t want a modem with WiFi, tough luck. If you want a true static IP or /29 block without some convoluted way of fooling the gateway, tough luck. If you want reverse DNS for your static IP, tough luck. To me it feels like when you go to your kids school for a parent-teacher conference and you sit in the little desk because all the facilities are tailored for kids. From: Jason McKemie via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:51 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router The model of this router is 5031nv, FYI. Internet only. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Bryan via Af af@afmug.com wrote: The U-verse TV boxes have to get IPs from the gateway (3600HGV or 3800HGV, I'm assuming?) hence there is no way to disable the dhcp server. You'll have to keep the U-verse gateway on a different sub-net, DMZPlus another router so it gets an outside IP to it's WAN and you should be good to go. -Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any typos On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Mathew Howard via Af javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? From: Af [javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com');] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM To: javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason -- Bryan Fussell TechWork Solutions T: (719) 629-7550 C: (386) 275-8047 E: javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','br...@techworkonline.com');
[AFMUG] ePMP users
Anyone with an AP named NB-Northwest and a customer Roman-Meytin on 5180 MHz can you email me offlist? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110
Hi, The Force 110 is a Horizontal Vertical. Dan From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:48 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110 A radome would be nice, I hope they do come out with one. The Force100 was definitely slant, so yeah, I'm guessing these are too... but there's no way to tell by looking at them, as far as I can see. I guess it doesn't really matter a whole lot. From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:24 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force 110 I told them to make a snap-on radome with the sub-reflector integrated into it. That would provide less wind load and keep ice off of the feedhorn, plus speed up assembly. I'm not sure what the polarization is. I thought the Force100 was -/+45, so the 110 is probably the same, but there's no way to tell. On 12/8/2014 11:46 AM, Mathew Howard via Af wrote: I just put together my first Force 110... definitely a huge improvement over the 100, it's still not quite as simple as throwing together a Nano/PowerBeam, but not bad at all, I think it's actually easier to put together than a NanoBridge... and the fact that I didn't look at the instructions until I was done is a good sign. I'm not sure how much I like the crazy wire thing on the front, but I can live with that, and otherwise, it seems like a pretty good design. The fact that they used carriage bolts for the pole mount instead of a u-bolt makes me very happy... I suspect we're going to be putting a lot of these things up on towers for PtP links. One question... are these dual slant or Horizontal/Vertical polarity? I know it doesn't really matter much for ePMP, but since they are connectorized, it's likely they'll get used with other radios at some point.
[AFMUG] Cambium support, ePMP
I just called and asked for some help/documentation on changing the IP of an AP from SSH since I can't get to the web interface at this point (Powercode problems, augh) They sent me the User Guide and directed me to page 85. Details on how to use the Quick Start. From the web interface. Is Monday over yet? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373
Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
Further investigation. To repeat it. First reset factory defaults to a 3.6 sm running 13.2 then reboot. Enable SNMP read/write in GUI. Then: #set IPv4 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 #set IPv6 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.160.0 i 1 The moment you set IPv6 filter it disables the IPv4 filter. After you do this once you cannot reproduce it without resetting defaults and rebooting again. Seeing other SNMP issues. Still testing. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, We are not able to reproduce your issue. We have some questions for you. Q1) Is your radio's SNMP setting set to R/W? Q2) Is the radios' SNMP Community string set to Canopy? Q3) Is the SNMP filter enabled? Q4) Are you rebooting the SM after sending the SNMP OID? Q5) Are you trying this to the SM over the SNMP proxy? Q6) What is the error that snmpset provides after issuing the command? Best, Cambium Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:01 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
Re: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta
AF Community, Thanks for providing your feedback on the new 13.3 features. We would like to know how 13.3 has been working for you in your Open Beta network(s). Please provide your candid feedback to us about 13.3 in your network by replying to this post. Thanks! Cambium Jonathan From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Mandziara via Af Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:44 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta AF Community, Please visit the Cambium Networks webpage to down load the Open Beta version of 13.3 for PMP450 and PTP450 radios. https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/pmp450/beta https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/ptp450/beta * PMP320 Co-location (5ms Frame support) (This will work on all bands, but intended for 3.5 and 3.65 at this time.) * 7MHz Channel Bandwidth for 3.5 and 3.65 radios * Removal of the PTP450 Map for faster link speeds * SNMPv3 * HTTPS * Ability to turn off Telnet, FTP and TFTP * Read-Only Accounts for Admin, Install, and Tech * Sector SA * Export of Sessions Status Page * Config File export/Import for AP/BHM and SM/BHS NOTE: PMP320 co-location works best when both the PMP450 and PMP320 are on CMM synch sources. Cambium is writing a paper on how to adjust the radios to best deal with other synch sources, although the radios will still work together without adjustment with some impact to throughput. We look forward to you feedback on this release either in this forum or at: http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-Beta/bd-p/forums_pmp_beta Best, Cambium Jonathan
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
You can use a straight modem (no gateway) with Comcast residential service. I have it plugged into a Mikrotik at several friends and family's houses. Read an interview with someone at TWC. Both TWC and Comcast's business divisions have 20% annual growth. They seem to be doing enough, whatever they're doing. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 2:10:37 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router “UVerse Business Service” is an oxymoron. Comcast not much different. Used to be the big guys wanted business customers. Now they design everything for the residential customer because that’s who will order the triple or quadruple play bundle, plus there are a lot of residential customers out there. They don’t know how to cater to businesses anymore. If you don’t want a modem with WiFi, tough luck. If you want a true static IP or /29 block without some convoluted way of fooling the gateway, tough luck. If you want reverse DNS for your static IP, tough luck. To me it feels like when you go to your kids school for a parent-teacher conference and you sit in the little desk because all the facilities are tailored for kids. From: Jason McKemie via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:51 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router The model of this router is 5031nv, FYI. Internet only. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Bryan via Af af@afmug.com wrote: The U-verse TV boxes have to get IPs from the gateway (3600HGV or 3800HGV, I'm assuming?) hence there is no way to disable the dhcp server. You'll have to keep the U-verse gateway on a different sub-net, DMZPlus another router so it gets an outside IP to it's WAN and you should be good to go. -Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any typos On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Mathew Howard via Af javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: blockquote I'm not really sure if this would work... but, it seems like it should. Could you put a Mikrotik in between with two ports bridged and just completely block DHCP traffic on it? From: Af [ javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com'); ] on behalf of Jason McKemie via Af [ javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); ] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 1:00 PM To: javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason -- Bryan Fussell TechWork Solutions T: (719) 629-7550 C: (386) 275-8047 E: javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','br...@techworkonline.com'); /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta
in draft release notes notices about 40MHz 1024 FFT 2.5ms, 40 Mhz plan to support in PMP450 13.3 or only in PMP455 ? 2014-12-08 22:58 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com: AF Community, Thanks for providing your feedback on the new 13.3 features. We would like to know how 13.3 has been working for you in your Open Beta network(s). Please provide your candid feedback to us about 13.3 in your network by replying to this post. Thanks! Cambium Jonathan *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Mandziara via Af *Sent:* Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:44 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta AF Community, Please visit the Cambium Networks webpage to down load the Open Beta version of 13.3 for PMP450 and PTP450 radios. https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/pmp450/beta https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/ptp450/beta - PMP320 Co-location (5ms Frame support) (This will work on all bands, but intended for 3.5 and 3.65 at this time.) - 7MHz Channel Bandwidth for 3.5 and 3.65 radios - Removal of the PTP450 Map for faster link speeds - SNMPv3 - HTTPS - Ability to turn off Telnet, FTP and TFTP - Read-Only Accounts for Admin, Install, and Tech - Sector SA - Export of Sessions Status Page - Config File export/Import for AP/BHM and SM/BHS *NOTE:* PMP320 co-location works best when both the PMP450 and PMP320 are on CMM synch sources. Cambium is writing a paper on how to adjust the radios to best deal with other synch sources, although the radios will still work together without adjustment with some impact to throughput. We look forward to you feedback on this release either in this forum or at: http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-Beta/bd-p/forums_pmp_beta Best, C*a*mbium Jonathan
Re: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta
Pavel, The Reply from Matt (Cambium) on the Cambium 13.3 Beta Forum to this question best sums it up: http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-Beta/13-3-beta-12-More-detail-on-CP-fragment-and-ACK-enhancements/m-p/37252#U37252 … “We are always evaluating LOTS of (REALLY COOL) stuff that may or not see the light of day (i.e. be included in an official release). We are definitely looking at implementing 40 MHz channels, but are still investigating whether we can make it high enough quality to release. Unfortunately, sometimes the ideas that we try don't pan out, and cannot be released with quality...” Best, Cambium Jonathan From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Pavel Lyuty via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 3:06 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta in draft release notes notices about 40MHz 1024 FFT 2.5ms, 40 Mhz plan to support in PMP450 13.3 or only in PMP455 ? 2014-12-08 22:58 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com: AF Community, Thanks for providing your feedback on the new 13.3 features. We would like to know how 13.3 has been working for you in your Open Beta network(s). Please provide your candid feedback to us about 13.3 in your network by replying to this post. Thanks! Cambium Jonathan From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Mandziara via Af Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:44 AM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] 13.3 Open Beta AF Community, Please visit the Cambium Networks webpage to down load the Open Beta version of 13.3 for PMP450 and PTP450 radios. https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/pmp450/beta https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/files/ptp450/beta * PMP320 Co-location (5ms Frame support) (This will work on all bands, but intended for 3.5 and 3.65 at this time.) * 7MHz Channel Bandwidth for 3.5 and 3.65 radios * Removal of the PTP450 Map for faster link speeds * SNMPv3 * HTTPS * Ability to turn off Telnet, FTP and TFTP * Read-Only Accounts for Admin, Install, and Tech * Sector SA * Export of Sessions Status Page * Config File export/Import for AP/BHM and SM/BHS NOTE: PMP320 co-location works best when both the PMP450 and PMP320 are on CMM synch sources. Cambium is writing a paper on how to adjust the radios to best deal with other synch sources, although the radios will still work together without adjustment with some impact to throughput. We look forward to you feedback on this release either in this forum or at: http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-Beta/bd-p/forums_pmp_beta Best, Cambium Jonathan
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium support, ePMP
Dan, This sure does. Thanks a bunch. Once I finish this I'm gonna grab me some adult beverage. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Dan Sullivan via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Hi Josh, Please find attached the ePMP CLI User Manual. This will be posted on support.cambiumnetworks.com in the near future. On Page 7, section 3.1.1 are specific instructions for changing the device IP address in bridge mode. The example here shows how to change all parameters. First, you do a “config set parameter value” for each parameter you want to update. Second, you do a “config save” to save the changes permanently. Third, you do a “config apply” so that you start using the parameters. 3.1.1 changes only the IP address first, but probably you want to do a “config set” on all the networking parameters before you issue your “config save” and “config apply”. Page 11 lists the parameter for the Bridge IP address (i.e. networkBridgeIPAddr). Page 9 lists the parameter for the LAN IP address while in NAT mode on the SM (i.e. networkLanIPAddr). Page 10 lists the parameter for the WAN IP address while in NAT mode on the SM (i.e. networkWanIPAddr). Associated Netmask, GatewayIP, etc parameters are listed right by these. Hopefully this will improve your Monday. Dan Sullivan Cambium Networks *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman via Af *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 2:46 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] Cambium support, ePMP I just called and asked for some help/documentation on changing the IP of an AP from SSH since I can't get to the web interface at this point (Powercode problems, augh) They sent me the User Guide and directed me to page 85. Details on how to use the Quick Start. From the web interface. Is Monday over yet? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373
[AFMUG] RB2011 gig ports + ePMP
Has anyone had problems with this? I'm running into all kinds of weird issues where an AP will work for a while, then link up/down forever. I can't find any kind of pattern with it and I'm starting to wonder if there's an expected problem (bug/compatibility) with these ports. Currently on 6.22 ROS. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373
Re: [AFMUG] RB2011 gig ports + ePMP
What POE are you using? On 12/8/2014 3:55 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: Has anyone had problems with this? I'm running into all kinds of weird issues where an AP will work for a while, then link up/down forever. I can't find any kind of pattern with it and I'm starting to wonder if there's an expected problem (bug/compatibility) with these ports. Currently on 6.22 ROS. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373
[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
I'm seeing the same thing with gmail. The second request would be nice as well. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','u...@domain.com'); if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
I get double sometimes. From: Mike Hammett via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 3:13 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
I have noticed the first message in thread showing up twice sometimes... I'm not sure if that's the same thing or not. I haven't ever seen it happen on my own emails though, it's always been threads that someone else started. From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Mike Hammett via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 4:13 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.commailto:u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
If I remembered my password. From: Josh Luthman via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 3:14 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
Just reset it, I don't think anyone knows theirs. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com wrote: If I remembered my password. *From:* Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 3:14 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
It won’t send me my password... From: Sean Heskett via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 3:22 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
it sent me mine right away On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com wrote: It won’t send me my password... *From:* Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 3:22 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
I had to do it twice. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com wrote: It won’t send me my password... *From:* Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 3:22 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
Ye! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean
Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
Matt, Thanks! With those steps that you provided, I can see the issue that you are having. I will open an issue for this. The obvious workaround (until fixed) would be to set the IPv4 Filter after setting the IPv6 filter in your script. Best, Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 2:53 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? Further investigation. To repeat it. First reset factory defaults to a 3.6 sm running 13.2 then reboot. Enable SNMP read/write in GUI. Then: #set IPv4 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 #set IPv6 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.160.0 i 1 The moment you set IPv6 filter it disables the IPv4 filter. After you do this once you cannot reproduce it without resetting defaults and rebooting again. Seeing other SNMP issues. Still testing. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, We are not able to reproduce your issue. We have some questions for you. Q1) Is your radio's SNMP setting set to R/W? Q2) Is the radios' SNMP Community string set to Canopy? Q3) Is the SNMP filter enabled? Q4) Are you rebooting the SM after sending the SNMP OID? Q5) Are you trying this to the SM over the SNMP proxy? Q6) What is the error that snmpset provides after issuing the command? Best, Cambium Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:01 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
youre the man on that #1 thing, its been driving me batty On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Ye! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean -- 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
Re: [AFMUG] Now that's a lot of GPS Satellites
Not us. GLONASS works better up here :/ josh reynolds :: chief information officer spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com On 12/08/2014 11:05 AM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: You have an interesting GPS system up north. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Mark Radabaugh via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: 13.2 (Build 40). How come I can only see 8 out of 1.8 million? Mark
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
Oh me too! That is a minor thing but a real annoyance. I feel like Dory from Finding Nemo sometimes; Send a message.. Oh look, a new message! -Ty On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:29 PM, That One Guy via Af af@afmug.com wrote: youre the man on that #1 thing, its been driving me batty On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Ye! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com wrote: In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own messages http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I haven't noticed #1. PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests Hello, Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes) 1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one message from other users (which is the expected behavior). 2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com instead of u...@domain.com if the reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc. 2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response??? thanks for listening, Sean -- 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
Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
I have perl script that programs SM's before they are labeled and go to installers. Between interruptions been fighting issues. snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.1.0 s all # Set Channel Scan No response. These also seem to not work. lanMaskSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.4 lanIpSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.3 defaultGwSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.5 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, Thanks! With those steps that you provided, I can see the issue that you are having. I will open an issue for this. The obvious workaround (until fixed) would be to set the IPv4 Filter after setting the IPv6 filter in your script. Best, Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 2:53 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? Further investigation. To repeat it. First reset factory defaults to a 3.6 sm running 13.2 then reboot. Enable SNMP read/write in GUI. Then: #set IPv4 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 #set IPv6 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.160.0 i 1 The moment you set IPv6 filter it disables the IPv4 filter. After you do this once you cannot reproduce it without resetting defaults and rebooting again. Seeing other SNMP issues. Still testing. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, We are not able to reproduce your issue. We have some questions for you. Q1) Is your radio's SNMP setting set to R/W? Q2) Is the radios' SNMP Community string set to Canopy? Q3) Is the SNMP filter enabled? Q4) Are you rebooting the SM after sending the SNMP OID? Q5) Are you trying this to the SM over the SNMP proxy? Q6) What is the error that snmpset provides after issuing the command? Best, Cambium Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:01 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug?
would you care to share your scripts matt? i'd be glad to buy beers or other compensation. our guys have been asking for an easy way to do all this and i've been too busy to build the scripts myself. -sean On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Matt via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I have perl script that programs SM's before they are labeled and go to installers. Between interruptions been fighting issues. snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.1.0 s all # Set Channel Scan No response. These also seem to not work. lanMaskSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.4 lanIpSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.3 defaultGwSm Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.2.1.5 On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, Thanks! With those steps that you provided, I can see the issue that you are having. I will open an issue for this. The obvious workaround (until fixed) would be to set the IPv4 Filter after setting the IPv6 filter in your script. Best, Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 2:53 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? Further investigation. To repeat it. First reset factory defaults to a 3.6 sm running 13.2 then reboot. Enable SNMP read/write in GUI. Then: #set IPv4 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 #set IPv6 filter all snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.160.0 i 1 The moment you set IPv6 filter it disables the IPv4 filter. After you do this once you cannot reproduce it without resetting defaults and rebooting again. Seeing other SNMP issues. Still testing. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jonathan Mandziara via Af af@afmug.com wrote: Matt, We are not able to reproduce your issue. We have some questions for you. Q1) Is your radio's SNMP setting set to R/W? Q2) Is the radios' SNMP Community string set to Canopy? Q3) Is the SNMP filter enabled? Q4) Are you rebooting the SM after sending the SNMP OID? Q5) Are you trying this to the SM over the SNMP proxy? Q6) What is the error that snmpset provides after issuing the command? Best, Cambium Jonathan -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:01 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Canopy v13.2 and SNMP Bug? allIpv4Filter Object ID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132 snmpset -v 2c -c Canopy 169.254.1.1 .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.3.2.132.0 i 1 Keep trying to set the allip4filter with SNMP on a 3.6 450 SM running 13.2 and it does not seem to work. Anyone else see an issue with it? Setting the allipv6filter does seem to work. This a bug?
[AFMUG] AF Lodging
On the AF website, it says to use the Hoiday-inn-express (Formerly Shilo) If I'm reading correctly, they are making the transition from Shilo to Holiday Inn on Feb1. Going through the website says no room available until Feb14. I've never had a problem with the Shilo, it had a shower and a bed, that's really all I need, but with the transition, will the hotel be in the middle of a remodel, or is that already underway? I do like the fact that they're going to a buffet breakfast. There was always the rush on the little restaurant in the mornings. It also looks like they're going to charge you for parking a car now too. Just asking the question, anyone had other experience with other hotels downtown? Really all I care about is Wifi, free Breakfast (buffet preferable) and parking. Is there another big event going on that week? A couple other hotels downtown looked to be full that week already.
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
U verse sucks. Stay away Jaime Solorza On Dec 8, 2014 12:00 PM, Jason McKemie via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason
[AFMUG] blocking tcp/ephemeral to tcp/ephemeral ... bad?
What would be the downside of using a firewall rule to block TCP traffic where BOTH source and destination port are 1024-65535 or maybe 2-65535? Talking about an ordinary subscriber. I have a customer with lots of such traffic and not much success convincing him it's probably bad. If I block the port that gets opened up at his end, it stops for maybe 2 hours and then it just opens a different port. If I block the remote IP addresses, they just change. The traffic is exactly symmetric, the in and out graphs are so identical you can't distinguish the 2 colors of lines they are on top of each other, except maybe around 8am and 8pm there is some genuine download traffic probably when he is home. It's not steady streaming, it jumps all around, with no time-of-day pattern, but it goes as high as 5M x 5M which IMHO is a lot of bandwidth for something I assume should not be happening. The traffic seems to come from hosted servers mainly in Germany, and then go back out to an AWS Cloudfront CDN address. So far blocking TCP traffic where both source and destination ports are 20,000-65,535 seems to stop it dead in its tracks, we'll see if it figures out to go below 20,000. VoIP could be 10,000-20,000 but should be UDP, I think maybe Facetime is 5000 but again UDP, so if necessary I can extend it lower. Just wondering what legitimate traffic I might be interfering with. I know there are applications that use high numbered ports, like routers managed on tcp/8080, also passive FTP and stuff like that.
Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
If you'd put on your loin cloth, maybe it wouldn't be so shy.
--
bp
part {dash} 15 {at} SkylineBroadbandService {dot} com
On 12/8/2014 2:23 PM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote:
It won’t send me my password...
*From:* Sean Heskett via Af mailto:af@afmug.com
*Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2014 3:22 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
aaah THANK YOU JOSH! i owe you a beer at AF ;-)
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com
mailto:af@afmug.com wrote:
In regards to 1 go here and disable sending yourself your own
messages
http://afmug.com/mailman/options/af
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com
mailto:af@afmug.com wrote:
I haven't noticed #1.
PDMNet was going to fix #2 back in September, but things came up.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
*From: *Sean Heskett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com
*To: *af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Monday, December 8, 2014 4:12:18 PM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] Animal Farm List weirdness/requests
Hello,
Whomever is now the list manager I have two requests (gripes)
1. for some reason when i send a message it shows up in the
conversation thread twice (i'm using Gmail) I'm not sure if
everyone else sees it twice or just me. i only get one
message from other users (which is the expected behavior).
2. It only shows the name of the person who sent the message
and strips out their email. Is there any way we can add this
back in. It's really frustrating when a cambium or UBNT
employee will post a reply and i don't immediately recognize
that this is a response from the manufacturer. even if it
stripped the email but put back in user at domain dot com
instead of u...@domain.com mailto:u...@domain.com if the
reason from it's removal was to prevent spam etc.
2a. For the manufacturers, would y'all mind adding a signature
file until this is fixed so we know it's an official response???
thanks for listening,
Sean
Re: [AFMUG] ATT U-verse modem / router
I didn't make the call, but I do have to fix the problem. On Monday, December 8, 2014, Jaime Solorza via Af af@afmug.com wrote: U verse sucks. Stay away Jaime Solorza On Dec 8, 2014 12:00 PM, Jason McKemie via Af af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: I've got a consulting client that just had their service switched over from standard ATT DSL to U-verse. In the process, ATT replaced the modem / router. The new unit that they issued does not have the ability to disable DHCP, which is necessary for this application as there is another DHCP server on the network. This is probably a fairly unique situation, as most routers that I've seen have the ability to disable DHCP, how the hardware manufacturer overlooked this is beyond me. Any suggestions on work-arounds? I had thought about putting a Mikrotik (or other router) in between their switch and the ATT box and just doing double-nat, but wanted to see if there was a better way. TIA. -Jason
[AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems?
Just got my four pack in. Opened the box, all nicely packed. Started my first assembly. Got the bracket put on the dish. No problems. Now I get to the feedhorn push in. Yah right. This thing will not just click in place like the video shows. There is no way this feed horn I have will push far enough for the tabs to go into the holes for themI would probably break something. Seriously, I put the Force 100 together faster, and you know how bad it is...I hope the other three are not like this or they will go back to the supplier.
Re: [AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems?
That's what I thought at first, I'ma gonna break somethin... I stuck the feedhorn in first. Put the back bracket and mount on. Put the four allen-head screw in hand tight. Put some pressure on the front of the feedhorn and push on the back of the bracket at each of the four locking tab points. They click in place. Tighten the four allen screws. Put the front reflector on, mount the radio, etc. Fairly easy after the first one. On 12/8/2014 10:35 PM, Alan West via Af wrote: Just got my four pack in. Opened the box, all nicely packed. Started my first assembly. Got the bracket put on the dish. No problems. Now I get to the feedhorn push in. Yah right. This thing will not just click in place like the video shows. There is no way this feed horn I have will push far enough for the tabs to go into the holes for themI would probably break something. Seriously, I put the Force 100 together faster, and you know how bad it is...I hope the other three are not like this or they will go back to the supplier.
Re: [AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems?
I've only put one together so far, but the feedhorn went in fine... it took a bit of pressure, but nowhere near breaking anything. From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af [af@afmug.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 10:58 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems? That's what I thought at first, I'ma gonna break somethin... I stuck the feedhorn in first. Put the back bracket and mount on. Put the four allen-head screw in hand tight. Put some pressure on the front of the feedhorn and push on the back of the bracket at each of the four locking tab points. They click in place. Tighten the four allen screws. Put the front reflector on, mount the radio, etc. Fairly easy after the first one. On 12/8/2014 10:35 PM, Alan West via Af wrote: Just got my four pack in. Opened the box, all nicely packed. Started my first assembly. Got the bracket put on the dish. No problems. Now I get to the feedhorn push in. Yah right. This thing will not just click in place like the video shows. There is no way this feed horn I have will push far enough for the tabs to go into the holes for themI would probably break something. Seriously, I put the Force 100 together faster, and you know how bad it is...I hope the other three are not like this or they will go back to the supplier.
Re: [AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems?
Does not work for me. I tried it that way, could only get one of the four tabs
to lock. The tolerances are way tight on this unit. It took all my might to get
the feedhorn in the hole of the dish (putting the horn in first), and it will
not bottom out like it is supposed to so the tabs can reach their holes. This
is a major disappointment for me.
On Monday, December 8, 2014 11:09 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com
wrote:
#yiv8998471224 P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}I've only put one together so
far, but the feedhorn went in fine... it took a bit of pressure, but nowhere
near breaking anything.
From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
via Af [af@afmug.com]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 10:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Force 110 assembly - anyone else having problems?
That's what I thought at first, I'ma gonna break somethin...
I stuck the feedhorn in first. Put the back bracket and mount on. Put the four
allen-head screw in hand tight. Put some pressure on the front of the feedhorn
and push on the back of the bracket at each of the four locking tab points.
They click in place. Tighten the four allen screws. Put the front reflector on,
mount the radio, etc. Fairly easy after the first one.
On 12/8/2014 10:35 PM, Alan West via Af wrote:
Just got my four pack in. Opened the box, all nicely packed. Started my first
assembly. Got the bracket put on the dish. No problems. Now I get to the
feedhorn push in. Yah right. This thing will not just click in place like the
video shows. There is no way this feed horn I have will push far enough for the
tabs to go into the holes for themI would probably break something.
Seriously, I put the Force 100 together faster, and you know how bad it is...I
hope the other three are not like this or they will go back to the supplier.
