Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would. 

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "TJ Trout"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 


I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 


Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 


Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Andy Trimmell]

how long are your cat5 runs to those 410 ft heights? Do you have fiber up the 
tower to a switch or did you attempt a 410ft cat5 run?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Joe Falaschi
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, something like 
440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the
450 and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an 
EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less 
even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a year 
ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it 
didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are using as a 
BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation may work out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time we climb. 
 They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
> I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM 
> site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something 
> like 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low 
> power station at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at
> 225 feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have 
> any problems though. The guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 
> bundle right next to the high power transmission line. "But there were 
> waveguide brackets there, it was so easy!" I smash your face now.
>
> On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for 
>> the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.
>> I'm wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would 
>> be sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.
>>
>> I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
>> 250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Every time I bring up switching to 48v (though 802.3xx would be better), I get 
all kinds of hate from people that did 12v or 24v plants... because nothing in 
IT ever changes. 

Honestly, the days of PoE are numbered anyway. Fiber + DC is where they should 
be moving to instead of different PoE standards. If you're going to change, 
change once and change it to the right damn place. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:14:37 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 



There are lots of gigabit poe switches on the market. But, they're almost all 
802.3af and its variants. The netonix does more wisp-friendly injection, but 
doesn't handle everything. Admittedly the midspans tend to be a bit of a mess, 
but there are a lot of less-messy ways to get a midspan in place. A 
syncinjector reduces the wiring load by 1/4 (one fuse per 4 radios). The 12 
port version will reduce this further and will be jumper configurable for a lot 
more different radios - if I can ever get the @()#$* thing shipping. 


Personally, I'm more puzzled by the fact that the radio industry hasn't just 
switched to 802.3af or 802.3at for PoE. If you look at the root cause of the 
PoE mess, it's more a symptom of the mismatched poe injection methods. 802.3af 
came out in 2003 and provides 15.4W per port. 802.3at came out in 2009, which 
provides 25.5W of power, and there's a "semi-standard non-standard" way of 
getting 51W using all 4 pairs of the cable. 


-forrest 



On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:06 PM, TJ Trout < t...@voltbb.com > wrote: 



Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 


I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 


Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 


Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 




-- 





Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Andy Trimmell]

Disregard still drinking coffee.you already answered the question.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Andy Trimmell
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

how long are your cat5 runs to those 410 ft heights? Do you have fiber up the 
tower to a switch or did you attempt a 410ft cat5 run?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Joe Falaschi
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, something like 
440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the
450 and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an 
EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less 
even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a year 
ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it 
didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are using as a 
BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation may work out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time we climb. 
 They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
> I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM 
> site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something 
> like 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low 
> power station at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at
> 225 feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have 
> any problems though. The guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 
> bundle right next to the high power transmission line. "But there were 
> waveguide brackets there, it was so easy!" I smash your face now.
>
> On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for 
>> the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.
>> I'm wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would 
>> be sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.
>>
>> I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
>> 250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>

[AFMUG] MT Router Guru's

[Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications Inc]

Any reason why I cannot run anything above OS 6.25 on a CCR1306 without
PPPoE sessions going haywire?

6.25 'appears' to be nice and stable.  

 

 

Tyson Burris, President 
Internet Communications Inc. 
739 Commerce Dr. 
Franklin, IN 46131 
  
317-738-0320 Daytime # 
317-412-1540 Cell/Direct # 
Online: www.surfici.net 

 



What can ICI do for you? 


Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - WiMax - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones - IP
Security - Fiber - Tower - Infrastructure. 
  
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is intended for the 
addressee shown. It contains information that is 
confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review, 
dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by 
unauthorized organizations or individuals is strictly 
prohibited. 

 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Stefan Englhardt]

Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches

power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for their 
performance.

to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power of a 
Netonix Switch

and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it will do 
the job with small

packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments and 
put MPLS

routers between segments.



I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable 
Gigabit performance.

So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job.



I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed all 
kind of stuff including

backhaul with short cables.





Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches



I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would.

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there.



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

   
  
  


Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com

   
  


  _

From: "TJ Trout" mailto:t...@voltbb.com> >
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already!



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys?



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way?



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!???

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Switching + VLANS != MPLS 

Depends on the load at hte site, but an RB1100AHx2 can put up a pretty good 
fight, otherwise, yes, to CCRs you go. 

Little need to guess, their web site tells you exactly what it does under a few 
different circumstances. Three different packet sizes, three different 
configurations for both bridging and routing. 

Also, though, on smaller than CCR routers, you have to deal with switch chip 
aggregation issues. CCR1009 is a nice little box, though. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Stefan Englhardt"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:43:31 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 



Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches 
power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for their 
performance. 
to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power of a 
Netonix Switch 
and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it will do 
the job with small 
packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments and 
put MPLS 
routers between segments. 

I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable 
Gigabit performance. 
So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job. 

I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed all 
kind of stuff including 
backhaul with short cables. 




Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20 
An: af@afmug.com 
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would. 

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -


From: "TJ Trout" < t...@voltbb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Jeremy]

The Cisco IE4000 does gigabit with POE if you are willing to spend about
$4K per switch.  Also, as mentioned, this type of POE will not work with
most WISP gear without converters.  I'd like to see this fabled Netonix
switch.  I am not aware of a single person ever receiving a DC Netonix, and
I have been on the waiting list for months.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Stefan Englhardt  wrote:

> Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches
>
> power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for
> their performance.
>
> to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power
> of a Netonix Switch
>
> and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it
> will do the job with small
>
> packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments
> and put MPLS
>
> routers between segments.
>
>
>
> I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable
> Gigabit performance.
>
> So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job.
>
>
>
> I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed
> all kind of stuff including
>
> backhaul with short cables.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Mike Hammett
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20
> *An:* af@afmug.com
> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
>
>
> I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There
> of zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea
> why you would.
>
> Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics
> anyway). I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes,
> though I may get there.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"TJ Trout" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
> Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I
> just really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on
> the market already!
>
>
>
> I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants
> to be locked into a specific switch, really guys?
>
>
>
> Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing,
> and a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it
> that way?
>
>
>
> Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's
> 2015!???
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Friends don't let friends use Cisco. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Jeremy"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:59:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


The Cisco IE4000 does gigabit with POE if you are willing to spend about $4K 
per switch. Also, as mentioned, this type of POE will not work with most WISP 
gear without converters. I'd like to see this fabled Netonix switch. I am not 
aware of a single person ever receiving a DC Netonix, and I have been on the 
waiting list for months. 


On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Stefan Englhardt < s...@genias.net > wrote: 





Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches 
power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for their 
performance. 
to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power of a 
Netonix Switch 
and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it will do 
the job with small 
packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments and 
put MPLS 
routers between segments. 

I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable 
Gigabit performance. 
So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job. 

I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed all 
kind of stuff including 
backhaul with short cables. 




Von: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20 
An: af@afmug.com 
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would. 

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 





From: "TJ Trout" < t...@voltbb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Josh Baird]

It works, so, yeah, I'll use it when it makes sense.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Friends don't let friends use Cisco.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Jeremy" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:59:40 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
>
> The Cisco IE4000 does gigabit with POE if you are willing to spend about
> $4K per switch.  Also, as mentioned, this type of POE will not work with
> most WISP gear without converters.  I'd like to see this fabled Netonix
> switch.  I am not aware of a single person ever receiving a DC Netonix, and
> I have been on the waiting list for months.
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Stefan Englhardt  wrote:
>
>> Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches
>>
>> power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for
>> their performance.
>>
>> to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power
>> of a Netonix Switch
>>
>> and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it
>> will do the job with small
>>
>> packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments
>> and put MPLS
>>
>> routers between segments.
>>
>>
>>
>> I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with
>> affordable Gigabit performance.
>>
>> So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job.
>>
>>
>>
>> I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed
>> all kind of stuff including
>>
>> backhaul with short cables.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *Mike Hammett
>> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20
>> *An:* af@afmug.com
>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it.
>> There of zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No
>> idea why you would.
>>
>> Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics
>> anyway). I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes,
>> though I may get there.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"TJ Trout" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>>
>> Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I
>> just really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on
>> the market already!
>>
>>
>>
>> I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants
>> to be locked into a specific switch, really guys?
>>
>>
>>
>> Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port,
>> fusing, and a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys
>> really see it that way?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's
>> 2015!???
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Cisco hates WISPs and there are multiple vendors of higher end gear that 
haven't gone out of their way to crap on us. Juniper, AlcaLuKia, Brocade, etc. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Josh Baird"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:12:25 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


It works, so, yeah, I'll use it when it makes sense. 


On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Friends don't let friends use Cisco. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Jeremy" < jeremysmi...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:59:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 




The Cisco IE4000 does gigabit with POE if you are willing to spend about $4K 
per switch. Also, as mentioned, this type of POE will not work with most WISP 
gear without converters. I'd like to see this fabled Netonix switch. I am not 
aware of a single person ever receiving a DC Netonix, and I have been on the 
waiting list for months. 


On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Stefan Englhardt < s...@genias.net > wrote: 





Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches 
power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for their 
performance. 
to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power of a 
Netonix Switch 
and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it will do 
the job with small 
packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments and 
put MPLS 
routers between segments. 

I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable 
Gigabit performance. 
So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job. 

I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed all 
kind of stuff including 
backhaul with short cables. 




Von: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20 
An: af@afmug.com 
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 


I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would. 

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 





From: "TJ Trout" < t...@voltbb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Mike Hammett]

Maybe they should add a thread to the forum that is like a changelog of feature 
requests. Links to the requests on the forum with status like what ones were 
released, in beta, in development, under consideration per release. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Paul McCall"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:25:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 



Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ? 



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Hi, 

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month. 

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs. 

Daniel Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 
Cambium Networks 
Cambium Networks Community Forum 


From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. It's always a solid 
answer, too. 



I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them. Nor do 
I use Radius. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. < 
mailing-li...@phxinternet.com > wrote: 
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform? 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Double Emails

[Mike Hammett]

Send an unsubscribe request for both e-mails and then a single subscribe? 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr."  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:31:13 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] OT: Double Emails 

Sometime beginning July 21st I began to receive double emails from this 
list. Questions: 
1. Am I the only one? 
2. If I am not the only one, is there someone I can email off list to 
check if one of my many aliases is also subscribed to the list? 

I recently changed my email to be hosted off network and the domain 
portion of my email became a domain alias for my email. When this 
happened, I stopped receiving email from the list for a week or more (I 
figured I was bounced). I resubscribed with the email address using my 
primary domain and was getting list mail normally, that is until the end 
of day July 21 when I started getting doubles. 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
Phoenix Internet 
List Email: mailing-li...@phxinternet.com 
Old List Email: mailing-li...@phoenixinternet.net 

[AFMUG] Ubnt items for sale

[Tim Reichhart]

Hello all
I have 1 edgerouter poe 5 port looking to get 130 plus shipping item is brand 
new 

2 tough switch poe 5 port looking to get. 70 dollars plus shipping.

I'm located in ohio

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Stefan Englhardt]

>Switching + VLANS != MPLS

Yes. Do you need this on every tower? You may want to aggregate smaller sites 
with switches
and put the CCRs at central towers. You might switch backhauls and put a router 
to the switch
to do MPLS over the switched segment.

We do MPLS in order to use VPLS tunnels. But for packet forwarding a HW-Switch 
is

more capable than a SW MPLS implementation. (Depends on the switch. These 
Atheros Switches

in Routerboards are SOHO-Switches).


>Depends on the load at hte site, but an RB1100AHx2 can put up a pretty good 
>fight, otherwise, yes, to CCRs you go.



RB1100AHx2 is a good router. But it has to encapsulate/decapsulate MPLS Packets 
in SW.


>Little need to guess, their web site tells you exactly what it does under a 
>few different circumstances. Three different packet sizes, three different 
>configurations for both bridging and routing.

Yes. You’ll get this throughputs but it will start to chunk earlier. As this 
are maximum values with nice traffic pattern and no OSPF process jumping in and 
eat some cpu.

With a HW-Switch I am sure to forward at non blocking wirespeed.

>Also, though, on smaller than CCR routers, you have to deal with switch chip 
>aggregation issues. CCR1009 is a nice little box, though.



As we use switches to power the gear anyway (It gives very clean installations) 
it is a surplus to add a MPLS-Router to a site.

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

I don't see why not? $309 for an RB1100 vs. $367 for a CCR1009 

It may or may not, I don't know. I just know the performance is great. 

CCR1009 or RB1100 for the CCR-adverse plus PacketFlux. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Stefan Englhardt"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:40:13 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 





>Switching + VLANS != MPLS 
Yes. Do you need this on every tower? You may want to aggregate smaller sites 
with switches 
and put the CCRs at central towers. You might switch backhauls and put a router 
to the switch 
to do MPLS over the switched segment. 
We do MPLS in order to use VPLS tunnels. But for packet forwarding a HW-Switch 
is 
more capable than a SW MPLS implementation. (Depends on the switch. These 
Atheros Switches 
in Routerboards are SOHO-Switches). 

>Depends on the load at hte site, but an RB1100AHx2 can put up a pretty good 
>fight, otherwise, yes, to CCRs you go. 

RB1100AHx2 is a good router. But it has to encapsulate/decapsulate MPLS Packets 
in SW. 

>Little need to guess, their web site tells you exactly what it does under a 
>few different circumstances. Three different packet sizes, three different 
>configurations for both bridging and routing. 
Yes. You’ll get this throughputs but it will start to chunk earlier. As this 
are maximum values with nice traffic pattern and no OSPF process jumping in and 
eat some cpu. 
With a HW-Switch I am sure to forward at non blocking wirespeed. 

>Also, though, on smaller than CCR routers, you have to deal with switch chip 
>aggregation issues. CCR1009 is a nice little box, though. 


As we use switches to power the gear anyway (It gives very clean installations) 
it is a surplus to add a MPLS-Router to a site. 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Stefan Englhardt]

For the meantime you are able to use the WS Mini and power it with

„48-53V barrel connector“ or feed it with POE.



I’ve an installation with WS-8-250-AC indoor feeding 2 WS-6-MINI outdoor.



The only power source at this site is the AC-Cable plugged into the WS-8-250-AC.

Even the routerboard indoor is feeded by the WS-8-250.





Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Jeremy
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 15:00
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches



The Cisco IE4000 does gigabit with POE if you are willing to spend about $4K 
per switch.  Also, as mentioned, this type of POE will not work with most WISP 
gear without converters.  I'd like to see this fabled Netonix switch.  I am not 
aware of a single person ever receiving a DC Netonix, and I have been on the 
waiting list for months.



On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@genias.net> > wrote:

Switches can do Switching/Vlans in Hardware. Esp. the Netonix Switches

power all kind of stuff. They are outdoor rated and use low power for their 
performance.

to do 1GBit MPLS you’ll need a CCR which uses at least 5 times the power of a 
Netonix Switch

and might run into trouble in an outdoor cabinet. And I am not sure it will do 
the job with small

packets. So it might be more efficient to build switched network segments and 
put MPLS

routers between segments.



I see Metrolinq (coming), Siklu, Integra (coming), Mimosas with affordable 
Gigabit performance.

So the smaller Routerboards wont do the job.



I like this WS-Mini Switches very much. Mount them to the pole and feed all 
kind of stuff including

backhaul with short cables.





Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com  ] Im Auftrag 
von Mike Hammett
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 14:20
An: af@afmug.com 
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches



I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would.

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there.



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

   
  
  


Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com

   
  



  _


From: "TJ Trout" mailto:t...@voltbb.com> >
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already!



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys?



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way?



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!???

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Double Emails

[Paul McCall]

We haven't others report this, except in the conditions mentioned by Josh

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 7:31 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT: Double Emails

Sometime beginning July 21st I began to receive double emails from this list. 
Questions:
1. Am I the only one?
2. If I am not the only one, is there someone I can email off list to check if 
one of my many aliases is also subscribed to the list?

I recently changed my email to be hosted off network and the domain portion of 
my email became a domain alias for my email. When this happened, I stopped 
receiving email from the list for a week or more (I figured I was bounced). I 
resubscribed with the email address using my primary domain and was getting 
list mail normally, that is until the end of day July 21 when I started getting 
doubles.

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.
Phoenix Internet
List Email: mailing-li...@phxinternet.com Old List Email: 
mailing-li...@phoenixinternet.net

[AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Jay Weekley]

Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT" 
from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM station.  
Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all work.  Short, 
shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally 
spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.


Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At fair-rite.com 
I found one that was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to 
loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you 
square the impedance for every extra loop you make through the ferrite, 
so just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as 
looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the 35kw 
site, but it did work at a 3kw site.



On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:
We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, 
something like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC 
errors on the 450 and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the 
tower.  We tried an EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect 
an SM to the AP much less even get into the AP's management page.  
This seems like it was over a year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of 
investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it didn't work for us on a high 
power FM site when the two units were close.


That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are 
using as a BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your 
situation may work out ok.


FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time 
we climb.  They don't like to do that during the morning and evening 
drive time.


Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM 
site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. 
Something like 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's 
also a low power station at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 
450 AP at 225 feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio 
doesn't have any problems though. The guys didn't listen to me and 
ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high power transmission line. 
"But there were waveguide brackets there, it was so easy!" I smash 
your face now.


On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for 
the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.  
I'm wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would 
be sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.


I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power 
250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Josh Luthman]

Like this?
http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM station.
> Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all work.  Short,
> shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally
> spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.
>
> Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At fair-rite.com
> I found one that was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to
> loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you
> square the impedance for every extra loop you make through the ferrite, so
> just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as looping
> through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the 35kw site, but
> it did work at a 3kw site.
>
>
> On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:
>
>> We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, something
>> like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the 450
>> and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an
>> EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much
>> less even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a
>> year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot
>> but it didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units were
>> close.
>>
>> That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are using
>> as a BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation may
>> work out ok.
>>
>> FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time we
>> climb.  They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive
>> time.
>>
>> Joe Falaschi
>> e-vergent
>>
>>
>> On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>>
>>> I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM site.
>>> The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something like
>>> 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low power station
>>> at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225 feet sees some
>>> CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have any problems though. The
>>> guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high
>>> power transmission line. "But there were waveguide brackets there, it was
>>> so easy!" I smash your face now.
>>>
>>> On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
 Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for
 the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.  I'm
 wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
 sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.

 I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
 250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

No.  Bigger.


On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Like this?
http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM
station.  Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all
work.  Short, shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They
still had occasionally spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to
affect service.

Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At
fair-rite.com  I found one that was I think
300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to loop the cat5 through
it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you square the
impedance for every extra loop you make through the ferrite, so
just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as
looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the
35kw site, but it did work at a 3kw site.


On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it,
something like 440 to 500 feet or something. We see some minor
CRC errors on the 450 and more so on the FSK and that is with
fiber up the tower.  We tried an EPMP at the same elevation
and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less even get
into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a
year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like
EPMP a lot but it didn't work for us on a high power FM site
when the two units were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that
we are using as a BH to another site and it is working great. 
So, your situation may work out ok.


FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down
each time we climb.  They don't like to do that during the
morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a
50kW FM site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's
50kW EIRP. Something like 15-16kW actually on the
transmission line. There's also a low power station at 250
feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225 feet
sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't
have any problems though. The guys didn't listen to me and
ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high power
transmission line. "But there were waveguide brackets
there, it was so easy!" I smash your face now.

On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I
would *LOVE* for the radios to have an SFP, but it
seems that's just not available.  I'm wonder if fiber
up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such
high power.

I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having
such high power 250 feet away, but that's a secondary
issue.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

Sorry I don't have a part number.  It might be in the list archives.  
They were like 1-3/4" OD.  The ID was just big enough to fit 10 or 11 
coils of outdoor Cat5.


On 7/23/2015 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:

No.  Bigger.


On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Like this?
http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM
station.  Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all
work.  Short, shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They
still had occasionally spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to
affect service.

Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At
fair-rite.com  I found one that was I think
300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to loop the cat5 through
it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you square the
impedance for every extra loop you make through the ferrite, so
just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as
looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at
the 35kw site, but it did work at a 3kw site.


On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it,
something like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some
minor CRC errors on the 450 and more so on the FSK and that
is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an EPMP at the same
elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less
even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it
was over a year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of
investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it didn't work for us
on a high power FM site when the two units were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that
we are using as a BH to another site and it is working
great.  So, your situation may work out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down
each time we climb.  They don't like to do that during the
morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a
50kW FM site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's
50kW EIRP. Something like 15-16kW actually on the
transmission line. There's also a low power station at
250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225
feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio
doesn't have any problems though. The guys didn't listen
to me and ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high
power transmission line. "But there were waveguide
brackets there, it was so easy!" I smash your face now.

On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I
would *LOVE* for the radios to have an SFP, but it
seems that's just not available.  I'm wonder if fiber
up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such
high power.

I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having
such high power 250 feet away, but that's a secondary
issue.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Josh Luthman]

That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10 loops?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

>  No.  Bigger.
>
>
> On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Like this?
> http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
>
>> Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM station.
>> Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all work.  Short,
>> shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally
>> spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.
>>
>> Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At fair-rite.com
>> I found one that was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to
>> loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you
>> square the impedance for every extra loop you make through the ferrite, so
>> just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as looping
>> through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the 35kw site, but
>> it did work at a 3kw site.
>>
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:
>>
>>> We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, something
>>> like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the 450
>>> and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an
>>> EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much
>>> less even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a
>>> year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot
>>> but it didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units were
>>> close.
>>>
>>> That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are
>>> using as a BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation
>>> may work out ok.
>>>
>>> FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time we
>>> climb.  They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive
>>> time.
>>>
>>> Joe Falaschi
>>> e-vergent
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>>>
 I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM site.
 The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something like
 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low power station
 at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225 feet sees some
 CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have any problems though. The
 guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high
 power transmission line. "But there were waveguide brackets there, it was
 so easy!" I smash your face now.

 On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for
> the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.  I'm
> wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
> sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.
>
> I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
> 250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.
>
> Josh Luthman
>  Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>


>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mathew Howard]

I have to agree, I don't see the sense in using switches when I can plug
everything into a Mikrotik router and get much more functionality. True,
you end up with a lot messier wiring using a midspan, but it's worth it in
my opinion that 12 port sync injector sounds like it's going to be
exactly what I want.

Some of the newer stuff does support 802.3af or at now, so maybe things are
starting to move the right direction. Cambium has the right idea with ePMP
- they work with both the old Canopy PoE and 802.3af... I wish everyone
would just do that.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There
> of zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea
> why you would.
>
> Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics
> anyway). I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes,
> though I may get there.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"TJ Trout" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
> Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I
> just really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on
> the market already!
>
> I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants
> to be locked into a specific switch, really guys?
>
> Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing,
> and a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it
> that way?
>
> Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's
> 2015!???
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Seth Mattinen]

On 7/23/15 06:13, Mike Hammett wrote:

Cisco hates WISPs and there are multiple vendors of higher end gear that
haven't gone out of their way to crap on us. Juniper, AlcaLuKia,
Brocade, etc.



I recently got a nice Nexus 3548P-10G with licenses donated from Cisco 
for an IX that supports multiple WISPs, so it wouldn't be correct to 
generalize like that. You could say their wireless BU hates WISPs while 
the other BU's are fine with anyone.


~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

I'm not sure if the link matches what you're describing.  The link is to 
a clip-on ferrite for a single cable up to 8.7mm diameter.


On 7/23/2015 11:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10 loops?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


No.  Bigger.


On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Like this?
http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM
station.  Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it
all work. Short, shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's. 
They still had occasionally spats of CRC errors, but not bad

enough to affect service.

Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At
fair-rite.com  I found one that was I
think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to loop the
cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the deal is you
square the impedance for every extra loop you make through
the ferrite, so just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't
do nearly as much as looping through it a bunch of times.  I
have not tried that at the 35kw site, but it did work at a
3kw site.


On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above
it, something like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see
some minor CRC errors on the 450 and more so on the FSK
and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an EPMP at
the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the
AP much less even get into the AP's management page. 
This seems like it was over a year ago.  We didn't do a

whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it
didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two
units were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet
that we are using as a BH to another site and it is
working great.  So, your situation may work out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power
down each time we climb. They don't like to do that
during the morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet
on a 50kW FM site. The bays start at 420 feet though.
And it's 50kW EIRP. Something like 15-16kW actually
on the transmission line. There's also a low power
station at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The
450 AP at 225 feet sees some CRC errors sometimes.
The ePMP radio doesn't have any problems though. The
guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle
right next to the high power transmission line. "But
there were waveguide brackets there, it was so easy!"
I smash your face now.

On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently?
I would *LOVE* for the radios to have an SFP, but
it seems that's just not available.  I'm wonder
if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded
cat5 would be sufficient to protect the ethernet
ports from such high power.

I'm also weary about getting on the tower for
having such high power 250 feet away, but that's
a secondary issue.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Jon Langeler]

Are they newer chipset?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley  wrote:
> 
> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
> someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

It's the same guy at the top. If he can't keep their divisions nice, then your 
dollars go elsewhere. 

Were the 3ks the one that supported S-Flow for IXP Manager? 

Tahoe_IX, right? 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Seth Mattinen"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:36:19 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

On 7/23/15 06:13, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> Cisco hates WISPs and there are multiple vendors of higher end gear that 
> haven't gone out of their way to crap on us. Juniper, AlcaLuKia, 
> Brocade, etc. 


I recently got a nice Nexus 3548P-10G with licenses donated from Cisco 
for an IX that supports multiple WISPs, so it wouldn't be correct to 
generalize like that. You could say their wireless BU hates WISPs while 
the other BU's are fine with anyone. 

~Seth 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mike Hammett]

I'm only aware of a form factor difference. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Jon Langeler"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 

Are they newer chipset? 

Sent from my iPhone 

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley  wrote: 
> 
> Anyone know when these will be available? I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
> someone that has actually used some trial units. 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Josh Luthman]

Fair rite has options for 1 to 300 Mhz and 25 to 300.  Any idea which you
chose?

This is 101.6 mm which is 4 inches
www.fair-rite.com/cgibin/catalog.pgm?THEONEPART=2643814002&SEARCHAGAIN=N#select:onepart

I figure the cable is 3/8" * 10 loops or 95.25 mm


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

>  I'm not sure if the link matches what you're describing.  The link is to
> a clip-on ferrite for a single cable up to 8.7mm diameter.
>
> On 7/23/2015 11:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10 loops?
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
>
>>  No.  Bigger.
>>
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> Like this?
>> http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129
>>
>>
>>  Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM station.
>>> Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all work.  Short,
>>> shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally
>>> spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.
>>>
>>>  Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At
>>> fair-rite.com I found one that was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it
>>> was big enough to loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the
>>> deal is you square the impedance for every extra loop you make through the
>>> ferrite, so just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much
>>> as looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the 35kw
>>> site, but it did work at a 3kw site.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:
>>>
 We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it, something
 like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the 450
 and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We tried an
 EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much
 less even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was over a
 year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP a lot
 but it didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units were
 close.

 That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are
 using as a BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation
 may work out ok.

 FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time
 we climb.  They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive
 time.

 Joe Falaschi
 e-vergent


 On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

> I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM
> site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something 
> like
> 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low power 
> station
> at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225 feet sees some
> CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have any problems though. The
> guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high
> power transmission line. "But there were waveguide brackets there, it was
> so easy!" I smash your face now.
>
> On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>> Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for
>> the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.  I'm
>> wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
>> sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.
>>
>> I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
>> 250 feet away, but that's a secondary issue.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>>  Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>
>

>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Ken Hohhof]

Why does this sound like Katy Perry / Taylor Swift / Nicki Minaj?  Or Donald 
Trump / John McCain / Lindsey Graham?


So they threw some shade our way in an FCC filing.  Geez, get over it.


-Original Message- 
From: Seth Mattinen

Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

On 7/23/15 06:13, Mike Hammett wrote:

Cisco hates WISPs and there are multiple vendors of higher end gear that
haven't gone out of their way to crap on us. Juniper, AlcaLuKia,
Brocade, etc.



I recently got a nice Nexus 3548P-10G with licenses donated from Cisco
for an IX that supports multiple WISPs, so it wouldn't be correct to
generalize like that. You could say their wireless BU hates WISPs while
the other BU's are fine with anyone.

~Seth 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Nope. 

You crap on me and you have competition that is at least on par with what you 
sell. No reason for me to do business with you. 

Well, I guess I can't fault Seth too much for getting free gear. I tried to get 
free from a few places and have been unsuccessful. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Ken Hohhof"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:57:50 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

Why does this sound like Katy Perry / Taylor Swift / Nicki Minaj? Or Donald 
Trump / John McCain / Lindsey Graham? 

So they threw some shade our way in an FCC filing. Geez, get over it. 


-Original Message- 
From: Seth Mattinen 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:36 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

On 7/23/15 06:13, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> Cisco hates WISPs and there are multiple vendors of higher end gear that 
> haven't gone out of their way to crap on us. Juniper, AlcaLuKia, 
> Brocade, etc. 


I recently got a nice Nexus 3548P-10G with licenses donated from Cisco 
for an IX that supports multiple WISPs, so it wouldn't be correct to 
generalize like that. You could say their wireless BU hates WISPs while 
the other BU's are fine with anyone. 

~Seth 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

The board was obviously reworked due to the form factor.  It's the same as
far as performance and such.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Jon Langeler" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Are they newer chipset?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
> wrote:
> >
> > Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

Wowthat's wy bigger than the one I was using.
Think in terms of cross sectional area.  The "B" dimension is the inner 
diamater, so 3".

pi * R^2 = 7.065 square inches.

If your cable is 3/8 (which sounds a little beefy, but it could be) then 
that's 0.110 square inches.  You could loop through that 60+ times.


I don't remember the formula for total impedance with coils.but it 
was exponential as coils went up.  So I think your impedance would have 
roughly.all of the ohms.


Another consideration is how much cable you have wound up in that coil.  
If you had a 2" bend radius (which would be tight) you'd have around 12" 
in each coil.  So you could wrap 60' of cable around that beast.



On 7/23/2015 11:54 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Fair rite has options for 1 to 300 Mhz and 25 to 300.  Any idea which 
you chose?


This is 101.6 mm which is 4 inches
www.fair-rite.com/cgibin/catalog.pgm?THEONEPART=2643814002&SEARCHAGAIN=N#select:onepart 



I figure the cable is 3/8" * 10 loops or 95.25 mm


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


I'm not sure if the link matches what you're describing.  The link
is to a clip-on ferrite for a single cable up to 8.7mm diameter.

On 7/23/2015 11:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10
loops?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

No. Bigger.


On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Like this?

http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a
35kw FM station. Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top
finally made it all work.  Short, shielded jumpers from
the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally spats
of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.

Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones. 
At fair-rite.com  I found one that

was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to
loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the
the deal is you square the impedance for every extra
loop you make through the ferrite, so just sticking a
ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as
looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried
that at the 35kw site, but it did work at a 3kw site.


On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just
above it, something like 440 to 500 feet or
something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the 450
and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the
tower.  We tried an EPMP at the same elevation and
we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less even
get into the AP's management page.  This seems like
it was over a year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of
investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it didn't work
for us on a high power FM site when the two units
were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120
feet that we are using as a BH to another site and
it is working great.  So, your situation may work
out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit
power down each time we climb.  They don't like to
do that during the morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125
feet on a 50kW FM site. The bays start at 420
feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something like
15-16kW actually on the transmission line.
There's also a low power station at 250 feet,
but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225
feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP
radio doesn't have any problems though. The guys
didn't listen

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[joseph marsh]

I have some trial dishes
On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley"  wrote:

> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Bill Prince]

Get one that matches the frequency(ies) that you want to block best. 
What frequency is the FM station?


bp


On 7/23/2015 8:54 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Fair rite has options for 1 to 300 Mhz and 25 to 300.  Any idea which 
you chose?


This is 101.6 mm which is 4 inches
www.fair-rite.com/cgibin/catalog.pgm?THEONEPART=2643814002&SEARCHAGAIN=N#select:onepart 



I figure the cable is 3/8" * 10 loops or 95.25 mm


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


I'm not sure if the link matches what you're describing.  The link
is to a clip-on ferrite for a single cable up to 8.7mm diameter.

On 7/23/2015 11:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10
loops?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

No. Bigger.


On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Like this?

http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a
35kw FM station. Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top
finally made it all work.  Short, shielded jumpers from
the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally spats
of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.

Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones. 
At fair-rite.com  I found one that

was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it was big enough to
loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the
the deal is you square the impedance for every extra
loop you make through the ferrite, so just sticking a
ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much as
looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried
that at the 35kw site, but it did work at a 3kw site.


On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just
above it, something like 440 to 500 feet or
something.  We see some minor CRC errors on the 450
and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the
tower.  We tried an EPMP at the same elevation and
we couldn't connect an SM to the AP much less even
get into the AP's management page.  This seems like
it was over a year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of
investigation. We like EPMP a lot but it didn't work
for us on a high power FM site when the two units
were close.

That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120
feet that we are using as a BH to another site and
it is working great.  So, your situation may work
out ok.

FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit
power down each time we climb.  They don't like to
do that during the morning and evening drive time.

Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125
feet on a 50kW FM site. The bays start at 420
feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something like
15-16kW actually on the transmission line.
There's also a low power station at 250 feet,
but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225
feet sees some CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP
radio doesn't have any problems though. The guys
didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle
right next to the high power transmission line.
"But there were waveguide brackets there, it was
so easy!" I smash your face now.

On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone had good luck on FM stations
recently? I would *LOVE* for the radios to
have an SFP, but it seems that's just not
available.  I'm wonder if fiber up ~250' and
then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Tushar Patel]

This is for ePMP 5 GHz?

Tushar


> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh  wrote:
> 
> I have some trial dishes
> 
>> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley"  wrote:
>> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
>> someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
well.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:

> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>
> Tushar
>
>
> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh  wrote:
>
> I have some trial dishes
> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley"  wrote:
>
>> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
>> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Josh Luthman]

95.7 MHz.

I was thinking one dimensionally, that's why I picked something so big.
Since there would be 2 dimensions I obviously don't need anything that
big.  I'm using ToughCable and I'm thinking we use 3/8" bits for holes and
that's a really nice size for barely any gap.  I think the cable is between
1/4 and 3/8 (call it 5/16"?)


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Bill Prince  wrote:

>  Get one that matches the frequency(ies) that you want to block best. What
> frequency is the FM station?
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 7/23/2015 8:54 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Fair rite has options for 1 to 300 Mhz and 25 to 300.  Any idea which you
> chose?
>
>  This is 101.6 mm which is 4 inches
>
> www.fair-rite.com/cgibin/catalog.pgm?THEONEPART=2643814002&SEARCHAGAIN=N#select:onepart
>
>  I figure the cable is 3/8" * 10 loops or 95.25 mm
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
>
>>  I'm not sure if the link matches what you're describing.  The link is to
>> a clip-on ferrite for a single cable up to 8.7mm diameter.
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 11:30 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> That's got room for 6" of cable.  I figure that's enough for 10 loops?
>>
>>
>>  Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Adam Moffett < 
>> dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  No.  Bigger.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/23/2015 11:20 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> Like this?
>>>
>>> http://www.newark.com/fair-rite/0475178281/frequency-min-200khz/dp/82X7129
>>>
>>>
>>>  Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Adam Moffett < 
>>> dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Yeah I know a site that had nothing but problems at a 35kw FM station.
 Fiber and DC to a CMM4 at the top finally made it all work.  Short,
 shielded jumpers from the CMM to the AP's.  They still had occasionally
 spats of CRC errors, but not bad enough to affect service.

  Never had any luck with ferrites until I got big ones.  At
 fair-rite.com I found one that was I think 300ohms at 100mhz, and it
 was big enough to loop the cat5 through it 10 or 11 times.  I think the the
 deal is you square the impedance for every extra loop you make through the
 ferrite, so just sticking a ferrite on the cable doesn't do nearly as much
 as looping through it a bunch of times.  I have not tried that at the 35kw
 site, but it did work at a 3kw site.


 On 7/23/2015 2:22 AM, Joe Falaschi wrote:

> We have 450 APs at 410 feet with a 50k station just above it,
> something like 440 to 500 feet or something.  We see some minor CRC errors
> on the 450 and more so on the FSK and that is with fiber up the tower.  We
> tried an EPMP at the same elevation and we couldn't connect an SM to the 
> AP
> much less even get into the AP's management page.  This seems like it was
> over a year ago.  We didn't do a whole lot of investigation. We like EPMP 
> a
> lot but it didn't work for us on a high power FM site when the two units
> were close.
>
> That said we have an EPMP on the same tower at 120 feet that we are
> using as a BH to another site and it is working great.  So, your situation
> may work out ok.
>
> FYI, we have the radio station turn the transmit power down each time
> we climb.  They don't like to do that during the morning and evening drive
> time.
>
> Joe Falaschi
> e-vergent
>
>
> On 7/22/15 6:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>
>> I have a connectorized ePMP on a 2' dish at 125 feet on a 50kW FM
>> site. The bays start at 420 feet though. And it's 50kW EIRP. Something 
>> like
>> 15-16kW actually on the transmission line. There's also a low power 
>> station
>> at 250 feet, but it's under 3kW I think. The 450 AP at 225 feet sees some
>> CRC errors sometimes. The ePMP radio doesn't have any problems though. 
>> The
>> guys didn't listen to me and ran our cat5 bundle right next to the high
>> power transmission line. "But there were waveguide brackets there, it was
>> so easy!" I smash your face now.
>>
>> On 7/22/2015 4:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone had good luck on FM stations recently? I would *LOVE* for
>>> the radios to have an SFP, but it seems that's just not available.  I'm
>>> wonder if fiber up ~250' and then 10-20 foot shielded cat5 would be
>>> sufficient to protect the ethernet ports from such high power.
>>>
>>> I'm also weary about getting on the tower for having such high power
>>> 250 feet away, but that's a se

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[joseph marsh]

2.4
On Jul 23, 2015 11:44 AM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:

> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>
> Tushar
>
>
> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh  wrote:
>
> I have some trial dishes
> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley"  wrote:
>
>> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
>> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[SmarterBroadband]

PacketFlux website shows 12 port as a timing port sync unit.

 

Are they going to do a 12 port sync injector (power port) as well?

 

That would be nice.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:31 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

 

I have to agree, I don't see the sense in using switches when I can plug 
everything into a Mikrotik router and get much more functionality. True, you 
end up with a lot messier wiring using a midspan, but it's worth it in my 
opinion that 12 port sync injector sounds like it's going to be exactly 
what I want.

Some of the newer stuff does support 802.3af or at now, so maybe things are 
starting to move the right direction. Cambium has the right idea with ePMP - 
they work with both the old Canopy PoE and 802.3af... I wish everyone would 
just do that.

 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would.

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there.



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

   
  
  
 

Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com

   
  
 

  _  

From: "TJ Trout" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already!

 

I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 

 

Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way?

 

Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!???

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Josh Luthman]

8 port is coming...dunno about 12.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:00 PM, SmarterBroadband <
li...@smarterbroadband.com> wrote:

> PacketFlux website shows 12 port as a timing port sync unit.
>
>
>
> Are they going to do a 12 port sync injector (power port) as well?
>
>
>
> That would be nice.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:31 AM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
>
>
> I have to agree, I don't see the sense in using switches when I can plug
> everything into a Mikrotik router and get much more functionality. True,
> you end up with a lot messier wiring using a midspan, but it's worth it in
> my opinion that 12 port sync injector sounds like it's going to be
> exactly what I want.
>
> Some of the newer stuff does support 802.3af or at now, so maybe things
> are starting to move the right direction. Cambium has the right idea with
> ePMP - they work with both the old Canopy PoE and 802.3af... I wish
> everyone would just do that.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There
> of zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea
> why you would.
>
> Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics
> anyway). I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes,
> though I may get there.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"TJ Trout" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>
> Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I
> just really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on
> the market already!
>
>
>
> I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants
> to be locked into a specific switch, really guys?
>
>
>
> Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing,
> and a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it
> that way?
>
>
>
> Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's
> 2015!???
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput

[Mike Hammett]

I haven't seen that anywhere other than here. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Paul McCall"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 7:19:54 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 



Ummm… sorry Mike. Even Mikrotik acknowledges this “symptom” as we brought it to 
them several times over the past year. They explained it about as badly as I 
did J 



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 7:10 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 


There should be no MT router in use today that has performance issues with 
single customer standard NAT. Maybe 10mbit+ plans on 10+ year old routers, but 
there shouldn't be a difference. 

That said, Fast Track does greatly improve the performance of anything using 
connection tracking. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -


From: "Paul McCall" < pa...@pdmnet.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 5:59:38 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 
I posed about our similar frustrations a while back… here’s an update. 

I would suspect something in the router’s queuing methods as well. Just a big 
important FYI, for those of you using Mikrotik routers and NAT for customers, 
if you want customers to always be able to achieve full speeds, use 6.29 or 
above an enable FastRack. We had a very difficult time, only with some 
customers getting full speeds. 2 computers could get each get 2.8 Mbit at the 
exact same time, but no individual PC could get more than 3Mbit. Not all users 
had this and the weak response “from the crowd” was the wireless link (even 
some good links from AP to SM) was causing a little extra queuing at the 
hardware level, resulting in performance behind the router to be less than 
optimal. Yeah, I know is not a completely scientific description that we can 
all latch onto, but it appears to have validity. 

Here are the FW rules for that version that magically fixed the few customers 
that we have tried it on. 
/ip firewall filter 
add chain=forward action=fasttrack-connection 
connection-state=established,related 
add chain=forward action=accept connection-state=established,related 
add chain=forward action=drop connection-state=invalid 

As the name says, it Fast tracks most of the firewall (processing of queues and 
other rules) which may not work for all your situations, such as a heavy user 
that absolutely needs VoIP optimization because they are slamming their 
connection. (not the norm) 

Paul 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:44 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 




Also, the two tests may be different. Speedtest.net type test may be saying I 
see packet loss starting at X Mbps so the rate is X, while iPerf type test may 
say I see Y Mbps goodput despite some packet loss so the rate is Y. 



This may be interacting with the queuing method, as Mike points out. 



Perhaps set the ePMP to wide open and see if customer results change, then set 
queue in Miktrotik and see what happens. 








From: Mike Hammett 

Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 5:30 AM 

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 




I read it as using the ePMP for queuing, the performance is less than expected. 
Using the MT for queuing, the performance is as expected. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 





From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:57:18 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 

If the Mikrotiks at the customer site are doing 40x10 but the customer devices 
behind the MT it doesn't really make sense to look at the epmp for your 
problem. 



It could be the Mikrotik's CPU, port, wireless or the customer device. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 



On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Nate Burke < n...@blastcomm.com > wrote: 
I have deployed quite a bit of epmp, but most people are at my base package, 
4x1 (using the radio qos to limit bw on different tiers). Of the handful of 
people that are on larger plans, 20x5 or 40x10, 2 of them, on different towers 
are complaining that they struggle to get over 10mb on a speed test. The radio 
rf link test performs at the assigned qos level, and I sent one of them a 
mikrotik to go between the poe and his router (qos 40x10), and udp/tcp tests to 
that are coming back as expected. However, I can be watching the router, and 
his interface plugged directly into a laptop only runs 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mathew Howard]

Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
> well.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>
>> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>>
>> Tushar
>>
>>
>> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I have some trial dishes
>> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley"  wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
>>> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Seth Mattinen]

On 7/23/15 08:50, Mike Hammett wrote:

It's the same guy at the top. If he can't keep their divisions nice,
then your dollars go elsewhere.

Were the 3ks the one that supported S-Flow for IXP Manager?

Tahoe_IX, right?



Yep. I haven't deployed it yet, it's sitting in the "to be worked on" 
never ending pile of stuff. I don't even know what version of NX-OS is 
on it but I'm pretty sure the 3000 series supports sFlow.


~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Adam Moffett]

'Dare's your problum rite 'dare.


On 7/23/2015 12:53 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I'm using ToughCable 

Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput

[Mike Hammett]

Sounds familiar... 

That's me invigorating the economy. Mike for President. ;-) Wait, I won't be 
old enough this election. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Erich Kaiser"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:31:50 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 


It could be a laptop issue, one time someone made fun of my laptop so I went 
out and bought an i7 laptop and now I can run speedtests all day long with no 
problem... 












Erich Kaiser 
North Central Tower 
er...@northcentraltower.com 
Office: 630-621-4804 
Cell: 630-777-9291 



On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Nate Burke < n...@blastcomm.com > wrote: 



I'm not doing any MT Queuing, the Only Queue is the EPMP QOS. I put a MT in 
Bridge mode at one of the customer locations for bandwidth testing after the 
customer was complaining about slow speeds. The MT BW Test to that Bridge runs 
as expected. It's reassuring that others are not seeing this. 



On 7/22/2015 5:43 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: 





Also, the two tests may be different. Speedtest.net type test may be saying I 
see packet loss starting at X Mbps so the rate is X, while iPerf type test may 
say I see Y Mbps goodput despite some packet loss so the rate is Y. 

This may be interacting with the queuing method, as Mike points out. 

Perhaps set the ePMP to wide open and see if customer results change, then set 
queue in Miktrotik and see what happens. 





From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 5:30 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 


I read it as using the ePMP for queuing, the performance is less than expected. 
Using the MT for queuing, the performance is as expected. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:57:18 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput 


If the Mikrotiks at the customer site are doing 40x10 but the customer devices 
behind the MT it doesn't really make sense to look at the epmp for your 
problem. 

It could be the Mikrotik's CPU, port, wireless or the customer device. 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Nate Burke < n...@blastcomm.com > wrote: 


I have deployed quite a bit of epmp, but most people are at my base package, 
4x1 (using the radio qos to limit bw on different tiers). Of the handful of 
people that are on larger plans, 20x5 or 40x10, 2 of them, on different towers 
are complaining that they struggle to get over 10mb on a speed test. The radio 
rf link test performs at the assigned qos level, and I sent one of them a 
mikrotik to go between the poe and his router (qos 40x10), and udp/tcp tests to 
that are coming back as expected. However, I can be watching the router, and 
his interface plugged directly into a laptop only runs like 10x2 during a 
speedtest. Do both of these customers have something wonky with their laptops, 
or is there a setting in epmp I'm overlooking? Most of our epmp deployment has 
been FSK upgrades, so I haven't had much actual laptop time myself behind an 
epmp sm, as we just go on the roof and change radios. 

Nate 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mike Hammett]

Is the Force 200 public information now? 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Mathew Howard"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:07:16 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 


Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming 
pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version. 



On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as well. 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel < tpa...@ecpi.com > wrote: 




This is for ePMP 5 GHz? 

Tushar 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh < bwireless...@gmail.com > wrote: 





I have some trial dishes 
On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" < par...@cyberbroadband.net > wrote: 


Anyone know when these will be available? I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
someone that has actually used some trial units. 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

Earlier in this thread: 

"The 12 port version will reduce this further and will be jumper configurable 
for a lot more different radios - if I can ever get the @()#$* thing shipping." 
- Forest 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "SmarterBroadband"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:00:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 



PacketFlux website shows 12 port as a timing port sync unit. 

Are they going to do a 12 port sync injector (power port) as well? 

That would be nice. 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:31 AM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 



I have to agree, I don't see the sense in using switches when I can plug 
everything into a Mikrotik router and get much more functionality. True, you 
end up with a lot messier wiring using a midspan, but it's worth it in my 
opinion that 12 port sync injector sounds like it's going to be exactly 
what I want. 

Some of the newer stuff does support 802.3af or at now, so maybe things are 
starting to move the right direction. Cambium has the right idea with ePMP - 
they work with both the old Canopy PoE and 802.3af... I wish everyone would 
just do that. 



On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it. There of 
zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No idea why you 
would. 

Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics anyway). 
I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes, though I may get 
there. 



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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 





From: "TJ Trout" < t...@voltbb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I just 
really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on the 
market already! 



I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants to be 
locked into a specific switch, really guys? 



Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port, fusing, and 
a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys really see it that 
way? 



Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's 2015!??? 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP and/or 50kw FM stations

[Josh Luthman]

I like it more than any other option.  Obviously the first waves were a
f**ing joke but the current boxes/cable are very good.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> 'Dare's your problum rite 'dare.
> 
>
> On 7/23/2015 12:53 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>> I'm using ToughCable
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

5 GHz is going to be first for everything for 10+ years I expect.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
> pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
>> well.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>>
>>> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>>>
>>> Tushar
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some trial dishes
>>> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
 from someone that has actually used some trial units.

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mike Hammett]

https://github.com/inex/IXP-Manager/wiki/Installing-Sflow-Support 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Seth Mattinen"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:07:13 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches 

On 7/23/15 08:50, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> It's the same guy at the top. If he can't keep their divisions nice, 
> then your dollars go elsewhere. 
> 
> Were the 3ks the one that supported S-Flow for IXP Manager? 
> 
> Tahoe_IX, right? 


Yep. I haven't deployed it yet, it's sitting in the "to be worked on" 
never ending pile of stuff. I don't even know what version of NX-OS is 
on it but I'm pretty sure the 3000 series supports sFlow. 

~Seth 

Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches

[Mathew Howard]

According to Forrest's post earlier in this thread "A syncinjector reduces
the wiring load by 1/4 (one fuse per 4 radios).  The 12 port version  will
reduce this further and will be jumper configurable for a lot more
different radios - if I can ever get the @()#$* thing shipping."

So yes, and it sounds really nice... with jumpers so it can power pretty
much anything.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> 8 port is coming...dunno about 12.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:00 PM, SmarterBroadband <
> li...@smarterbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> PacketFlux website shows 12 port as a timing port sync unit.
>>
>>
>>
>> Are they going to do a 12 port sync injector (power port) as well?
>>
>>
>>
>> That would be nice.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2015 8:31 AM
>> *To:* af
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>>
>>
>>
>> I have to agree, I don't see the sense in using switches when I can plug
>> everything into a Mikrotik router and get much more functionality. True,
>> you end up with a lot messier wiring using a midspan, but it's worth it in
>> my opinion that 12 port sync injector sounds like it's going to be
>> exactly what I want.
>>
>> Some of the newer stuff does support 802.3af or at now, so maybe things
>> are starting to move the right direction. Cambium has the right idea with
>> ePMP - they work with both the old Canopy PoE and 802.3af... I wish
>> everyone would just do that.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>> I don't use switches in the field, otherwise I'd be pressing for it.
>> There of zero use to me. Reduced functionality and reduced performance. No
>> idea why you would.
>>
>> Radios go directly into an MPLS router (in terms of active electronics
>> anyway). I'm not yet to Gino's level of going directly into CE boxes,
>> though I may get there.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"TJ Trout" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:06:16 PM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] DC POE Switches
>>
>> Is there really no gigabit poe switches on the market available now? I
>> just really don't understand why there aren't a bunch of types of these on
>> the market already!
>>
>>
>>
>> I posed the question to Forrest at afmug and he stated that no one wants
>> to be locked into a specific switch, really guys?
>>
>>
>>
>> Using a midspan injector that requires power cabling to each port,
>> fusing, and a rats nest of ethernet cables seems so 2006, do you guys
>> really see it that way?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes I know about netonix, but how are they the first to market, it's
>> 2015!???
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput

[Josh Luthman]

What's that matter?  It's not like we care about the constitution any more.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Sounds familiar...
>
> That's me invigorating the economy. Mike for President.  ;-)  Wait, I
> won't be old enough this election.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Erich Kaiser" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:31:50 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>
> It could be a laptop issue, one time someone made fun of my laptop so I
> went out and bought an i7 laptop and now I can run speedtests all day long
> with no problem...
>
>
> Erich Kaiser
> North Central Tower
> er...@northcentraltower.com
> Office: 630-621-4804
> Cell: 630-777-9291
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>
>>  I'm not doing any MT Queuing, the Only Queue is the EPMP QOS.  I put a
>> MT in Bridge mode at one of the customer locations for bandwidth testing
>> after the customer was complaining about slow speeds.  The MT BW Test to
>> that Bridge runs as expected.  It's reassuring that others are not seeing
>> this.
>>
>>
>> On 7/22/2015 5:43 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>>  Also, the two tests may be different.  Speedtest.net type test may be
>> saying I see packet loss starting at X Mbps so the rate is X, while iPerf
>> type test may say I see Y Mbps goodput despite some packet loss so the rate
>> is Y.
>>
>> This may be interacting with the queuing method, as Mike points out.
>>
>> Perhaps set the ePMP to wide open and see if customer results change,
>> then set queue in Miktrotik and see what happens.
>>
>>
>>  *From:* Mike Hammett 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 5:30 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>>
>>  I read it as using the ePMP for queuing, the performance is less than
>> expected. Using the MT for queuing, the performance is as expected.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>  --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:57:18 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>>
>> If the Mikrotiks at the customer site are doing 40x10 but the customer
>> devices behind the MT it doesn't really make sense to look at the epmp for
>> your problem.
>>
>> It could be the Mikrotik's CPU, port, wireless or the customer device.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>>
>>> I have deployed quite a bit of epmp, but most people are at my base
>>> package, 4x1 (using the radio qos to limit bw on different tiers). Of the
>>> handful of people that are on larger plans, 20x5 or 40x10, 2 of them, on
>>> different towers are complaining that they struggle to get over 10mb on a
>>> speed test. The radio rf link test performs at the assigned qos level, and
>>> I sent one of them a mikrotik to go between the poe and his router (qos
>>> 40x10), and udp/tcp tests to that are coming back as expected. However, I
>>> can be watching the router, and his interface plugged directly into a
>>> laptop only runs like 10x2 during a speedtest. Do both of these customers
>>> have something wonky with their laptops, or is there a setting in epmp I'm
>>> overlooking? Most of our epmp deployment has been FSK upgrades, so I
>>> haven't had much actual laptop time myself behind an epmp sm, as we just go
>>> on the roof and change radios.
>>>
>>> Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mathew Howard]

Sort of, there was some talk of it on Cambium's forum, but I haven't seen
any details of it yet.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Is the Force 200 public information now?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Mathew Howard" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:07:16 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
> pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
>> well.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>>
>>> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>>>
>>> Tushar
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some trial dishes
>>> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
 from someone that has actually used some trial units.

>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

It's on the FCC DB so...


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Is the Force 200 public information now?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Mathew Howard" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:07:16 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
> pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
>> well.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>>
>>> This is for ePMP 5 GHz?
>>>
>>> Tushar
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some trial dishes
>>> On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
 from someone that has actually used some trial units.

>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mathew Howard]

Yeah, I would expect so, but I thought maybe they wanted to get the 2.4 out
first since they already have the 110 for 5ghz, but nothing with decent
gain for 2.4.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> 5 GHz is going to be first for everything for 10+ years I expect.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
>> pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
>>> well.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>>>
 This is for ePMP 5 GHz?

 Tushar


 On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
 wrote:

 I have some trial dishes
 On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" 
 wrote:

> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work
> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[joseph marsh]

I'm playing with mine  Friday afternoon. Never even plugged mine up

They Are still sitting in the office
On Jul 23, 2015 12:10 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
wrote:

> 5 GHz is going to be first for everything for 10+ years I expect.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming
>> pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as
>>> well.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>>>
 This is for ePMP 5 GHz?

 Tushar


 On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh 
 wrote:

 I have some trial dishes
 On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" 
 wrote:

> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work
> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mike Hammett]

I saw something new come up, but it wasn't directly labeled as the Force 200 at 
the time. 

If such a thing exists, yes, I'd expect 5 GHz only for some time with 2.4 GHz 
to follow. 





(Did ya see what I did there?) ;-) 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:14:21 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 


It's on the FCC DB so... 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Is the Force 200 public information now? 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:07:16 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 


Is 5ghz coming first with these? A distributor told me the 2.4 was coming 
pretty soon, but he didn't mention anything about the 5ghz version. 



On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Obviously 5 GHz is coming first but I'm assuming/expecting to see 2.4 as well. 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tushar Patel < tpa...@ecpi.com > wrote: 




This is for ePMP 5 GHz? 

Tushar 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh < bwireless...@gmail.com > wrote: 





I have some trial dishes 
On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" < par...@cyberbroadband.net > wrote: 


Anyone know when these will be available? I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
someone that has actually used some trial units. 

Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput

[Mathew Howard]

Yes... just write a new date of birth on your ID with a Sharpie... it'll be
fine, who's going to bother checking?

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> What's that matter?  It's not like we care about the constitution any more.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> Sounds familiar...
>>
>> That's me invigorating the economy. Mike for President.  ;-)  Wait, I
>> won't be old enough this election.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Erich Kaiser" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:31:50 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>>
>> It could be a laptop issue, one time someone made fun of my laptop so I
>> went out and bought an i7 laptop and now I can run speedtests all day long
>> with no problem...
>>
>>
>> Erich Kaiser
>> North Central Tower
>> er...@northcentraltower.com
>> Office: 630-621-4804
>> Cell: 630-777-9291
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>>
>>>  I'm not doing any MT Queuing, the Only Queue is the EPMP QOS.  I put a
>>> MT in Bridge mode at one of the customer locations for bandwidth testing
>>> after the customer was complaining about slow speeds.  The MT BW Test to
>>> that Bridge runs as expected.  It's reassuring that others are not seeing
>>> this.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/22/2015 5:43 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>
>>>  Also, the two tests may be different.  Speedtest.net type test may be
>>> saying I see packet loss starting at X Mbps so the rate is X, while iPerf
>>> type test may say I see Y Mbps goodput despite some packet loss so the rate
>>> is Y.
>>>
>>> This may be interacting with the queuing method, as Mike points out.
>>>
>>> Perhaps set the ePMP to wide open and see if customer results change,
>>> then set queue in Miktrotik and see what happens.
>>>
>>>
>>>  *From:* Mike Hammett 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 5:30 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>>>
>>>  I read it as using the ePMP for queuing, the performance is less than
>>> expected. Using the MT for queuing, the performance is as expected.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  --
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:57:18 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Epmp user throughput
>>>
>>> If the Mikrotiks at the customer site are doing 40x10 but the customer
>>> devices behind the MT it doesn't really make sense to look at the epmp for
>>> your problem.
>>>
>>> It could be the Mikrotik's CPU, port, wireless or the customer device.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>>>
 I have deployed quite a bit of epmp, but most people are at my base
 package, 4x1 (using the radio qos to limit bw on different tiers). Of the
 handful of people that are on larger plans, 20x5 or 40x10, 2 of them, on
 different towers are complaining that they struggle to get over 10mb on a
 speed test. The radio rf link test performs at the assigned qos level, and
 I sent one of them a mikrotik to go between the poe and his router (qos
 40x10), and udp/tcp tests to that are coming back as expected. However, I
 can be watching the router, and his interface plugged directly into a
 laptop only runs like 10x2 during a speedtest. Do both of these customers
 have something wonky with their laptops, or is there a setting in epmp I'm
 overlooking? Most of our epmp deployment has been FSK upgrades, so I
 haven't had much actual laptop time myself behind an epmp sm, as we just go
 on the roof and change radios.

 Nate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Jay Weekley]

2.4 ePMP is what I was told.

Tushar Patel wrote:

This is for ePMP 5 GHz?

Tushar


On Jul 23, 2015, at 11:18 AM, joseph marsh > wrote:



I have some trial dishes

On Jul 23, 2015 9:53 AM, "Jay Weekley" > wrote:


Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work
"GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] 24v syncinjector wiring

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

Forrest?
I have a revision E0 Parasitic
Base Unit II - Firmware - March 12 2013
SyncInjector100RevH1 22-Jan-14
SyncInjector430RevH1 12-Jan-15

The 100 injector will not show connected unless it is the first device, it
was doing some weird stuff like randomly not being connected, but I think
it may have been due to the amount if time I left power off when cycling

I have the parasitic connected to the syncinjector 100, its is getting
pulses and both the fsk and the 320 AP are showing sync, but there is no
GPS data. Is this normal behavior when using a parasitic?

Parasitics dont generate their own sync, is this correct? So if it is
sending pulses, even without the satellite info they should be valid timing?

I though when I shop tested these that they were showing GPS data, but I
dont know if I tested with this particular parasitic

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:21 PM, George Skorup  wrote:

>  The link Josh posted to wire the RJ12 to RJ45 jumper will allow you to
> use the spare parasitics with SyncInjectors. But I think you need at least
> Rev E or possibly Rev F/G/H pipes with the newer SiteMonitor controlled
> SyncInjectors. There's some difference, I forget what it is. I think the
> no-no was Rev C pipes on Rev H SyncInjectors. Forrest would have to say for
> sure what works with what.
>
> On 6/19/2015 12:18 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
>
> We have always used the parasitics, syncsplitters, creative taps and
> syncbox, but these syncinjectors are the bees knees, other than that they
> arent universal. BUT, not having to climb up makes a huge difference, and
> being able to do with packetflux with a handful of hundred dollar bills
> what the CMMs do, its a no brainer. but now we have a bunch of parasitics
> laying around. They just wont die, so we have to use them
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:19 AM, George Skorup  wrote:
>
>>  Yeah, I have a couple sites with either a SyncPipe Deluxe or a SyncBox
>> on top powered separately and a SyncInjector with it's own Basic pipe at
>> the bottom to provide redundant timing to some 450 sectors.
>>
>> I also have some 450 sectors each with their own Parasitic pipes because
>> they're far apart on the tower. And I get some strange GPS issues there
>> when it rains or there's heavy cloud cover. So I asked Forrest if it would
>> be OK to put a sync over power pulse through the Parasitic pipes. He said
>> no issues and I've bench tested it, so I'm going to add a SyncInjector on
>> those APs
>>
>> On 6/19/2015 11:06 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>>  I have mostly switched to using the Syncbox12 instead of Parasitics.
>> It does have a Syncinjector port on it (which I haven’t had a use for).
>>
>>  *From:* Josh Luthman 
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2015 10:48 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 24v syncinjector wiring
>>
>>1.  From what I'm told you can do it.  Just reverse the blue/brown
>> pairs.  Sync pulse doesn't cause damage from what Forrest said.
>>
>> 2.
>> http://manuals.packetflux.com/index.php?page=using-a-syncpipe-parasitic-with-a-syncinjector
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:45 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I thought I had read these are both doable,
>>> 1. Can I power ubnt devices off these? what is the cross pinout? and do
>>> I need to turn off the sync pulse on that port?
>>>
>>> 2. Can I use a syncpipe parasitic on the syncinjector? Isnt there a
>>> particular cable pinout to do this?
>>>
>>> --
>>>   If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
>   If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>
>
>


-- 
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[George Skorup]

GigE interface!

On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I'm only aware of a form factor difference.



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



Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com



*From: *"Jon Langeler" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Are they newer chipset?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
 wrote:

>
> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work 
"GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync

[Mike Hammett]

Mikrotik can get 200+ out of 40 MHz. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Ken Hohhof"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:19:29 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 




Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 
802.11n PHY. 

I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version 
really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. 





From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 


220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my 
story about going from Beams to force110? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, "Joshua Heide" < j...@velociter.net > wrote: 





Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting 
with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? 

Josh Heide 
Network Engineer 
Velociter Wireless, Inc. 
(209)838-1221 x108 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mike Hammett]

I guess I didn't have it plugged in to the right places. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "George Skorup"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 12:40:42 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 

GigE interface! 


On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



I'm only aware of a form factor difference. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Jon Langeler"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200 

Are they newer chipset? 

Sent from my iPhone 

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley  wrote: 
> 
> Anyone know when these will be available? I've heard they work "GREAT" from 
> someone that has actually used some trial units. 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

That's the force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

>  GigE interface!
>
> On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
>  --
> *From: *"Jon Langeler" 
> 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Are they newer chipset?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work "GREAT"
> from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[George Skorup]

You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?

On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


That's the force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup" > wrote:


GigE interface!

On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I'm only aware of a form factor difference.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Jon Langeler" 

*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Are they newer chipset?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley
  wrote:
>
> Anyone know when these will be available?  I've heard they work
"GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt

[Mike Hammett]

So that's less than ten minutes? 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:06:39 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt 


My Chrome on two machines at home, two machines at the office, one RDP machine 
plus my phone. That's 6 devices for just me. 

I'm suggesting a simpler solution, not a real PITA one!!! 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Paul Stewart < p...@paulstewart.org > wrote: 





For CPE, you can install it in your browser to confirm it’s secure … won’t 
prompt you again. We run many different internal systems that have private SSL 
certs that are installed in our browsers … works well …. 


From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:32 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt 


Self signed certs would still have Chrome/Firefox complain that it isn't 
secure. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Paul Stewart < p...@paulstewart.org > wrote: 




Do the CPE radios support it? 

But for infrastructure stuff why not install your own certs? 

From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:20 PM 


To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt 




Oh what if we can batch it for thousands of CPE radios? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Jul 21, 2015 3:13 PM, "Paul Stewart" < p...@paulstewart.org > wrote: 




Hopefully it “plays nice” with all browsers.. there’s been a couple of other 
free SSL providers come along but they had significant problems with certain 
browsers. 

Honestly for the price of a “cheap” SSL cert anymore I’m not sure this is huge 
news – but it definitely will hopefully foster further SSL adoption .. J 

From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:52 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt 


Whoa that's going to be a huge! 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Simon Westlake < 
simon.westl...@digitalgunfire.com > wrote: 


Yeah, it's a pretty cool concept. Should essentially let you generate (for 
free) browser trusted certs. I've been waiting for it to come out for a while. 

Right now I mostly use Comodo because it's cheap, but this should end up being 
pretty much comparable for $0. 

On 7/20/2015 9:37 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: 


Coming September. Anyone know more about it? Free certs sounds good. 

https://letsencrypt.org/ 

Re: [AFMUG] 24v syncinjector wiring

[George Skorup]

It sounds like you're having the module detection issue on the expansion 
bus. Forrest put out some new firmware that fixes those issues.


I also recall that there was a wiring/pinout change with the newer 
SyncInjectors. Or maybe the GPS data issue is because the Rev E pipes 
don't do NMEA format?


On 7/23/2015 12:29 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

Forrest?
I have a revision E0 Parasitic
Base Unit II - Firmware - March 12 2013
SyncInjector100RevH122-Jan-14
SyncInjector430RevH112-Jan-15

The 100 injector will not show connected unless it is the first 
device, it was doing some weird stuff like randomly not being 
connected, but I think it may have been due to the amount if time I 
left power off when cycling


I have the parasitic connected to the syncinjector 100, its is getting 
pulses and both the fsk and the 320 AP are showing sync, but there is 
no GPS data. Is this normal behavior when using a parasitic?


Parasitics dont generate their own sync, is this correct? So if it is 
sending pulses, even without the satellite info they should be valid 
timing?


I though when I shop tested these that they were showing GPS data, but 
I dont know if I tested with this particular parasitic


On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:21 PM, George Skorup > wrote:


The link Josh posted to wire the RJ12 to RJ45 jumper will allow
you to use the spare parasitics with SyncInjectors. But I think
you need at least Rev E or possibly Rev F/G/H pipes with the newer
SiteMonitor controlled SyncInjectors. There's some difference, I
forget what it is. I think the no-no was Rev C pipes on Rev H
SyncInjectors. Forrest would have to say for sure what works with
what.

On 6/19/2015 12:18 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

We have always used the parasitics, syncsplitters, creative taps
and syncbox, but these syncinjectors are the bees knees, other
than that they arent universal. BUT, not having to climb up makes
a huge difference, and being able to do with packetflux with a
handful of hundred dollar bills what the CMMs do, its a no
brainer. but now we have a bunch of parasitics laying around.
They just wont die, so we have to use them

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:19 AM, George Skorup
mailto:geo...@cbcast.com>> wrote:

Yeah, I have a couple sites with either a SyncPipe Deluxe or
a SyncBox on top powered separately and a SyncInjector with
it's own Basic pipe at the bottom to provide redundant timing
to some 450 sectors.

I also have some 450 sectors each with their own Parasitic
pipes because they're far apart on the tower. And I get some
strange GPS issues there when it rains or there's heavy cloud
cover. So I asked Forrest if it would be OK to put a sync
over power pulse through the Parasitic pipes. He said no
issues and I've bench tested it, so I'm going to add a
SyncInjector on those APs

On 6/19/2015 11:06 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

I have mostly switched to using the Syncbox12 instead of
Parasitics.  It does have a Syncinjector port on it (which I
haven’t had a use for).
*From:* Josh Luthman 
*Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2015 10:48 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 24v syncinjector wiring
1.  From what I'm told you can do it.  Just reverse the
blue/brown pairs. Sync pulse doesn't cause damage from what
Forrest said.
2.

http://manuals.packetflux.com/index.php?page=using-a-syncpipe-parasitic-with-a-syncinjector
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:45 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I thought I had read these are both doable,
1. Can I power ubnt devices off these? what is the cross
pinout? and do I need to turn off the sync pulse on that
port?
2. Can I use a syncpipe parasitic on the syncinjector?
Isnt there a particular cable pinout to do this?
-- 
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you

don't see your team as part of yourself you have already
failed as part of the team.






-- 
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see

your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of
the team.





--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your 
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Re: [AFMUG] MT in 5GHz band

[Mike Hammett]

HOLY *&^*&$% %$^&*^% BATMAN 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Glen Waldrop"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:54:45 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] MT in 5GHz band 


I was rebuilding a fried AP, figured it would likely be my last MT 5GHz unit. 

MT finally mentioned that they are working on UNII certifications. Exactly what 
that means is anyone's guess. They might shoot for UNII 3 and leave the rest on 
the table. 

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=87354#p491178 

Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt

[Josh Luthman]

E plus each employee device plus replacement machines.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> So that's less than ten minutes?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:06:39 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt
>
> My Chrome on two machines at home, two machines at the office, one RDP
> machine plus my phone.  That's 6 devices for just me.
>
> I'm suggesting a simpler solution, not a real PITA one!!!
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Paul Stewart 
> wrote:
>
>> For CPE, you can install it in your browser to confirm it’s secure …
>> won’t prompt you again.  We run many different internal systems that have
>> private SSL certs that are installed in our browsers … works well ….
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:32 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt
>>
>>
>>
>> Self signed certs would still have Chrome/Firefox complain that it isn't
>> secure.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Paul Stewart 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Do the CPE radios support it?
>>
>>
>>
>> But for infrastructure stuff why not install your own certs?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:20 PM
>>
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt
>>
>>
>>
>> Oh what if we can batch it for thousands of CPE radios?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Jul 21, 2015 3:13 PM, "Paul Stewart"  wrote:
>>
>> Hopefully it “plays nice” with all browsers.. there’s been a couple of
>> other free SSL providers come along but they had significant problems with
>> certain browsers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Honestly for the price of a “cheap” SSL cert anymore I’m not sure this is
>> huge news – but it definitely will hopefully foster further SSL adoption ..
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:52 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Let's Encrypt
>>
>>
>>
>> Whoa that's going to be a huge!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Simon Westlake <
>> simon.westl...@digitalgunfire.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, it's a pretty cool concept. Should essentially let you generate
>> (for free) browser trusted certs. I've been waiting for it to come out for
>> a while.
>>
>> Right now I mostly use Comodo because it's cheap, but this should end up
>> being pretty much comparable for $0.
>>
>> On 7/20/2015 9:37 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>> Coming September.  Anyone know more about it?  Free certs sounds good.
>>
>> https://letsencrypt.org/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

180 is gigabit horizontal

200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

>  You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?
>
> On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> That's the force 180
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>>  GigE interface!
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>
>> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>  --
>> *From: *"Jon Langeler" 
>> 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>>
>> Are they newer chipset?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
>>   wrote:
>> >
>> > Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work
>> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>
>>
>>
>

[AFMUG] Ubiquiti AC

[Jason McKemie]

I know this has been talked about before, but what do those out there using
this stuff think of it for ptmp?

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[George Skorup]

Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.

On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


180 is gigabit horizontal

200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup" > wrote:


You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?

On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


That's the force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup" mailto:geo...@cbcast.com>> wrote:

GigE interface!

On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I'm only aware of a form factor difference.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Jon Langeler" 

*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Are they newer chipset?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley

 wrote:
>
> Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard
they work "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some
trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

Pretty sure it's 100...I'll double check when I get home

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 23, 2015 2:18 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

>  Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.
>
> On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> 180 is gigabit horizontal
>
> 200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>>  You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> That's the force 180
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>>
>>>  GigE interface!
>>>
>>> On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  --
>>> *From: *"Jon Langeler" 
>>> 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>>>
>>> Are they newer chipset?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
>>>  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work
>>> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Ken Hohhof]

I give up, what is gigabit horizontal?

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.


On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

  180 is gigabit horizontal

  200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn

  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?


On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

  That's the force 180

  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

GigE interface!


On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

  I'm only aware of a form factor difference.




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



  Midwest Internet Exchange
  http://www.midwest-ix.com




--

  From: "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

  Are they newer chipset?

  Sent from my iPhone

  > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote:
  > 
  > Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work 
"GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti AC

[Keefe John]

It is working really well for us.  The diagnostic features are 
amazing(constellations, cable test, live airview without droppping the 
connection).


On 7/23/2015 1:15 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
I know this has been talked about before, but what do those out there 
using this stuff think of it for ptmp?

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Mathew Howard]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who couldn't figure that out...

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

>   I give up, what is gigabit horizontal?
>
>  *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:18 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.
>
> On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> 180 is gigabit horizontal
>
> 200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>> You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> That's the force 180
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>>
>>> GigE interface!
>>>
>>> On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net
>>> 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>>>
>>> Are they newer chipset?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley
>>> mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work
>>> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[AFMUG] Can't contain myself on this one... Customer using Telrad COMPACTs in 2.5 GHz sends a note

[Patrick Leary]

This just came in today, shared to us by our partner PCS Technologies in MN who 
is the integrator on this project. I have redacted out the company name of the 
customer, competitor's name, and person who sent the mail until I get his 
explicit approval. This is running the WiMAX load and COMPACTs in 2.5 GHz. It 
is running WiMAX because the customer has a lot of migrating to do.


"Wanted to give a little feedback on our migration from 's to Telrad 
base stations. It's been awesome!  Signals are great. Most customers in the 
-60's, -70's, and a few -80's are now in the -50's and -60's! Just a few in 
the middle of 2 sectors buried in trees didn't change dramatically but still 
increased by 5 db. Can't move over my signals on  better than -60's 
right now because they will be -40's on the Telrad and [so] too hot.

Didn't expect this to do this well. Completely blew our minds on how well this 
has been. I have 85 customers moved over to these sectors and doing great. Some 
radios that were experience wireless dropping on the  quit dropping 
when I moved to Telrad [and upgraded the old CPE] to the Alvarion WIMAX 
firmware on the old CPE. Didn't expect that either.  Our accountant living at 
13 miles out has around a -54, she also has a little bit of a hill in the way 
as well so not perfect LOS either.

Bandwidth is consistent too. Not real bursty either. I had 2 -720p videos, 1 @ 
1080p and Netflix going over a 7M plan and it kept up very well. 1080p 
struggled a bit but the bandwidth showed 7M consistently on my home Mikrotik 
router interface so it was me just killing my 7M plan.

I took one of the indoors to my wife's grandparents and at a -84 I was still 
getting 5.5M down on a 7M plan while my kid was streaming a Youtube video in HD 
on his older phone. Pretty damn impressive and very exciting."
**

THANKS PCS for sharing this one!

Did I mention how fun this business is again?

Patrick Leary
Director, Business Development
Telrad
727-501-3735





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Josh Luthman]

Force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 23, 2015 2:35 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

>   I give up, what is gigabit horizontal?
>
>  *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:18 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>
> Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.
>
> On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> 180 is gigabit horizontal
>
> 200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>> You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?
>>
>> On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> That's the force 180
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>>
>>> GigE interface!
>>>
>>> On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm only aware of a form factor difference.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net
>>> 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200
>>>
>>> Are they newer chipset?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley
>>> mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work
>>> "GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Dan Sullivan]

Paul,

2.5 will include:

2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Hi,

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a solid 
answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them.  Nor 
do I use Radius.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
mailto:mailing-li...@phxinternet.com>> wrote:
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform?

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

[Ken Hohhof]

Yes, Force 180.

But please define the term “gigabit horizontal”.  Or am I missing a joke?


From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 2:35 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

  I give up, what is gigabit horizontal?

  From: George Skorup 
  Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:18 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

  Yeah, I'm talking about the 200. That has gigabit too.


  On 7/23/2015 1:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

180 is gigabit horizontal

200 is the dish with the neat feedhorn

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 1:52 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

  You mean the thing they gave us? I thought that was the 200?


  On 7/23/2015 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

That's the force 180

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jul 23, 2015 1:40 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

  GigE interface!


  On 7/23/2015 10:50 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I'm only aware of a form factor difference.




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



Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com






From: "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:47:38 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 200

Are they newer chipset?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Jay Weekley 
mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote:
> 
> Anyone know when these will be available?� I've heard they work 
"GREAT" from someone that has actually used some trial units.

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Sakid Ahmed]

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights -

- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet)
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in advance.

Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
 wrote:

Paul,

2.5 will include:

2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Hi,

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a solid 
answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them.  Nor 
do I use Radius.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
mailto:mailing-li...@phxinternet.com>> wrote:
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform?

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Mike Hammett]

Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Sakid Ahmed"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights - 


- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms 
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta) 
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet) 
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector 
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available 


Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in 
advance. 


Sakid 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan < daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com 
> wrote: 



Paul, 

2.5 will include: 

2.5 msec frame 
Collocation with Canopy FSK 
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot 
ePTP DFS channel support 
uPNP 

Dan 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul McCall 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ? 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Hi, 

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month. 

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs. 

Daniel Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 
Cambium Networks 
Cambium Networks Community Forum 


From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. It's always a solid 
answer, too. 



I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them. Nor do 
I use Radius. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. < 
mailing-li...@phxinternet.com > wrote: 
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform? 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Josh Luthman]

Not until 2.5ms framing


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not
> match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if
> ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and 450 as well.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Sakid Ahmed" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
> Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates
> who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following
> are some of the highlights -
>
>  - Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
> - Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
> - Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t
> verified 3rd party sync just yet)
> - 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100
> with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
> - Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available
>
>  Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in
> advance.
>
>  Sakid
>
>  On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan <
> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>   Paul,
>
>  2.5 will include:
>
>  2.5 msec frame
>  Collocation with Canopy FSK
>  AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and
> Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
>  ePTP DFS channel support
>  uPNP
>
>  Dan
>
>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Paul McCall
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?
>
>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Dan Sullivan
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  Hi,
>
>  Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.
>
>  The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication
> for the SMs.
>
> Daniel Sullivan
>  ePMP Software Manager
>  Cambium Networks
>  Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>  *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a
> solid answer, too.
>
>   I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use
> them.  Nor do I use Radius.
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>  On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. <
> mailing-li...@phxinternet.com> wrote:
>  I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping
> they would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look
> like they have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that
> functionality on the ePMP platform?
>
> Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Mike Hammett]

Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


Not until 2.5ms framing 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Sakid Ahmed" < sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 



Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights - 


- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms 
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta) 
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet) 
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector 
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available 


Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in 
advance. 


Sakid 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan < daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com 
> wrote: 



Paul, 

2.5 will include: 

2.5 msec frame 
Collocation with Canopy FSK 
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot 
ePTP DFS channel support 
uPNP 

Dan 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul McCall 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ? 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Hi, 

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month. 

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs. 

Daniel Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 
Cambium Networks 
Cambium Networks Community Forum 


From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. It's always a solid 
answer, too. 



I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them. Nor do 
I use Radius. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. < 
mailing-li...@phxinternet.com > wrote: 
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform? 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Josh Luthman]

I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for some
reason it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100.  Perhaps the pmp450 is a
multiplicative?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
> Not until 2.5ms framing
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not
>> match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if
>> ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and 450 as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Sakid Ahmed" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>
>> Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates
>> who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following
>> are some of the highlights -
>>
>>  - Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
>> - Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
>> - Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t
>> verified 3rd party sync just yet)
>> - 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100
>> with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
>> - Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available
>>
>>  Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in
>> advance.
>>
>>  Sakid
>>
>>  On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>   Paul,
>>
>>  2.5 will include:
>>
>>  2.5 msec frame
>>  Collocation with Canopy FSK
>>  AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and
>> Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
>>  ePTP DFS channel support
>>  uPNP
>>
>>  Dan
>>
>>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Paul McCall
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>
>>  Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?
>>
>>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Dan Sullivan
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>
>>  Hi,
>>
>>  Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.
>>
>>  The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication
>> for the SMs.
>>
>> Daniel Sullivan
>>  ePMP Software Manager
>>  Cambium Networks
>>  Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>>
>>
>>  *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>
>>  If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a
>> solid answer, too.
>>
>>   I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use
>> them.  Nor do I use Radius.
>>
>>
>>  Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>  On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. <
>> mailing-li...@phxinternet.com> wrote:
>>  I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping
>> they would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look
>> like they have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that
>> functionality on the ePMP platform?
>>
>> Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Mike Hammett]

I thought all PMP was 2.5 ms and ePMP was 5 ms. Once you had 2.5 ms, you got 
the whole family. 

We'll need someone more PMP smart to chime in. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:12:38 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for some reason 
it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100. Perhaps the pmp450 is a 
multiplicative? 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM 


Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


Not until 2.5ms framing 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 




From: "Sakid Ahmed" < sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 



Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights - 


- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms 
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta) 
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet) 
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector 
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available 


Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in 
advance. 


Sakid 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan < daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com 
> wrote: 



Paul, 

2.5 will include: 

2.5 msec frame 
Collocation with Canopy FSK 
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot 
ePTP DFS channel support 
uPNP 

Dan 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul McCall 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ? 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Hi, 

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month. 

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs. 

Daniel Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 
Cambium Networks 
Cambium Networks Community Forum 


From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. It's always a solid 
answer, too. 



I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them. Nor do 
I use Radius. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. < 
mailing-li...@phxinternet.com > wrote: 
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform? 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Bill Prince]

PMP450 is already bisexual (will do either 2.5ms or 5ms timing).

I think PMP430 is 2.5ms only, as is PMP100.


bp


On 7/23/2015 1:12 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for some 
reason it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100.  Perhaps the pmp450 
is a multiplicative?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett > wrote:


Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Josh Luthman" mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM

*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Not until 2.5ms framing


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:

Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes
it not match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with
430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and 450
as well.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Sakid Ahmed" mailto:sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta
candidates who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to
their PMP100. Following are some of the highlights -

- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100
(Haven’t verified 3rd party sync just yet)
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple
of PMP100 with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always,
thanks in advance.

Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>> wrote:

Paul,
2.5 will include:
2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti
SM WiFi, and Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP
Dan
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Paul
McCall
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com 
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Dan
Sullivan
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com 
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
Hi,
Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.
The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS
Authentication for the SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Josh
Luthman
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com 
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. 
   

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Adam Moffett]

When you pronounce P-M-P as "pimp" these emails sound terrible

On 7/23/2015 4:16 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

PMP450 is already bisexual (will do either 2.5ms or 5ms timing).

I think PMP430 is 2.5ms only, as is PMP100.


bp


On 7/23/2015 1:12 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for 
some reason it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100.  Perhaps the 
pmp450 is a multiplicative?



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett > wrote:


Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Josh Luthman" mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM

*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Not until 2.5ms framing


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett 
wrote:

Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that
makes it not match this new framing? I thought 100 synced
with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and
450 as well.



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




Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com




*From: *"Sakid Ahmed" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta
candidates who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to
their PMP100. Following are some of the highlights -

- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100
(Haven’t verified 3rd party sync just yet)
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple
of PMP100 with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always,
thanks in advance.

Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan
 wrote:

Paul,
2.5 will include:
2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti
SM WiFi, and Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP
Dan
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Paul
McCall
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Dan
Sullivan
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
Hi,
Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.
The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS
Authentication for the SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]*On Behalf Of*Josh
Luthman
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
*To:*af@afmug.com
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. 
It's always a solid answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs change

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Ken Hohhof]

Probably they are expecting lots of people wanting to colocate ePMP with 100, 
like maybe during transition, and not very many wanting to colocate ePMP with 
450.  Assuming there are ePMP people, and 450 people, but not that many EPMP + 
450 people.  

From: Bill Prince 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

PMP450 is already bisexual (will do either 2.5ms or 5ms timing). 

I think PMP430 is 2.5ms only, as is PMP100.



bp


On 7/23/2015 1:12 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

  I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for some reason 
it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100.  Perhaps the pmp450 is a 
multiplicative?


  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh.




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



Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com






From: "Josh Luthman" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius


Not until 2.5ms framing


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

  Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not 
match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP 
matched 100, it would 430 and 450 as well.




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



  Midwest Internet Exchange
  http://www.midwest-ix.com




--

  From: "Sakid Ahmed" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius


  Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates 
who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are 
some of the highlights - 

  - Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
  - Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
  - Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t 
verified 3rd party sync just yet)
  - 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 
with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
  - Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

  Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in 
advance.

  Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan 
 wrote:

Paul,

2.5 will include:

2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and 
Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Hi,

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication 
for the SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a 
solid answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use 
them.  Nor do I use Radius.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
 wrote:
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping 
they would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like 
they have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that 
functionality on the ePMP platform?

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Sean Heskett]

my guess (and this is only a guess) is that they are mostly concerned with
ePMP syncing with PMP100 because PMP100 has such low throughput now a days
(thanks netflix) that a lot of operators are looking for a cheep way to
upgrade their PMP100 installed base.  PMP450 is kinda expensive if you are
migrating a customer who has been on your network forever.  at $50/mo for
typical service it will take 6 months just to pay off a PMP450 SM.  However
if you can migrate that same client to a ePMP for ~$100 it will only take 2
months.  (and that calc is just for the SM, doesn't include the AP etc)

I know we are in this boat.  We've overlaid PMP450 over PMP100 and we sing
up new clients on 450 but our installed base is more difficult.  We've
tried to entice them to upgrade their service plan in order to up grade
hardware but not everyone want to do that.  If I can over lay ePMP and it
syncs with PMP100 then i can upgrade my installed base at a reasonable cost.

also if they can get the frames to sync with PMP100 i'm pretty certain that
ePMP will sync with 430 and 450.

2 cents

-sean


On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> I thought all PMP was 2.5 ms and ePMP was 5 ms. Once you had 2.5 ms, you
> got the whole family.
>
> We'll need someone more PMP smart to chime in.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:12:38 PM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
> I see what you're saying, I don't know why it's that way, but for some
> reason it needs 2.5ms framing to work with pmp100.  Perhaps the pmp450 is a
> multiplicative?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> Pay attention to what I'm responding to, Josh.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:08:12 PM
>>
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>
>> Not until 2.5ms framing
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>>> Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not
>>> match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if
>>> ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and 450 as well.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Sakid Ahmed" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>>>
>>> Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates
>>> who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following
>>> are some of the highlights -
>>>
>>>  - Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
>>> - Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
>>> - Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t
>>> verified 3rd party sync just yet)
>>> - 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100
>>> with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
>>> - Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available
>>>
>>>  Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks
>>> in advance.
>>>
>>>  Sakid
>>>
>>>  On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>   Paul,
>>>
>>>  2.5 will include:
>>>
>>>  2.5 msec frame
>>>  Collocation

[AFMUG] Shielding Useful on ePMP Force 110?

[Christopher Gray]

I have some UBNT PowerBeam links with shields from RF Armor. I've been
happy with the performance [but I'll admit that I didn't do back-to-back
comparisons to test the effectiveness in my situation].

Would the ePMP Force 110 benefit from similar shielding? I'm planning to
add a few non-sync ePMP backhaul links and I am trying to determine whether
to seek shielding for the ePMP or to use another dish like the Jirous.

Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Shielding Useful on ePMP Force 110?

[Josh Luthman]

Force110 ptp has a strong metal case.  The antennas are better than the
Powerbeam 400 to begin with.  You could definitely get away with regular
Force110 radios if you want.

Personally I'd spring for the extra bucks and put on the force110ptp.  It's
the heavy duty GPS radio but super cheap.  It's a backhaul, don't try and
save a few bucks or it costs you in the long run.

IMO the Jirous dishes aren't worth the mechanical disaster but I haven't
touched them myself.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Christopher Gray <
cg...@graytechsoftware.com> wrote:

> I have some UBNT PowerBeam links with shields from RF Armor. I've been
> happy with the performance [but I'll admit that I didn't do back-to-back
> comparisons to test the effectiveness in my situation].
>
> Would the ePMP Force 110 benefit from similar shielding? I'm planning to
> add a few non-sync ePMP backhaul links and I am trying to determine whether
> to seek shielding for the ePMP or to use another dish like the Jirous.
>
> Thanks - Chris
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Sakid Ahmed]

There are some technical challenges around further frame start accuracy that 
would have to be worked through. PMP100 syncing does not automatically give 
450/430 syncing and it does require some additional work.
We are curious to understand the use case for 450/ePMP co-location? Is it on 
the network fringes? Is it to swap non cambium gear :)

Sakid


On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:

Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well.



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

[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]

Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com

[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]

From: "Sakid Ahmed" 
mailto:sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights -

- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet)
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in advance.

Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
 wrote:

Paul,

2.5 will include:

2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Hi,

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a solid 
answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them.  Nor 
do I use Radius.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
mailto:mailing-li...@phxinternet.com>> wrote:
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform?

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.

[AFMUG] 900 fsk and interference with repeaters

[Craig House]

We have another tower that we have installed 900 FSK equipment on that seems to 
be causing problems with a 2 way repeater system.  The noise floor on the 2 way 
system is 20 db higher when the equipment is on.  The down side to this is the 
tower owner is the repeater owner and without his repeater his business suffers 
and the need for the tower is gone.  We have in the past had this issue and ran 
coax all the way up the tower to have only the antennas on top and it solved 
this issue but I dont want to do this for a FSK 900 radio?  So my question 
would be, what are the odds that the new 450 900 mhz that is only moments away 
from being released would work without running Coax up the tower?  I think this 
is an issue with the processor in the FSK board not the RF @ 900mhz that is 
causing the problem.   What have others done about this.   We have another 
tower that seems to be on the brink of this same issue as well and I dont want 
to completely pull off all 900 FSK but maybe I should?  Should I just go to 
UBNT 900 until the 450's release?

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Josh Luthman]

How would 450/epmp co-location be relevant to non Cambium gear?

I would imagine if someone starts with ePMP and then gets to the point
where they need a little extra punch and can afford 450, sync would be
extremely helpful.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Sakid Ahmed <
sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:

>  There are some technical challenges around further frame start accuracy
> that would have to be worked through. PMP100 syncing does not automatically
> give 450/430 syncing and it does require some additional work.
> We are curious to understand the use case for 450/ePMP co-location? Is it
> on the network fringes? Is it to swap non cambium gear :)
>
>  Sakid
>
>
>  On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>  Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not
> match this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if
> ePMP matched 100, it would 430 and 450 as well.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>  
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>
>  
> 
> 
>  --
>  *From: *"Sakid Ahmed" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
> Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates
> who would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following
> are some of the highlights -
>
>  - Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
> - Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
> - Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t
> verified 3rd party sync just yet)
> - 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100
> with an ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
> - Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available
>
>  Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in
> advance.
>
>  Sakid
>
>  On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan <
> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>   Paul,
>
>  2.5 will include:
>
>  2.5 msec frame
>  Collocation with Canopy FSK
>  AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and
> Mikrotik SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
>  ePTP DFS channel support
>  uPNP
>
>  Dan
>
>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Paul McCall
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?
>
>   *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Dan Sullivan
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  Hi,
>
>  Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.
>
>  The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication
> for the SMs.
>
> Daniel Sullivan
>  ePMP Software Manager
>  Cambium Networks
>  Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>  *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius
>
>  If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a
> solid answer, too.
>
>   I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use
> them.  Nor do I use Radius.
>
>
>  Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>  On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. <
> mailing-li...@phxinternet.com> wrote:
>  I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping
> they would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look
> like they have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that
> functionality on the ePMP platform?
>
> Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Mike Hammett]

Other operators. My network touches over 11 WISPs, most of them PMP based with 
I'm sure 450 being most new radios. No, I'm not buying 450 radios unless 
they're at ePMP prices. ;-) 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Sakid Ahmed"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 4:13:08 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

There are some technical challenges around further frame start accuracy that 
would have to be worked through. PMP100 syncing does not automatically give 
450/430 syncing and it does require some additional work. 
We are curious to understand the use case for 450/ePMP co-location? Is it on 
the network fringes? Is it to swap non cambium gear :) 


Sakid 







On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well. 




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



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


- Original Message -

From: "Sakid Ahmed" < sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights - 


- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms 
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta) 
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet) 
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector 
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available 


Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in 
advance. 


Sakid 





On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan < daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com 
> wrote: 



Paul, 

2.5 will include: 

2.5 msec frame 
Collocation with Canopy FSK 
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot 
ePTP DFS channel support 
uPNP 

Dan 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul McCall 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ? 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 

Hi, 

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month. 

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs. 

Daniel Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 
Cambium Networks 
Cambium Networks Community Forum 


From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius 


If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer. It's always a solid 
answer, too. 



I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them. Nor do 
I use Radius. 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. < 
mailing-li...@phxinternet.com > wrote: 
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform? 

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

[Sakid Ahmed]

As in your core, high density is 450, out skirts are non Cambium and you are 
looking for a cheaper solution to put in that will play nice with 450.
On Jul 23, 2015, at 4:16 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

How would 450/epmp co-location be relevant to non Cambium gear?

I would imagine if someone starts with ePMP and then gets to the point where 
they need a little extra punch and can afford 450, sync would be extremely 
helpful.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Sakid Ahmed 
mailto:sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com>> wrote:
There are some technical challenges around further frame start accuracy that 
would have to be worked through. PMP100 syncing does not automatically give 
450/430 syncing and it does require some additional work.
We are curious to understand the use case for 450/ePMP co-location? Is it on 
the network fringes? Is it to swap non cambium gear :)

Sakid


On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:

Not being a PMP user, what's different with 430\450 that makes it not match 
this new framing? I thought 100 synced with 430\450, therefore if ePMP matched 
100, it would 430 and 450 as well.



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

[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]

Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com


[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]

From: "Sakid Ahmed" 
mailto:sakid.ah...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:02:14 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Speaking of PMP100 co-location, we are seeking about 10 beta candidates who 
would be willing to co-locate ePMP 100 next to their PMP100. Following are some 
of the highlights -

- Configure ePMP to 2.5 ms
- Support 75/25 (the most tested configuration during beta)
- Use CMM4 or onboard GPS with any combination on the PMP100 (Haven’t verified 
3rd party sync just yet)
- 5 MHz guard band for vertical install or replacing a couple of PMP100 with an 
ePMP 1000 & 90 degree sector
- Offline frame calculator and a guide will be available

Please hit Dan or I offline if you are interested. As always, thanks in advance.

Sakid

On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Dan Sullivan 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
 wrote:

Paul,

2.5 will include:

2.5 msec frame
Collocation with Canopy FSK
AP WiFi providing connectivity to ePMP SM WiFi, Ubiquiti SM WiFi, and Mikrotik 
SM WiFi; and outdoor WiFi hotspot
ePTP DFS channel support
uPNP

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Is there a feature list of what’s coming in 2.5 ?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

Hi,

Our next release is 2.5.0 and it is coming out next month.

The release after this will contain VLAN VSAs and RADIUS Authentication for the 
SMs.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager
Cambium Networks
Cambium Networks Community Forum


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP + Radius

If you ask in the forum you get a pretty quick answer.  It's always a solid 
answer, too.

I don't think anything with VLANs changed in 2.4.3 but I don't use them.  Nor 
do I use Radius.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. 
mailto:mailing-li...@phxinternet.com>> wrote:
I saw that Cambium released software version 2.4.3 recently. I hoping they 
would allow the ability to assign VLANs with radius (does not look like they 
have). Does anyone know if Cambium ever plans on offering that functionality on 
the ePMP platform?

Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.