Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

Is this just happening on APs, or is it an issue on SMs too?

Reason I ask, is that I was just looking at an SM that has been on 13.4 
for about a month, and shows several watchdog/stack dumps since that 
time. It's been running clean for the last 10 days though...


bp


On 9/9/2015 8:28 PM, Chitrang Srivastava wrote:

Hi George,

For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have to reboot AP.
Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and then select luid of 
SM which has problem,  after submitting you will get the logs,

Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs 'logs - AP 
session '

We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS authentication for SM, for 
you SM authentication is radius as well?

Thanks
Chitrang Srivastava

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup 
Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

What does FreeRun have to do with it?

I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any watchdog
resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it on 13.2.1.
It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.

One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs getting into
a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says receiving
sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is wrong. Tracking
8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I understand this had
something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other issues get
fixed before I can update the entire network.

Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens in the
middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously return to
normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to register for
no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
freakin idea what this is about.

On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:

We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's

It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has helpful suggestions 
like'just put them in free run'.   Um Thanks for the help, but no.

Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
Millbury, OH 43447
419-261-5996


On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan  wrote:

Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing in-house for a while.  
While running 13.2 we would see an AP here or there reboot on occasion by 
itself.  The only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog Reset.  This is 
one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed in the 13.4 release notes.

Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now seeing at least 4 AP's out 
there rebooting several times per day.  On one of these AP's we are also seeing 
SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the AP.  The site has UPS backup so 
I know it's not a power grid problem.  I am planning to roll the affected AP's 
back to 13.2 this evening.

Anyone else having Watchdog issues with the 13.4 release?

**System Startup**
System Reset Exception -- Watchdog Reset
Software Version : CANOPY 13.4 AP-DES
Board Type : P12
Device Setting : 5.7GHz MIMO OFDM - Access Point - 0a-00-3e-a0-08-e5 - 5760.0 
MHz - 20.0 MHz - 1/16 - CC 85 - 2.5 ms
FPGA Version : 040715
FPGA Features : DES, Sched, US/ETSI;
08/28/2015 : 14:11:42 CST : :Time Set
08/28/2015 : 14:11:58 CST : Acquired sync pulse from Power Port.






Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread Sean Heskett
Have you experienced any LBT or DFS hits?  With only one channel in the
config I believe the ap would stop transmitting for 30min.  Knock on wood,
I've never had a DFS or LBT hit but we are in a pretty rural
mountainous area.

A 2.5mhz secondary channel offset seems to keep the aps on my network happy.

YMMV
-sean

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, George Skorup  wrote:

> Yeah, but 2.5MHz doesn't help if it's a real LBT or DFS hit. Too many
> interference issues if I let APs roam free. Would cause more harm than good.
>
> On 9/9/2015 11:07 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>
> You can choose a LBT or DFS secondary channel 2.5mhz away from the primary
> channel...you don't have choose a secondary that is 20mhz away.  Unless
> of course you are in an area that would trigger a lot of DFS or LBT
> events.
>
> -sean
>
> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, George Skorup <
> geo...@cbcast.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Nope, no authentication at all.
>>
>> Next time it happens, I will try to get the logs. It's impossible to know
>> when or where it will strike, so retrieving the SM's side of the logs is
>> very unlikely while this is occurring. Maybe I can get my house moved over
>> to a 3.6 450 on Friday or some time next week and wait for it to happen.
>>
>> I have never seen this issue on 5GHz or the one lonely 2.4GHz 450 we have
>> up. Something with the 3.6GHz 450 is just... different. The only thing that
>> comes to mind is LBT which I understand is modified DFS. Maybe the thing is
>> that I don't have any alternate frequencies configured on any of the 3.6
>> 450 sectors. There's simply no alternate channels to have a sector move to
>> in a cluster. Many of these are co-located with UBNT 3.65 running in the
>> lower half of the band while we're migrating customers to the 450.
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 10:28 PM, Chitrang Srivastava wrote:
>>
>>> Hi George,
>>>
>>> For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have to reboot
>>> AP.
>>> Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and then select
>>> luid of SM which has problem,  after submitting you will get the logs,
>>>
>>> Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs 'logs - AP
>>> session '
>>>
>>> We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS authentication for SM,
>>> for you SM authentication is radius as well?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Chitrang Srivastava
>>> 
>>> From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup <
>>> geo...@cbcast.com>
>>> Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset
>>>
>>> What does FreeRun have to do with it?
>>>
>>> I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any watchdog
>>> resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it on 13.2.1.
>>> It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.
>>>
>>> One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs getting into
>>> a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says receiving
>>> sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
>>> rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is wrong. Tracking
>>> 8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I understand this had
>>> something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
>>> resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other issues get
>>> fixed before I can update the entire network.
>>>
>>> Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens in the
>>> middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously return to
>>> normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
>>> registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to register for
>>> no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
>>> freakin idea what this is about.
>>>
>>> On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
>>>
 We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's

 It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has helpful
 suggestions like'just put them in free run'.   Um Thanks for the help,
 but no.

 Mark Radabaugh
 Amplex
 27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
 Millbury, OH 43447
 419-261-5996

 On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan  > wrote:
>
> Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing in-house for a
> while.  While running 13.2 we would see an AP here or there reboot on
> occasion by itself.  The only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog
> Reset.  This is one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed in the 13.4
> release notes.
>
> Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now seeing at least 4
> AP's out there rebooting several times per day.  On one of these AP's we
> are also seeing SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the AP.  The
> site has UPS backup so I know it's not a power grid problem.  I am 
> planning
> to roll the affected AP's back to 13.2 this evening.
>
> Anyone else having Watchdog 

Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
Yeah, but 2.5MHz doesn't help if it's a real LBT or DFS hit. Too many 
interference issues if I let APs roam free. Would cause more harm than good.


On 9/9/2015 11:07 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
You can choose a LBT or DFS secondary channel 2.5mhz away from the 
primary channel...you don't have choose a secondary that is 20mhz 
away.  Unless of course you are in an area that would trigger a lot of 
DFS or LBT events.


-sean

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, George Skorup > wrote:


Nope, no authentication at all.

Next time it happens, I will try to get the logs. It's impossible
to know when or where it will strike, so retrieving the SM's side
of the logs is very unlikely while this is occurring. Maybe I can
get my house moved over to a 3.6 450 on Friday or some time next
week and wait for it to happen.

I have never seen this issue on 5GHz or the one lonely 2.4GHz 450
we have up. Something with the 3.6GHz 450 is just... different.
The only thing that comes to mind is LBT which I understand is
modified DFS. Maybe the thing is that I don't have any alternate
frequencies configured on any of the 3.6 450 sectors. There's
simply no alternate channels to have a sector move to in a
cluster. Many of these are co-located with UBNT 3.65 running in
the lower half of the band while we're migrating customers to the 450.

On 9/9/2015 10:28 PM, Chitrang Srivastava wrote:

Hi George,

For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have
to reboot AP.
Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and
then select luid of SM which has problem,  after submitting
you will get the logs,

Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs
'logs - AP session '

We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS
authentication for SM, for you SM authentication is radius as
well?

Thanks
Chitrang Srivastava

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup

Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

What does FreeRun have to do with it?

I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any
watchdog
resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it
on 13.2.1.
It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.

One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs
getting into
a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says
receiving
sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is
wrong. Tracking
8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I
understand this had
something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other
issues get
fixed before I can update the entire network.

Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens
in the
middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously
return to
normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to
register for
no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
freakin idea what this is about.

On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:

We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's

It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has
helpful suggestions like'just put them in free run'.
 Um Thanks for the help, but no.

Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
Millbury, OH 43447
419-261-5996

On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan
 wrote:

Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing
in-house for a while.  While running 13.2 we would see
an AP here or there reboot on occasion by itself.  The
only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog Reset.
This is one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed
in the 13.4 release notes.

Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now
seeing at least 4 AP's out there rebooting several
times per day.  On one of these AP's we are also
seeing SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the
AP.  The site has UPS backup so I know it's not a
power grid problem.  I am planning to roll the
affected AP's back to 13.2 this evening.

Anyone 

Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
I think the FSB is very specific to a set of radios that were identified 
as improperly assembled. I had one 5GHz 450 SM show the ADI 
communication failure. And a 3.6GHz SM show RF calibration failure. Both 
rebooted with ADI force resets. Both not on the list. Cambium RMA'd them 
without too many questions.


FYI. Maybe it's related, maybe not. I found some new SMs that had a few 
solder balls rattling around in the cases, but they work fine.


On 9/9/2015 9:21 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
I have seen 2 out of around 100 suddenly exhibit the ADI 
Communications Failure after about a month in service, neither was on 
the serial number list.  So a 2 day burn-in may help but you won’t be 
bullet-proof.  We’ve only seen it on 5 GHz SMs, but we use a lot more 
5 GHz than 3.65 GHz, and no 2.4 GHz.  No apparent correlation with any 
environmental conditions like hot or stormy weather that could have 
precipitated it.
Worst case will be it fails intermittently and the new customer just 
thinks your service is really unreliable.  One of the 2 failures we 
saw was intermittent, rebooting for several hours, then registered for 
several hours, then rebooting again, no rhyme or reason.  At least if 
it fails hard, they will call.

*From:* Tushar Patel 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:48 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM
We had 9 failures in 50 we ordered, those were not listed in the unit 
serial numbers.
What we are doing now is running radios in the office for at least two 
days before we send out and we are seeing these failures in the office.
Even after doing that today we had one fail which was 1 hr drive from 
the office and it was new customer too, installed last week. This 
gives us bad reputation and cost us lot too.
So whatever the root cause mentioned in the email, if it was 
identified but did not include the batch we got, so something is not 
adding up still.

I really hope cambium gets to the bottom of these quickly.
Tushar

On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:22 PM, Steve D > wrote:


Just a bump... was this ever sorted out? Contained to just one batch 
of 5.8 radios as listed? I know I've seen reports in other 
frequencies but seemed less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a 
while...  Just want to know before our next order...

-Steve D
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis 
> wrote:


I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We
found the root cause and identified the affected units by serial
number.

See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any
further comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:

http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106

Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.

*Matt Mangriotis*

Senior Product Manager*
Cambium Networks**
*3800 Golf Road, Suite 360

Rolling Meadows, IL 60008

www.cambiumnetworks.com *
**O: *847-439-6379 

*M: *630-308-9394 *
E: *m...@cambiumnetworks.com 



Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum






Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread Sean Heskett
You can choose a LBT or DFS secondary channel 2.5mhz away from the primary
channel...you don't have choose a secondary that is 20mhz away.  Unless of
course you are in an area that would trigger a lot of DFS or LBT events.

-sean

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, George Skorup  wrote:

> Nope, no authentication at all.
>
> Next time it happens, I will try to get the logs. It's impossible to know
> when or where it will strike, so retrieving the SM's side of the logs is
> very unlikely while this is occurring. Maybe I can get my house moved over
> to a 3.6 450 on Friday or some time next week and wait for it to happen.
>
> I have never seen this issue on 5GHz or the one lonely 2.4GHz 450 we have
> up. Something with the 3.6GHz 450 is just... different. The only thing that
> comes to mind is LBT which I understand is modified DFS. Maybe the thing is
> that I don't have any alternate frequencies configured on any of the 3.6
> 450 sectors. There's simply no alternate channels to have a sector move to
> in a cluster. Many of these are co-located with UBNT 3.65 running in the
> lower half of the band while we're migrating customers to the 450.
>
> On 9/9/2015 10:28 PM, Chitrang Srivastava wrote:
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have to reboot
>> AP.
>> Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and then select
>> luid of SM which has problem,  after submitting you will get the logs,
>>
>> Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs 'logs - AP
>> session '
>>
>> We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS authentication for SM,
>> for you SM authentication is radius as well?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Chitrang Srivastava
>> 
>> From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup <
>> geo...@cbcast.com>
>> Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset
>>
>> What does FreeRun have to do with it?
>>
>> I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any watchdog
>> resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it on 13.2.1.
>> It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.
>>
>> One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs getting into
>> a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says receiving
>> sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
>> rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is wrong. Tracking
>> 8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I understand this had
>> something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
>> resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other issues get
>> fixed before I can update the entire network.
>>
>> Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens in the
>> middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously return to
>> normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
>> registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to register for
>> no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
>> freakin idea what this is about.
>>
>> On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
>>
>>> We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's
>>>
>>> It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has helpful
>>> suggestions like'just put them in free run'.   Um Thanks for the help,
>>> but no.
>>>
>>> Mark Radabaugh
>>> Amplex
>>> 27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
>>> Millbury, OH 43447
>>> 419-261-5996
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan 
 wrote:

 Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing in-house for a
 while.  While running 13.2 we would see an AP here or there reboot on
 occasion by itself.  The only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog
 Reset.  This is one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed in the 13.4
 release notes.

 Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now seeing at least 4 AP's
 out there rebooting several times per day.  On one of these AP's we are
 also seeing SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the AP.  The site
 has UPS backup so I know it's not a power grid problem.  I am planning to
 roll the affected AP's back to 13.2 this evening.

 Anyone else having Watchdog issues with the 13.4 release?

 **System Startup**
 System Reset Exception -- Watchdog Reset
 Software Version : CANOPY 13.4 AP-DES
 Board Type : P12
 Device Setting : 5.7GHz MIMO OFDM - Access Point - 0a-00-3e-a0-08-e5 -
 5760.0 MHz - 20.0 MHz - 1/16 - CC 85 - 2.5 ms
 FPGA Version : 040715
 FPGA Features : DES, Sched, US/ETSI;
 08/28/2015 : 14:11:42 CST : :Time Set
 08/28/2015 : 14:11:58 CST : Acquired sync pulse from Power Port.



>


Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

Nope, no authentication at all.

Next time it happens, I will try to get the logs. It's impossible to 
know when or where it will strike, so retrieving the SM's side of the 
logs is very unlikely while this is occurring. Maybe I can get my house 
moved over to a 3.6 450 on Friday or some time next week and wait for it 
to happen.


I have never seen this issue on 5GHz or the one lonely 2.4GHz 450 we 
have up. Something with the 3.6GHz 450 is just... different. The only 
thing that comes to mind is LBT which I understand is modified DFS. 
Maybe the thing is that I don't have any alternate frequencies 
configured on any of the 3.6 450 sectors. There's simply no alternate 
channels to have a sector move to in a cluster. Many of these are 
co-located with UBNT 3.65 running in the lower half of the band while 
we're migrating customers to the 450.


On 9/9/2015 10:28 PM, Chitrang Srivastava wrote:

Hi George,

For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have to reboot AP.
Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and then select luid of 
SM which has problem,  after submitting you will get the logs,

Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs 'logs - AP 
session '

We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS authentication for SM, for 
you SM authentication is radius as well?

Thanks
Chitrang Srivastava

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup 
Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

What does FreeRun have to do with it?

I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any watchdog
resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it on 13.2.1.
It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.

One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs getting into
a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says receiving
sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is wrong. Tracking
8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I understand this had
something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other issues get
fixed before I can update the entire network.

Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens in the
middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously return to
normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to register for
no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
freakin idea what this is about.

On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:

We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's

It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has helpful suggestions 
like'just put them in free run'.   Um Thanks for the help, but no.

Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
Millbury, OH 43447
419-261-5996


On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan  wrote:

Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing in-house for a while.  
While running 13.2 we would see an AP here or there reboot on occasion by 
itself.  The only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog Reset.  This is 
one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed in the 13.4 release notes.

Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now seeing at least 4 AP's out 
there rebooting several times per day.  On one of these AP's we are also seeing 
SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the AP.  The site has UPS backup so 
I know it's not a power grid problem.  I am planning to roll the affected AP's 
back to 13.2 this evening.

Anyone else having Watchdog issues with the 13.4 release?

**System Startup**
System Reset Exception -- Watchdog Reset
Software Version : CANOPY 13.4 AP-DES
Board Type : P12
Device Setting : 5.7GHz MIMO OFDM - Access Point - 0a-00-3e-a0-08-e5 - 5760.0 
MHz - 20.0 MHz - 1/16 - CC 85 - 2.5 ms
FPGA Version : 040715
FPGA Features : DES, Sched, US/ETSI;
08/28/2015 : 14:11:42 CST : :Time Set
08/28/2015 : 14:11:58 CST : Acquired sync pulse from Power Port.






Re: [AFMUG] High MCS

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
That snr is a lie.  The noise doesn't seem to be the actual noise, like
Ubnt.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:33 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

> Yeah, I think I'd believe the MCS 4 is real. MCS4 seems kinda low for 18dB
> SNR though.
>
> On 9/9/2015 10:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> Yeah, something's up if I'm getting MCS 128. Not sure I can trust the rest
> of the stats if one is impossible. That hop has some high inconsistent
> latency (2, 2, 2, 2, 806, 3, 3, 12, 754, 2, 3, 3, 3), so I'm more included
> to believe the low MCS one. I'm not upgrading the firmware at this time of
> night. That's what I'll do first to try to address the MCS 128 stuff and
> then go from there. I'm not liking how one direction is so much quieter
> than the other...  but can I believe that number?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"George Skorup"  
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:15:38 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] High MCS
>
> Your AP needs a shield.
>
>
>
> ducking..
>
> On 9/9/2015 10:14 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> This radio ought to be screaming!  Oh, wait
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> 
> 
> 
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] High MCS

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
Yeah, I think I'd believe the MCS 4 is real. MCS4 seems kinda low for 
18dB SNR though.


On 9/9/2015 10:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Yeah, something's up if I'm getting MCS 128. Not sure I can trust the 
rest of the stats if one is impossible. That hop has some high 
inconsistent latency (2, 2, 2, 2, 806, 3, 3, 12, 754, 2, 3, 3, 3), so 
I'm more included to believe the low MCS one. I'm not upgrading the 
firmware at this time of night. That's what I'll do first to try to 
address the MCS 128 stuff and then go from there. I'm not liking how 
one direction is so much quieter than the other...  but can I believe 
that number?




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



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



*From: *"George Skorup" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:15:38 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] High MCS

Your AP needs a shield.



ducking..

On 9/9/2015 10:14 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

This radio ought to be screaming!  Oh, wait



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




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










Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

2015-09-09 Thread Chitrang Srivastava
Hi George,

For your other issues where SM fails to register and you have to reboot AP.
Please send AP logs ,  on AP goto 'logs - SM sessions' and then select luid of 
SM which has problem,  after submitting you will get the logs,

Further if it is possible to reach SM please get similar logs 'logs - AP 
session '

We are working on a similar issue but with RADIUS authentication for SM, for 
you SM authentication is radius as well?

Thanks
Chitrang Srivastava

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup 
Sent: 29 August 2015 09:30:14
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Canopy 13.4 Watchdog Reset

What does FreeRun have to do with it?

I have a couple 450 test sites on 13.4 and haven't seen any watchdog
resets. Granted, that's only two APs. Definitely still see it on 13.2.1.
It's not a daily thing, but yeah, annoying.

One thing I'm seeing on the 3.6 450 with 13.2.1 is the APs getting into
a state where they say there's no sync pulse. Then it says receiving
sync, no sync... over and over every few seconds until they are
rebooted. All the while the SyncInjector says nothing is wrong. Tracking
8+ sats. No increment for the 1PPS Active counter. I understand this had
something to do with the FreeRun stuck issue, which was apparently
resolved with 13.4, but I'm waiting on 13.4.1 so some other issues get
fixed before I can update the entire network.

Anyway, if I leave the APs alone for a while (say it happens in the
middle of the night while I'm sleeping), they mysteriously return to
normal after anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes. Then if any SM loses
registration (or if I force an SM to rescan), it fails to register for
no reason at all. Reboot the AP, everything works again. I have no
freakin idea what this is about.

On 8/28/2015 9:54 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
> We have been seeing this across 200+ AP's
>
> It's getting truly annoying.   Cambium tech support has helpful suggestions 
> like'just put them in free run'.   Um Thanks for the help, but no.
>
> Mark Radabaugh
> Amplex
> 27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
> Millbury, OH 43447
> 419-261-5996
>
>> On Aug 28, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Brian Sullivan  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Last week we rolled out 13.4 to 450 AP's after testing in-house for a while. 
>>  While running 13.2 we would see an AP here or there reboot on occasion by 
>> itself.  The only message in the Event Log mentions Watchdog Reset.  This is 
>> one of the bugs that Cambium noted was fixed in the 13.4 release notes.
>>
>> Since we upgraded the network to 13.4 we are now seeing at least 4 AP's out 
>> there rebooting several times per day.  On one of these AP's we are also 
>> seeing SM's (all 17 registered) reboot along with the AP.  The site has UPS 
>> backup so I know it's not a power grid problem.  I am planning to roll the 
>> affected AP's back to 13.2 this evening.
>>
>> Anyone else having Watchdog issues with the 13.4 release?
>>
>> **System Startup**
>> System Reset Exception -- Watchdog Reset
>> Software Version : CANOPY 13.4 AP-DES
>> Board Type : P12
>> Device Setting : 5.7GHz MIMO OFDM - Access Point - 0a-00-3e-a0-08-e5 - 
>> 5760.0 MHz - 20.0 MHz - 1/16 - CC 85 - 2.5 ms
>> FPGA Version : 040715
>> FPGA Features : DES, Sched, US/ETSI;
>> 08/28/2015 : 14:11:42 CST : :Time Set
>> 08/28/2015 : 14:11:58 CST : Acquired sync pulse from Power Port.
>>
>>



Re: [AFMUG] High MCS

2015-09-09 Thread Mike Hammett
Yeah, something's up if I'm getting MCS 128. Not sure I can trust the rest of 
the stats if one is impossible. That hop has some high inconsistent latency (2, 
2, 2, 2, 806, 3, 3, 12, 754, 2, 3, 3, 3), so I'm more included to believe the 
low MCS one. I'm not upgrading the firmware at this time of night. That's what 
I'll do first to try to address the MCS 128 stuff and then go from there. I'm 
not liking how one direction is so much quieter than the other... but can I 
believe that number? 




- 
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: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:15:38 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] High MCS 

Your AP needs a shield. 



ducking.. 


On 9/9/2015 10:14 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



This radio ought to be screaming! Oh, wait 




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



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








Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread Chitrang Srivastava
Hi,

For your second issue,  if you are using P8 boards, it is because of NAT table 
size (this will be fixed in 13.4. 1) but temporary work around is to reduce NAT 
table size to 1024 on SM,
Boot up SM using default plug (NAT get disabled).


Chitrang

From: Af  on behalf of Wireless Administrator 

Sent: 10 September 2015 04:52:30
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium.


*SM's hang - Not passing customer data and no response on Wan side.  
Power on reset required.

*Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet side. 
 Responds to ping but not telnet or browser.  If you catch it within seconds of 
post completion you can get in with browser.


Anyone else having issues?  I need to provide Cambium the details they 
requested to move forward with problem determination.

Steve B.



Re: [AFMUG] High MCS

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

Your AP needs a shield.



ducking..

On 9/9/2015 10:14 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

This radio ought to be screaming!  Oh, wait



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



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






[AFMUG] High MCS

2015-09-09 Thread Mike Hammett
This radio ought to be screaming! Oh, wait 




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



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




Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
I have seen 2 out of around 100 suddenly exhibit the ADI Communications Failure 
after about a month in service, neither was on the serial number list.  So a 2 
day burn-in may help but you won’t be bullet-proof.  We’ve only seen it on 5 
GHz SMs, but we use a lot more 5 GHz than 3.65 GHz, and no 2.4 GHz.  No 
apparent correlation with any environmental conditions like hot or stormy 
weather that could have precipitated it.

Worst case will be it fails intermittently and the new customer just thinks 
your service is really unreliable.  One of the 2 failures we saw was 
intermittent, rebooting for several hours, then registered for several hours, 
then rebooting again, no rhyme or reason.  At least if it fails hard, they will 
call.


From: Tushar Patel 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

We had 9 failures in 50 we ordered, those were not listed in the unit serial 
numbers.

What we are doing now is running radios in the office for at least two days 
before we send out and we are seeing these failures in the office. 

Even after doing that today we had one fail which was 1 hr drive from the 
office and it was new customer too, installed last week. This gives us bad 
reputation and cost us lot too.

So whatever the root cause mentioned in the email, if it was identified but did 
not include the batch we got, so something is not adding up still. 

I really hope cambium gets to the bottom of these quickly. 


Tushar 


On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:22 PM, Steve D  wrote:


  Just a bump... was this ever sorted out?  Contained to just one batch of 5.8 
radios as listed?  I know I've seen reports in other frequencies but seemed 
less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a while...  Just want to know 
before our next order... 

  -Steve D

  On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis 
 wrote:

I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We found the root 
cause and identified the affected units by serial number.



See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any further 
comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:  
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106



Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.



Matt Mangriotis

Senior Product Manager
Cambium Networks
3800 Golf Road, Suite 360

Rolling Meadows, IL 60008



www.cambiumnetworks.com
O: 847-439-6379

M: 630-308-9394
E: m...@cambiumnetworks.com





Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum





Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread Colin Stanners
That's the new Cambium "Titanium" series radios.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:

> We had 9 failures in 50 we ordered, those were not listed in the unit
> serial numbers.
>
> What we are doing now is running radios in the office for at least two
> days before we send out and we are seeing these failures in the office.
>
> Even after doing that today we had one fail which was 1 hr drive from the
> office and it was new customer too, installed last week. This gives us bad
> reputation and cost us lot too.
>
> So whatever the root cause mentioned in the email, if it was identified
> but did not include the batch we got, so something is not adding up still.
>
> I really hope cambium gets to the bottom of these quickly.
>
>
> Tushar
>
>
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:22 PM, Steve D  wrote:
>
> Just a bump... was this ever sorted out?  Contained to just one batch of
> 5.8 radios as listed?  I know I've seen reports in other frequencies but
> seemed less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a while...  Just want to
> know before our next order...
>
> -Steve D
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis <
> matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We found the
>> root cause and identified the affected units by serial number.
>>
>>
>>
>> See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any further
>> comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:
>> http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106
>>
>>
>>
>> Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Matt Mangriotis*
>>
>> Senior Product Manager
>> * Cambium Networks*
>> 3800 Golf Road, Suite 360
>>
>> Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
>>
>>
>>
>> www.cambiumnetworks.com
>> *O: *847-439-6379
>>
>> *M: *630-308-9394
>> * E: *m...@cambiumnetworks.com
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> Join the Conversation
>>
>> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread Wireless Administrator
We moved to 13.4 primarily to benefit from the new configuration
back-up/restore capability. From our experience we ran into the two issues I
mentioned earlier and one additional issue didn’t report.  The third issue
is that the PPPoE password does not seem to carry forward. There’s a chance
that all three issues are somehow due to some mistake I made but I hope to
ID the cause either way soon.  I’m thinking about just offering to sending
Cambium one of my radios with the symptoms for analysis if they are willing.
This would likely be easier for everyone.

 

Steve B.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:28 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

 

PPPoE on the SM or on the customer equipment? If on the SM, I'm pretty sure
this has been brought up quite a few times going back quite a while. I know
others have mentioned that SM registration auth via RADIUS is giving similar
issues. Well, at least the session stuck in a state where the SM is
unmanageable or something like that.

I'm not doing PPPoE or RADIUS for SM auth, but I am considering going to NAT
in the SM w/ DMZ now that the NAT speed has been greatly improved with
13.2+. I really wanted 13.4 loaded up first so I can create a config
template so the guys don't have to get too involved with setting everything
up in every single SM multiple times per day. I hope to test this up on a
site once they get 13.4.1 builds in our hands.

I bet Aaron is sooo happy to be back on the list. :)

On 9/9/2015 6:52 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:

Just to do pppoe auth.

Steve

�

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 7:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

�

Are you running RADIUS?

On 9/9/2015 6:22 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:

I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium. 

�

·SM�s hang � Not passing customer data and no response on Wan
side.� Power on reset required.

·Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet
side.� Responds to ping but not telnet or browser.� If you catch it
within seconds of post completion you can get in with browser.

�

Anyone else having issues?� I need to provide Cambium the details they
requested to move forward with problem determination.

�

Steve B.

�

�

 



Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
That's a serious hassle!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 9:48 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:

> We had 9 failures in 50 we ordered, those were not listed in the unit
> serial numbers.
>
> What we are doing now is running radios in the office for at least two
> days before we send out and we are seeing these failures in the office.
>
> Even after doing that today we had one fail which was 1 hr drive from the
> office and it was new customer too, installed last week. This gives us bad
> reputation and cost us lot too.
>
> So whatever the root cause mentioned in the email, if it was identified
> but did not include the batch we got, so something is not adding up still.
>
> I really hope cambium gets to the bottom of these quickly.
>
>
> Tushar
>
>
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:22 PM, Steve D  wrote:
>
> Just a bump... was this ever sorted out?  Contained to just one batch of
> 5.8 radios as listed?  I know I've seen reports in other frequencies but
> seemed less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a while...  Just want to
> know before our next order...
>
> -Steve D
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis <
> matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We found the
>> root cause and identified the affected units by serial number.
>>
>>
>>
>> See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any further
>> comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:
>> http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106
>>
>>
>>
>> Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Matt Mangriotis*
>>
>> Senior Product Manager
>> * Cambium Networks*
>> 3800 Golf Road, Suite 360
>>
>> Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
>>
>>
>>
>> www.cambiumnetworks.com
>> *O: *847-439-6379
>>
>> *M: *630-308-9394
>> * E: *m...@cambiumnetworks.com
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> Join the Conversation
>>
>> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread Tushar Patel
We had 9 failures in 50 we ordered, those were not listed in the unit serial 
numbers.

What we are doing now is running radios in the office for at least two days 
before we send out and we are seeing these failures in the office. 

Even after doing that today we had one fail which was 1 hr drive from the 
office and it was new customer too, installed last week. This gives us bad 
reputation and cost us lot too.

So whatever the root cause mentioned in the email, if it was identified but did 
not include the batch we got, so something is not adding up still. 

I really hope cambium gets to the bottom of these quickly. 


Tushar


> On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:22 PM, Steve D  wrote:
> 
> Just a bump... was this ever sorted out?  Contained to just one batch of 5.8 
> radios as listed?  I know I've seen reports in other frequencies but seemed 
> less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a while...  Just want to know 
> before our next order...
> 
> -Steve D
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis 
>>  wrote:
>> I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We found the root 
>> cause and identified the affected units by serial number.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any further 
>> comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:  
>> http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Matt Mangriotis
>> 
>> Senior Product Manager
>> Cambium Networks
>> 3800 Golf Road, Suite 360
>> 
>> Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> www.cambiumnetworks.com
>> O: 847-439-6379
>> 
>> M: 630-308-9394
>> E: m...@cambiumnetworks.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Join the Conversation
>> 
>> Cambium Networks Community Forum
>> 
> 


Re: [AFMUG] Field Service Bulletin - PMP 450 SM

2015-09-09 Thread Steve D
Just a bump... was this ever sorted out?  Contained to just one batch of
5.8 radios as listed?  I know I've seen reports in other frequencies but
seemed less widespread?  No mention from anyone in a while...  Just want to
know before our next order...

-Steve D

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Matt Mangriotis <
matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:

> I wanted to get this out to everyone before the weekend.  We found the
> root cause and identified the affected units by serial number.
>
>
>
> See the attached Field Service Bulletin, and you can post any further
> comment or issue in the thread that discusses it here:
> http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/PMP-450/Field-Service-Bulletin-ADI-Catalina-R1-Chip-not-supported/m-p/43211#M1106
>
>
>
> Apologies for the pain this issue has caused.
>
>
>
> *Matt Mangriotis*
>
> Senior Product Manager
> * Cambium Networks*
> 3800 Golf Road, Suite 360
>
> Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
>
>
>
> www.cambiumnetworks.com
> *O: *847-439-6379
>
> *M: *630-308-9394
> * E: *m...@cambiumnetworks.com
>
> [image: CN_logo_horizontal_blueIcon_blackName]
>
>
>
> Join the Conversation
>
> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Mathew Howard
There's just no pleasing some people... :P

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> Yep...
> On Sep 9, 2015 6:31 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
> wrote:
>
>> Always blaming someone else, geez... :)
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Sep 9, 2015 8:22 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dress this_!
>>>
>>> Waiting for electricians to run conduit.
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 6:12 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 No!!! Dress that cable!!! =P


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

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Jaime Solorza <
 losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Happy?
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test
>> system is cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:
>>
>>> I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...
>>>
>>> bp
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> Stored in a rectangle.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>>>
 Why are your cables all kinky?

 *From:* Jaime Solorza 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
 *To:* Animal Farm 
 *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work


 Setting up remote monitoring of wells

>>>
>>>



Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Jaime Solorza
Yep...
On Sep 9, 2015 6:31 PM, "Josh Luthman"  wrote:

> Always blaming someone else, geez... :)
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 8:22 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:
>
>> Dress this_!
>>
>> Waiting for electricians to run conduit.
>> On Sep 9, 2015 6:12 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> No!!! Dress that cable!!! =P
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Jaime Solorza >> > wrote:
>>>
 Happy?
 On Sep 9, 2015 11:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
 wrote:

> Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test system
> is cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:
>
>> I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...
>>
>> bp
>> 
>>
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> Stored in a rectangle.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>>
>>> Why are your cables all kinky?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work
>>>
>>>
>>> Setting up remote monitoring of wells
>>>
>>
>>
>>>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof


From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 7:30 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

I also hacked the radio to do 2.5 GHz and over clocked the CPU to 2.5 GHz so my 
AP running 2.5 does a great job at running 2.5.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 8:21 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

  What are you on?
  2.5
  OK, but what framing?
  2.5!
  No, what framing!?
  2.5


  On 9/9/2015 6:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's confusing!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup  wrote:

  I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally unintentional, 
right? :)


  On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Thanks guys!!!



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


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan 
 wrote:

  Josh,



  No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to 
upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to listen 
to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.



  Daniel Sullivan

  ePMP Software Manager



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement



  I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms 
frames.  Does anyone know?




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








Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:34 PM, George Skorup  wrote:

> The 2.5GHz CPU clock should speed up the GUI. :O
>
> On 9/9/2015 7:30 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> I also hacked the radio to do 2.5 GHz and over clocked the CPU to 2.5 GHz
> so my AP running 2.5 does a great job at running 2.5.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 8:21 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>> What are you on?
>> 2.5
>> OK, but what framing?
>> 2.5!
>> No, what framing!?
>> 2.5
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 6:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's confusing!
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup < 
>> geo...@cbcast.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally unintentional,
>>> right? :)
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks guys!!!
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>>
 Josh,



 No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to
 upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to
 listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.



 Daniel Sullivan

 ePMP Software Manager



 *From:* Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com] *On
 Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware
 requirement



 I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
 frames.  Does anyone know?



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

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

The 2.5GHz CPU clock should speed up the GUI. :O

On 9/9/2015 7:30 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


I also hacked the radio to do 2.5 GHz and over clocked the CPU to 2.5 
GHz so my AP running 2.5 does a great job at running 2.5.


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

On Sep 9, 2015 8:21 PM, "George Skorup" > wrote:


What are you on?
2.5
OK, but what framing?
2.5!
No, what framing!?
2.5

On 9/9/2015 6:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's
confusing!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup mailto:geo...@cbcast.com>> wrote:

I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally
unintentional, right? :)

On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Thanks guys!!!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>> wrote:

Josh,

No. 2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You
will need to upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release
and then they will be able to listen to an AP configured
to 2.5 msec frames.

Daniel Sullivan

ePMP Software Manager

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station
firmware requirement

I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP
doing 2.5ms frames.  Does anyone know?

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











Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Always blaming someone else, geez... :)

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 8:22 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

> Dress this_!
>
> Waiting for electricians to run conduit.
> On Sep 9, 2015 6:12 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
> wrote:
>
>> No!!! Dress that cable!!! =P
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Jaime Solorza 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Happy?
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test system
 is cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
 On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:

> I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Stored in a rectangle.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>
>> Why are your cables all kinky?
>>
>> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work
>>
>>
>> Setting up remote monitoring of wells
>>
>
>
>>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
I also hacked the radio to do 2.5 GHz and over clocked the CPU to 2.5 GHz
so my AP running 2.5 does a great job at running 2.5.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 8:21 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

> What are you on?
> 2.5
> OK, but what framing?
> 2.5!
> No, what framing!?
> 2.5
>
> On 9/9/2015 6:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's confusing!
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup  wrote:
>
>> I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally unintentional,
>> right? :)
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> Thanks guys!!!
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Josh,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to
>>> upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to
>>> listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel Sullivan
>>>
>>> ePMP Software Manager
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
>>> frames.  Does anyone know?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
PPPoE on the SM or on the customer equipment? If on the SM, I'm pretty 
sure this has been brought up quite a few times going back quite a 
while. I know others have mentioned that SM registration auth via RADIUS 
is giving similar issues. Well, at least the session stuck in a state 
where the SM is unmanageable or something like that.


I'm not doing PPPoE or RADIUS for SM auth, but I am considering going to 
NAT in the SM w/ DMZ now that the NAT speed has been greatly improved 
with 13.2+. I really wanted 13.4 loaded up first so I can create a 
config template so the guys don't have to get too involved with setting 
everything up in every single SM multiple times per day. I hope to test 
this up on a site once they get 13.4.1 builds in our hands.


I bet Aaron is sooo happy to be back on the list. :)

On 9/9/2015 6:52 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:


Just to do pppoe auth.

Steve

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 7:44 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

Are you running RADIUS?

On 9/9/2015 6:22 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:

I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium.

�

�SM�s hang � Not passing customer data and no response on Wan
side.� Power on reset required.

�Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet
side.� Responds to ping but not telnet or browser.� If you
catch it within seconds of post completion you can get in with
browser.

�

Anyone else having issues?� I need to provide Cambium the
details they requested to move forward with problem determination.

�

Steve B.

�





Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Jaime Solorza
Dress this_!

Waiting for electricians to run conduit.
On Sep 9, 2015 6:12 PM, "Josh Luthman"  wrote:

> No!!! Dress that cable!!! =P
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Jaime Solorza 
> wrote:
>
>> Happy?
>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test system
>>> is cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:
>>>
 I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...

 bp
 


 On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

 Stored in a rectangle.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373
 On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> Why are your cables all kinky?
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work
>
>
> Setting up remote monitoring of wells
>


>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

What are you on?
2.5
OK, but what framing?
2.5!
No, what framing!?
2.5

On 9/9/2015 6:54 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's confusing!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup > wrote:


I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally
unintentional, right? :)

On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Thanks guys!!!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>> wrote:

Josh,

No. 2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will
need to upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then
they will be able to listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec
frames.

Daniel Sullivan

ePMP Software Manager

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware
requirement

I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing
2.5ms frames.  Does anyone know?

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









Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
No!!! Dress that cable!!! =P


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> Happy?
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test system is
>> cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:
>>
>>> I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...
>>>
>>> bp
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> Stored in a rectangle.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>>>
 Why are your cables all kinky?

 *From:* Jaime Solorza 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
 *To:* Animal Farm 
 *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work


 Setting up remote monitoring of wells

>>>
>>>


Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
Donald Rumpelstiltskin. I think that was from the Dubya impersonator on 
SNL like 10 years ago.


Oh wait, even better... Donald Trumpelstiltskin!

On 9/9/2015 6:43 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

Brings this to mind:

Donald Rumsfeld is giving the president his daily briefing. He 
concludes by saying: 'Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed'. 
'OH NO!' the President exclaims. 'That's terrible!'


His staff are stunned at this display of emotion, they watch nervously 
as the President sits, head in hands.

Finally, the President looks up and asks, 'How many is a brazillion?'

bp


On 9/9/2015 2:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:
I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to 
galvanized or give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if 
they ordered a brazillion, they could get the cost down.






Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
If it was I'd say that's a mistake - too many 2.5 notes it's confusing!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:37 PM, George Skorup  wrote:

> I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally unintentional,
> right? :)
>
> On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Thanks guys!!!
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan <
> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> Josh,
>>
>>
>>
>> No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to
>> upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to
>> listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel Sullivan
>>
>> ePMP Software Manager
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
>> frames.  Does anyone know?
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread Wireless Administrator
Just to do pppoe auth.

Steve

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 7:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

 

Are you running RADIUS?

On 9/9/2015 6:22 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:

I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium. 

�

·SM�s hang � Not passing customer data and no response on Wan
side.� Power on reset required.

·Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet
side.� Responds to ping but not telnet or browser.� If you catch it
within seconds of post completion you can get in with browser.

�

Anyone else having issues?� I need to provide Cambium the details they
requested to move forward with problem determination.

�

Steve B.

�

 



Re: [AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

Are you running RADIUS?

On 9/9/2015 6:22 PM, Wireless Administrator wrote:


I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium.

�SM�s hang � Not passing customer data and no response on Wan side.  
Power on reset required.


�Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet 
side.  Responds to ping but not telnet or browser. If you catch it 
within seconds of post completion you can get in with browser.


Anyone else having issues?  I need to provide Cambium the details they 
requested to move forward with problem determination.


Steve B.





Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

Brings this to mind:

Donald Rumsfeld is giving the president his daily briefing. He concludes 
by saying: 'Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed'. 'OH NO!' the 
President exclaims. 'That's terrible!'


His staff are stunned at this display of emotion, they watch nervously 
as the President sits, head in hands.

Finally, the President looks up and asks, 'How many is a brazillion?'

bp


On 9/9/2015 2:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:
I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to 
galvanized or give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if 
they ordered a brazillion, they could get the cost down.




Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup

No, just, no. Hey, get the torch away from that guy wire!

On 9/9/2015 5:06 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
But it gives you an opportunity to strap a cutting torch to your back 
and climb up the tower and make sparks!

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Lincoln-Electric-Port-A-Torch-Kit-KH776/202339712
OK, or a battery operated Sawzall.
*From:* George Skorup 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 4:58 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
The Laird OEM stuff for the 450 antennas use the same stuff. Stainless 
on stainless. Every single one we've put up has seized. At least it 
won't loosen up! Still sucks when you want to change something and 
have to cut the bolts off and replace with something else.


I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to 
galvanized or give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if 
they ordered a brazillion, they could get the cost down.


On 9/9/2015 4:48 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
They are M8 - 5/16" is almost exactly the same size as 8mm (not the 
same thread though), so it works fine to just use normal 5/16" 
galvanized carriage bolts from Menards or wherever, and the nuts will 
use a 1/2" wrench, which is close enough to 13mm that you don't need 
to bother with different tools.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Ken Hohhof > wrote:


If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the
nearest SAE size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then
M6 and the nearest SAE size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit
oversize due to the zinc so YMMV (galvanized nuts are tapped
oversize to match).
*From:* Nate Burke 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and
a source handy?


On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:


We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts
and nuts in standard threads (US) its working well.

Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

Special bees will construct it on site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk

*From:*Nate Burke 

*Sent:*Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my
installers from Swearing while assembling them? Can it be
installed by Drone?  I can just program the drone and release it
from the roof of my office to go do the install?

On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you
get from distributors as they go through stock?Â

On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

They already know about the hardware, the new Force
dishes are much much better.  As far as current stuff
I don't know...

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
 wrote:

Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones
instead?  BTW what is Force EPMP ?ÂÂ

On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke"
 wrote:

We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns
(Force dishes), and it seems that the stainless nuts
have seized on.

Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or
would we be better off just replacing the hardware with
brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I haven't used Anti-Seize
before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would the
installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy
that gets sent to de-install? I'm also thinking about
how to easy it would be to re-deploy the Force Dishes.

Nate









Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
I like how the v2.5 for 2.5ms thing played out. Totally unintentional, 
right? :)


On 9/9/2015 5:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Thanks guys!!!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan 
> wrote:


Josh,

No. 2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need
to upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be
able to listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.

Daniel Sullivan

ePMP Software Manager

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware
requirement

I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing
2.5ms frames.  Does anyone know?

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






Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Brandon Yuchasz
I can get them tomorrow. We are buying them locally at the hardware and I need 
a few more. Ill post up tomorrow night.

 

 

Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net  

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

 

So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a source handy?



On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:

We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and nuts in 
standard threads (US) its working well.

 

Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net  

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

 

Special bees will construct it on site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk

 

 

From: Nate Burke   

Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

 

When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers from 
Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I can just 
program the drone and release it from the roof of my office to go do the 
install?




On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get from 
distributors as they go through stock?  




On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are much much 
better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones instead?  BTW what is 
Force EPMP ?  

On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns (Force dishes), and it 
seems that the stainless nuts have seized on.

Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we be better off 
just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I haven't used 
Anti-Seize before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would the installers 
actually use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent to de-install?  
I'm also thinking about how to easy it would be to re-deploy the Force Dishes.

Nate

 

 

 



[AFMUG] 13.4 Firmware on PMP100

2015-09-09 Thread Wireless Administrator
I have two open tickets that I need to work on with Cambium. 

 

.SM's hang - Not passing customer data and no response on Wan side.
Power on reset required.

.Installers unable to access the SM in NAT mode from the Ethernet
side.  Responds to ping but not telnet or browser.  If you catch it within
seconds of post completion you can get in with browser.

 

Anyone else having issues?  I need to provide Cambium the details they
requested to move forward with problem determination.

 

Steve B.

 



Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B5c antenna choices

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Mark,

Are those based off of the ones that the Redline AN50 used?  Sure looks a
lot like it (though that's dual pol).


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:

> We have put up a couple of 4.9 links with B5c using MTI panel antennas:
>
> http://www.mtiwe.com/?CategoryID=211&ArticleID=217
>
> Results have been very good.   The antenna is about $600 with the mounting
> kit.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Jul 22, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Jaime Fink  wrote:
>
> On a related topic to the connectorized parabolics for use on the B5c,
> almost all of the dishes are designed primarily for 5850 Mhz U-NII 3
> because most of the PTP business has been so far
>
> So if you’re wanting to set it up in 4900 (public safety) or 5150 MHz
> bands, there’s definitely more antenna match gain loss versus what people
> observe on the antennas in U-NII 3, since they weren’t specifically
> engineered for it.
>
> Most vendors to date have not posted performance specs for the lower bands
> since it’s a relatively new application for those dishes, you may want to
> get opinions from other users on what they’re seeing if you’re using those
> bands, and what to compensate on power with, some users have observed 2 to
> 4 dBi difference sometimes I’ve heard.
>
> On integrated devices radios like B5, this compensation automatically
> happens since we characterize or own dish to optimize EIRP with the FCC
> (all in the filings), but it’s up to the professional installer to do so
> with a connectorized dish.
>
> Cheers,
>
> *Jaime Fink* • *Mimosa*  • *CPO & Co-Founder*
> From: Af  on behalf of TJ Trout 
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 4:39 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B5c antenna choices
>
> They are vh. I would use the rd light weight and isobeam after using those
> and the rdac31. waste of money I think.
> On Jul 22, 2015 4:37 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
> wrote:
>
>> The AC are slant I think.  If both sides are the same (both slant or both
>> linear) the radio won't know.
>>
>> What's $1300?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jul 22, 2015 7:25 PM, "Craig House"  wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone tried to use a b5c on a UBNT 5G31AC dish?  I have been using
>>> Commscope dishes but my supply is gone and I hate to buy a 1300.00 dish to
>>> do what a 300$ dish may accomplish?  I know the connectors would have to be
>>> RPSMA to N type but otherwise any reason this would not work?
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B5c antenna choices

2015-09-09 Thread Mark Radabaugh
We have put up a couple of 4.9 links with B5c using MTI panel antennas:

http://www.mtiwe.com/?CategoryID=211&ArticleID=217 


Results have been very good.   The antenna is about $600 with the mounting kit.

Mark



> On Jul 22, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Jaime Fink  wrote:
> 
> On a related topic to the connectorized parabolics for use on the B5c, almost 
> all of the dishes are designed primarily for 5850 Mhz U-NII 3 because most of 
> the PTP business has been so far
> 
> So if you’re wanting to set it up in 4900 (public safety) or 5150 MHz bands, 
> there’s definitely more antenna match gain loss versus what people observe on 
> the antennas in U-NII 3, since they weren’t specifically engineered for it. 
> 
> Most vendors to date have not posted performance specs for the lower bands 
> since it’s a relatively new application for those dishes, you may want to get 
> opinions from other users on what they’re seeing if you’re using those bands, 
> and what to compensate on power with, some users have observed 2 to 4 dBi 
> difference sometimes I’ve heard. 
> 
> On integrated devices radios like B5, this compensation automatically happens 
> since we characterize or own dish to optimize EIRP with the FCC (all in the 
> filings), but it’s up to the professional installer to do so with a 
> connectorized dish.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jaime Fink • Mimosa  • CPO & Co-Founder
> 
> From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of TJ 
> Trout mailto:t...@voltbb.com>>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com "  >
> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 4:39 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com " mailto:af@afmug.com>>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B5c antenna choices
> 
> They are vh. I would use the rd light weight and isobeam after using those 
> and the rdac31. waste of money I think.
> 
> On Jul 22, 2015 4:37 PM, "Josh Luthman"  > wrote:
> The AC are slant I think.  If both sides are the same (both slant or both 
> linear) the radio won't know.
> 
> What's $1300?
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 
> Direct: 937-552-2343 
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> On Jul 22, 2015 7:25 PM, "Craig House"  > wrote:
> Has anyone tried to use a b5c on a UBNT 5G31AC dish?  I have been using 
> Commscope dishes but my supply is gone and I hate to buy a 1300.00 dish to do 
> what a 300$ dish may accomplish?  I know the connectors would have to be 
> RPSMA to N type but otherwise any reason this would not work?
> 
> Craig



Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Thanks guys!!!


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dan Sullivan <
daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:

> Josh,
>
>
>
> No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to
> upgrade your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to
> listen to an AP configured to 2.5 msec frames.
>
>
>
> Daniel Sullivan
>
> ePMP Software Manager
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement
>
>
>
> I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
> frames.  Does anyone know?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Dan Sullivan
Josh,

No.  2.4.3 stations cannot support 2.5 msec frames.  You will need to upgrade 
your stations to the 2.5 release and then they will be able to listen to an AP 
configured to 2.5 msec frames.

Daniel Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms frames.  
Does anyone know?

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


Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Mathew Howard
As fun as that sounds, I'd rather be able to just use a wrench to take
antennas down like an almost normal person.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> But it gives you an opportunity to strap a cutting torch to your back and
> climb up the tower and make sparks!
>
>
> http://www.homedepot.com/p/Lincoln-Electric-Port-A-Torch-Kit-KH776/202339712
>
> OK, or a battery operated Sawzall.
>
>
> *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 4:58 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>
> The Laird OEM stuff for the 450 antennas use the same stuff. Stainless on
> stainless. Every single one we've put up has seized. At least it won't
> loosen up! Still sucks when you want to change something and have to cut
> the bolts off and replace with something else.
>
> I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to
> galvanized or give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if they
> ordered a brazillion, they could get the cost down.
>
> On 9/9/2015 4:48 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>
> They are M8 - 5/16" is almost exactly the same size as 8mm (not the same
> thread though), so it works fine to just use normal 5/16" galvanized
> carriage bolts from Menards or wherever, and the nuts will use a 1/2"
> wrench, which is close enough to 13mm that you don't need to bother with
> different tools.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the nearest
>> SAE size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then M6 and the
>> nearest SAE size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit oversize due to the
>> zinc so YMMV (galvanized nuts are tapped oversize to match).
>>
>>
>> *From:* Nate Burke 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>>
>> So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a source
>> handy?
>>
>>
>> On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:
>>
>> We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and nuts
>> in standard threads (US) its working well.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Brandon Yuchasz
>>
>> GogebicRange.net
>>
>> www.gogebicrange.net
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>>
>>
>>
>> Special bees will construct it on site.
>>
>> 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Nate Burke 
>>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM
>>
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>>
>>
>>
>> When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers from
>> Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I can just
>> program the drone and release it from the roof of my office to go do the
>> install?
>>
>> On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> It'll be a new part entirely.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke" < 
>> n...@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get from
>> distributors as they go through stock?Â
>>
>> On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are much much
>> better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza" < 
>> losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones instead?  BTW
>> what is Force EPMP ?ÂÂ
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke" < 
>> n...@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>> We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns (Force dishes),
>> and it seems that the stainless nuts have seized on.
>>
>> Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we be better
>> off just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I
>> haven't used Anti-Seize before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would
>> the installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent
>> to de-install?  I'm also thinking about how to easy it would be to
>> re-deploy the Force Dishes.
>>
>> Nate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Mathew Howard
I don't think so, but I'm not positive... I think I read on the Cambium
forum that everything needs to be on v2.5, but I could be remembering wrong.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
> frames.  Does anyone know?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>


[AFMUG] ePMP AP running 2.5 ms - station firmware requirement

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
I'm wondering if my stations at 2.4.3 can talk to an AP doing 2.5ms
frames.  Does anyone know?

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


Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
But it gives you an opportunity to strap a cutting torch to your back and climb 
up the tower and make sparks!

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Lincoln-Electric-Port-A-Torch-Kit-KH776/202339712

OK, or a battery operated Sawzall.


From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 4:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

The Laird OEM stuff for the 450 antennas use the same stuff. Stainless on 
stainless. Every single one we've put up has seized. At least it won't loosen 
up! Still sucks when you want to change something and have to cut the bolts off 
and replace with something else.

I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to galvanized or 
give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if they ordered a 
brazillion, they could get the cost down.


On 9/9/2015 4:48 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:

  They are M8 - 5/16" is almost exactly the same size as 8mm (not the same 
thread though), so it works fine to just use normal 5/16" galvanized carriage 
bolts from Menards or wherever, and the nuts will use a 1/2" wrench, which is 
close enough to 13mm that you don't need to bother with different tools.


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the nearest 
SAE size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then M6 and the nearest 
SAE size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit oversize due to the zinc so YMMV 
(galvanized nuts are tapped oversize to match).


From: Nate Burke 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a source 
handy?



On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:

  We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and nuts 
in standard threads (US) its working well.



  Best regards,

  Brandon Yuchasz

  GogebicRange.net

  www.gogebicrange.net



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
  Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts



  Special bees will construct it on site.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk





  From: Nate Burke 

  Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts



  When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers from 
Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I can just 
program the drone and release it from the roof of my office to go do the 
install?



  On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get from 
distributors as they go through stock?  



On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

  They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are much 
much better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...

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

  On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  
wrote:

  Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones instead?  
BTW what is Force EPMP ?  

  On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

  We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns (Force 
dishes), and it seems that the stainless nuts have seized on.

  Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we be 
better off just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I 
haven't used Anti-Seize before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would the 
installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent to 
de-install?  I'm also thinking about how to easy it would be to re-deploy 
the Force Dishes.

  Nate











Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
The Laird OEM stuff for the 450 antennas use the same stuff. Stainless 
on stainless. Every single one we've put up has seized. At least it 
won't loosen up! Still sucks when you want to change something and have 
to cut the bolts off and replace with something else.


I really wish Cambium would convince their supplier to change to 
galvanized or give us silicon-bronze nuts. Even metric, I'm sure if they 
ordered a brazillion, they could get the cost down.


On 9/9/2015 4:48 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
They are M8 - 5/16" is almost exactly the same size as 8mm (not the 
same thread though), so it works fine to just use normal 5/16" 
galvanized carriage bolts from Menards or wherever, and the nuts will 
use a 1/2" wrench, which is close enough to 13mm that you don't need 
to bother with different tools.


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Ken Hohhof > wrote:


If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the
nearest SAE size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then
M6 and the nearest SAE size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit
oversize due to the zinc so YMMV (galvanized nuts are tapped
oversize to match).
*From:* Nate Burke 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a
source handy?


On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:


We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts
and nuts in standard threads (US) its working well.

Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net 

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

Special bees will construct it on site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk

*From:*Nate Burke 

*Sent:*Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my
installers from Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be
installed by Drone?  I can just program the drone and release it
from the roof of my office to go do the install?

On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke" mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you
get from distributors as they go through stock?Â

On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

They already know about the hardware, the new Force
dishes are much much better.  As far as current stuff
I don't know...

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones
instead?  BTW what is Force EPMP ?ÂÂ

On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke" mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns
(Force dishes), and it seems that the stainless nuts have
seized on.

Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or
would we be better off just replacing the hardware with
brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I haven't used Anti-Seize
before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would the
installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy
that gets sent to de-install?  I'm also thinking about
how to easy it would be to re-deploy the Force Dishes.

Nate








Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Mathew Howard
They are M8 - 5/16" is almost exactly the same size as 8mm (not the same
thread though), so it works fine to just use normal 5/16" galvanized
carriage bolts from Menards or wherever, and the nuts will use a 1/2"
wrench, which is close enough to 13mm that you don't need to bother with
different tools.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the nearest
> SAE size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then M6 and the
> nearest SAE size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit oversize due to the
> zinc so YMMV (galvanized nuts are tapped oversize to match).
>
>
> *From:* Nate Burke 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>
> So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a source
> handy?
>
>
> On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:
>
> We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and nuts
> in standard threads (US) its working well.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Brandon Yuchasz
>
> GogebicRange.net
>
> www.gogebicrange.net
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>
>
>
> Special bees will construct it on site.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Nate Burke 
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts
>
>
>
> When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers from
> Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I can just
> program the drone and release it from the roof of my office to go do the
> install?
>
> On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> It'll be a new part entirely.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:
>
> Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get from
> distributors as they go through stock?Â
>
> On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are much much
> better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:
>
> Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones instead?  BTW
> what is Force EPMP ?ÂÂ
>
> On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:
>
> We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns (Force dishes),
> and it seems that the stainless nuts have seized on.
>
> Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we be better
> off just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I
> haven't used Anti-Seize before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would
> the installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent
> to de-install?  I'm also thinking about how to easy it would be to
> re-deploy the Force Dishes.
>
> Nate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
If the head takes a 13 mm wrench, it would be an M8 bolt and the nearest SAE 
size would be 5/16.  If it takes a 10 mm wrench, then M6 and the nearest SAE 
size would be 1/4.  HDG bolts are a bit oversize due to the zinc so YMMV 
(galvanized nuts are tapped oversize to match).


From: Nate Burke 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 3:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a source handy?



On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:

  We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and nuts in 
standard threads (US) its working well.

   

  Best regards,

  Brandon Yuchasz

  GogebicRange.net

  www.gogebicrange.net

   

  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
  Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

   

  Special bees will construct it on site.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk

   

   

  From: Nate Burke 

  Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

   

  When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers from 
Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I can just 
program the drone and release it from the roof of my office to go do the 
install?



  On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get from 
distributors as they go through stock?  



On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

  They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are much much 
better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...

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

  On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

  Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones instead?  BTW 
what is Force EPMP ?  

  On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke"  wrote:

  We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns (Force dishes), 
and it seems that the stainless nuts have seized on.

  Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we be better 
off just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze nuts ala LMG?  I haven't 
used Anti-Seize before, is it a sticky mess to work with?  Would the 
installers actually use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent to 
de-install?  I'm also thinking about how to easy it would be to re-deploy 
the Force Dishes.

  Nate

 

   




Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

2015-09-09 Thread Nate Burke
So I don't have to re-invent the wheel, do you have the size and a 
source handy?



On 9/8/2015 9:06 PM, Brandon Yuchasz wrote:


We have swapped all of ours out with hot dipped galvanized bolts and 
nuts in standard threads (US) its working well.


Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net 

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 08, 2015 5:12 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

Special bees will construct it on site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uSVM3tJVPk

*From:*Nate Burke 

*Sent:*Tuesday, September 08, 2015 4:30 PM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Anti-seize or Brass Nuts

When will this magical new dish be out?  Will it keep my installers 
from Swearing while assembling them?  Can it be installed by Drone?  I 
can just program the drone and release it from the roof of my office 
to go do the install?


On 9/8/2015 4:26 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

It'll be a new part entirely.

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:24 PM, "Nate Burke" mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

Do the new dishes have a new part number?  Or just what you get
from distributors as they go through stock?Â

On 9/8/2015 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

They already know about the hardware, the new Force dishes are
much much better.  As far as current stuff I don't know...

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

On Sep 8, 2015 5:00 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

Can you replace parts with hot dipped galvanized ones
instead?  BTW what is Force EPMP ?ÂÂ

On Sep 8, 2015 2:54 PM, "Nate Burke" mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

We've had to start doing our first couple EPMP takedowns
(Force dishes), and it seems that the stainless nuts have
seized on.

Should we be hitting all installs with Anti-Seize, or would we
be better off just replacing the hardware with brass/bronze
nuts ala LMG?  I haven't used Anti-Seize before, is it a
sticky mess to work with?  Would the installers actually
use it, or just screw over the guy that gets sent to
de-install?  I'm also thinking about how to easy it would
be to re-deploy the Force Dishes.

Nate





Re: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

2015-09-09 Thread Chuck McCown
You can make a mid span drop clamp work on fig 8.

From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

I had not considered a mid-span drop.  Interesting point.


  Might want to compare figure 8 costs to ADSS as well, the share some of the 
same strengths and weaknesses. Lashed has the advantage of being able to 
overlash and do mid-span aerial drops.

  On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Adam Moffett  wrote:

So It seems like figure-8 is almost 3 times the cost of a separate fiber 
and messenger strand.but the generally accepted wisdom has always been that 
figure-8 is cheaper.

Seems like you have at least twice the labor in lashed because you pull the 
whole length twice.  I don't really have a basis for comparison though.  Does 
anybody have reasonable guesses about labor hours spent for aerial installation 
on the two different methods?






Re: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

2015-09-09 Thread Chuck McCown
That surprises me.  I presume the price is a supply and demand thing.  Most 
folks lash because the strand is already there and they are just adding to 
it.


-Original Message- 
From: Adam Moffett

Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

So It seems like figure-8 is almost 3 times the cost of a separate fiber
and messenger strand.but the generally accepted wisdom has always
been that figure-8 is cheaper.

Seems like you have at least twice the labor in lashed because you pull
the whole length twice.  I don't really have a basis for comparison
though.  Does anybody have reasonable guesses about labor hours spent
for aerial installation on the two different methods?




Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Chuck McCown
No, but it does give off some light at 6 volts (you have to be in a dark room 
to see it).

From: Ken Hohhof 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:01 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

On the other hand, I don’t think you need to design for as low as 6V.

From: Chuck McCown 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

They don’t throw off much heat, the resistor is rated at 0.5 watt and it has 
never failed.
I think the resistor is a 10K so at [60V – 1.2 V (for the LED)] Squared over 
10K = 345 milliwatts of heat.  

Not much heat to get rid of.

Temperature is a different thing.  The temp of the component will be high at 
high voltages if you put your finger on it.  But it isn’t going to add much to 
the active load and if it is running at 125F, your box raises another 20 
degrees, 145F is not going to get too hot for the solder to melt.

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 12:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

I did mention this here when I was bench testing powering an AF24. My Traco was 
floating at 55 volts. The radio ran fine.

It's not that it's powering the radio and getting hot. If you feed the card 
with 50+ volts, the LED still gets hot. I remember that Chuck did say it should 
be fine up to 60VDC.

I'm going to be using a lot more of these on more site 48VDC conversions. So 
Chuck, is this something that can be changed? Is there any risk of severe 
overheating if I have these running in a hot enclosure? Some sites we just 
can't do ventilation because of grain dust and things of that nature.


On 9/9/2015 11:04 AM, Josh Baird wrote:

  So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage without 
issues?  Just trying to rule this out.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.  
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.  

Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the 
magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.

From: Josh Baird 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder 
if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

  The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman 
 wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 
55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on 
system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60 volts 
without some tradeoff.  

  As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.  

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is 
not very hot at all.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's? 


On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

  The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an 
AF24, and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns 
your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these 
installed, is this normal? 

  It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that 
the ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm 
not sure if it's related or not.

  Josh










Re: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

2015-09-09 Thread Adam Moffett

I had not considered a mid-span drop. Interesting point.

Might want to compare figure 8 costs to ADSS as well, the share some 
of the same strengths and weaknesses. Lashed has the advantage of 
being able to overlash and do mid-span aerial drops.


On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Adam Moffett > wrote:


So It seems like figure-8 is almost 3 times the cost of a separate
fiber and messenger strand.but the generally accepted wisdom
has always been that figure-8 is cheaper.

Seems like you have at least twice the labor in lashed because you
pull the whole length twice.  I don't really have a basis for
comparison though.  Does anybody have reasonable guesses about
labor hours spent for aerial installation on the two different
methods?






Re: [AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

2015-09-09 Thread Jason McKemie
Might want to compare figure 8 costs to ADSS as well, the share some of the
same strengths and weaknesses. Lashed has the advantage of being able to
overlash and do mid-span aerial drops.

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> So It seems like figure-8 is almost 3 times the cost of a separate fiber
> and messenger strand.but the generally accepted wisdom has always been
> that figure-8 is cheaper.
>
> Seems like you have at least twice the labor in lashed because you pull
> the whole length twice.  I don't really have a basis for comparison
> though.  Does anybody have reasonable guesses about labor hours spent for
> aerial installation on the two different methods?
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread SmarterBroadband
Ah, but the power levels on the status and statistics page show combined.  
Therefore the SSR could be showing one channel way off.

 

Is there anywhere in a PTP650 to see V and H power levels separate?

 

Adam

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

 

That's very confusing. If all of the power levels are nearly the same, how can 
the ratio be that far off? That makes no sense. Unless it doesn't mean the same 
thing as with SSR on the PMP450 (V-H or B-A Rx power ratio).

On 9/9/2015 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are the same.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  wrote:

Just a noise issue?  The manual says;

 

Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large positive 
or negative value then investigate the following potential problems:

• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected. 

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value may be 
pointing in the wrong direction. 

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed using a 
side lobe rather than the main lobe.

 

I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.

 

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

 

Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam

 

 

 



Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
Watchdog reset issue?

From: That One Guy /sarcasm 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 2:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

is 13.4.1 bringing in some fabulous shoes?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

  I think the only reason to do 12.1 first is the 430/450 interop thing.  Which 
doesn’t apply to PMP100.

  From: George Skorup 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:46 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

  I have taken several radios from 11.2 directly to 13.1.3. Haven't tried going 
straight to 13.4 yet outside of a bench test, which worked fine (all config 
intact). At this point though, I'm just going to wait for 13.4.1.


  On 9/9/2015 12:03 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

We went from 11.2 to 12.1 to 13..

The config ignores the MAC address from the source config (so you're cool).


bp


On 9/9/2015 9:14 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

  I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 11.2 
all the way up, probably broke something 

  Im concernerd in the config file,

  "srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",


  is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x 

The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4

Don't quote me tho lol 

-Sean 


On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

  Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i 
believe on all the radios, some may be betas 
  what is the recomended path


  -- 

  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] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread SmarterBroadband
Good Point.  Manual says;

 

The Signal Strength Ratio (calculated over a one hour period) is: Power 
received by the vertical antenna input (dB) ÷ Power received by the horizontal 
antenna input (dB) This ratio is presented as: max, mean, min, and latest. The 
max, min and latest are true instantaneous measurements; the mean is the mean 
of a set of one second means.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

 

That's very confusing. If all of the power levels are nearly the same, how can 
the ratio be that far off? That makes no sense. Unless it doesn't mean the same 
thing as with SSR on the PMP450 (V-H or B-A Rx power ratio).

On 9/9/2015 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are the same.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  wrote:

Just a noise issue?  The manual says;

 

Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large positive 
or negative value then investigate the following potential problems:

• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected. 

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value may be 
pointing in the wrong direction. 

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed using a 
side lobe rather than the main lobe.

 

I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.

 

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

 

Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam

 

 

 



[AFMUG] Figure-8 vs lashed

2015-09-09 Thread Adam Moffett
So It seems like figure-8 is almost 3 times the cost of a separate fiber 
and messenger strand.but the generally accepted wisdom has always 
been that figure-8 is cheaper.


Seems like you have at least twice the labor in lashed because you pull 
the whole length twice.  I don't really have a basis for comparison 
though.  Does anybody have reasonable guesses about labor hours spent 
for aerial installation on the two different methods?





Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread That One Guy /sarcasm
is 13.4.1 bringing in some fabulous shoes?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> I think the only reason to do 12.1 first is the 430/450 interop thing.
> Which doesn’t apply to PMP100.
>
> *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:46 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4
>
> I have taken several radios from 11.2 directly to 13.1.3. Haven't tried
> going straight to 13.4 yet outside of a bench test, which worked fine (all
> config intact). At this point though, I'm just going to wait for 13.4.1.
>
> On 9/9/2015 12:03 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
>
> We went from 11.2 to 12.1 to 13..
>
> The config ignores the MAC address from the source config (so you're cool).
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 9/9/2015 9:14 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
>
> I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 11.2
> all the way up, probably broke something
>
> Im concernerd in the config file,
>
> "srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",
>
> is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:
>
>> I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x
>>
>> The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4
>>
>> Don't quote me tho lol
>>
>> -Sean
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i believe
>>> on all the radios, some may be betas
>>> what is the recomended path
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
On the other hand, I don’t think you need to design for as low as 6V.

From: Chuck McCown 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

They don’t throw off much heat, the resistor is rated at 0.5 watt and it has 
never failed.
I think the resistor is a 10K so at [60V – 1.2 V (for the LED)] Squared over 
10K = 345 milliwatts of heat.  

Not much heat to get rid of.

Temperature is a different thing.  The temp of the component will be high at 
high voltages if you put your finger on it.  But it isn’t going to add much to 
the active load and if it is running at 125F, your box raises another 20 
degrees, 145F is not going to get too hot for the solder to melt.

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 12:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

I did mention this here when I was bench testing powering an AF24. My Traco was 
floating at 55 volts. The radio ran fine.

It's not that it's powering the radio and getting hot. If you feed the card 
with 50+ volts, the LED still gets hot. I remember that Chuck did say it should 
be fine up to 60VDC.

I'm going to be using a lot more of these on more site 48VDC conversions. So 
Chuck, is this something that can be changed? Is there any risk of severe 
overheating if I have these running in a hot enclosure? Some sites we just 
can't do ventilation because of grain dust and things of that nature.


On 9/9/2015 11:04 AM, Josh Baird wrote:

  So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage without 
issues?  Just trying to rule this out.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.  
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.  

Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the 
magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.

From: Josh Baird 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder 
if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

  The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman 
 wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 
55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on 
system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60 volts 
without some tradeoff.  

  As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.  

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is 
not very hot at all.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's? 


On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

  The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an 
AF24, and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns 
your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these 
installed, is this normal? 

  It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that 
the ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm 
not sure if it's related or not.

  Josh










Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Chuck McCown
They don’t throw off much heat, the resistor is rated at 0.5 watt and it has 
never failed.
I think the resistor is a 10K so at [60V – 1.2 V (for the LED)] Squared over 
10K = 345 milliwatts of heat.  

Not much heat to get rid of.

Temperature is a different thing.  The temp of the component will be high at 
high voltages if you put your finger on it.  But it isn’t going to add much to 
the active load and if it is running at 125F, your box raises another 20 
degrees, 145F is not going to get too hot for the solder to melt.

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 12:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

I did mention this here when I was bench testing powering an AF24. My Traco was 
floating at 55 volts. The radio ran fine.

It's not that it's powering the radio and getting hot. If you feed the card 
with 50+ volts, the LED still gets hot. I remember that Chuck did say it should 
be fine up to 60VDC.

I'm going to be using a lot more of these on more site 48VDC conversions. So 
Chuck, is this something that can be changed? Is there any risk of severe 
overheating if I have these running in a hot enclosure? Some sites we just 
can't do ventilation because of grain dust and things of that nature.


On 9/9/2015 11:04 AM, Josh Baird wrote:

  So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage without 
issues?  Just trying to rule this out.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.  
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.  

Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the 
magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.

From: Josh Baird 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder 
if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

  The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman 
 wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 
55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on 
system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60 volts 
without some tradeoff.  

  As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.  

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is 
not very hot at all.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's? 


On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

  The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an 
AF24, and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns 
your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these 
installed, is this normal? 

  It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that 
the ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm 
not sure if it's related or not.

  Josh










Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
That's very confusing. If all of the power levels are nearly the same, 
how can the ratio be that far off? That makes no sense. Unless it 
doesn't mean the same thing as with SSR on the PMP450 (V-H or B-A Rx 
power ratio).


On 9/9/2015 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are 
the same.


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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
mailto:li...@smarterbroadband.com>> wrote:


Just a noise issue?  The manual says;

Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a
large positive or negative value then investigate the following
potential problems:

• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected.

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower
value may be pointing in the wrong direction.

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be
directed using a side lobe rather than the main lobe.

I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"
mailto:li...@smarterbroadband.com>>
wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal
Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam





Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
I think the only reason to do 12.1 first is the 430/450 interop thing.  Which 
doesn’t apply to PMP100.

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

I have taken several radios from 11.2 directly to 13.1.3. Haven't tried going 
straight to 13.4 yet outside of a bench test, which worked fine (all config 
intact). At this point though, I'm just going to wait for 13.4.1.


On 9/9/2015 12:03 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

  We went from 11.2 to 12.1 to 13..

  The config ignores the MAC address from the source config (so you're cool).


bp


On 9/9/2015 9:14 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 11.2 
all the way up, probably broke something 

Im concernerd in the config file,

"srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",


is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

  I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x 

  The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4

  Don't quote me tho lol 

  -Sean 


  On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i 
believe on all the radios, some may be betas 
what is the recomended path


-- 

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] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
I have taken several radios from 11.2 directly to 13.1.3. Haven't tried 
going straight to 13.4 yet outside of a bench test, which worked fine 
(all config intact). At this point though, I'm just going to wait for 
13.4.1.


On 9/9/2015 12:03 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

We went from 11.2 to 12.1 to 13..

The config ignores the MAC address from the source config (so you're 
cool).


bp


On 9/9/2015 9:14 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 
11.2 all the way up, probably broke something


Im concernerd in the config file,

"srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",

is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett > wrote:


I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x

The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4

Don't quote me tho lol

-Sean


On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or
13.1.3 i believe on all the radios, some may be betas
what is the recomended path


-- 
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] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread George Skorup
I did mention this here when I was bench testing powering an AF24. My 
Traco was floating at 55 volts. The radio ran fine.


It's not that it's powering the radio and getting hot. If you feed the 
card with 50+ volts, the LED still gets hot. I remember that Chuck did 
say it should be fine up to 60VDC.


I'm going to be using a lot more of these on more site 48VDC 
conversions. So Chuck, is this something that can be changed? Is there 
any risk of severe overheating if I have these running in a hot 
enclosure? Some sites we just can't do ventilation because of grain dust 
and things of that nature.


On 9/9/2015 11:04 AM, Josh Baird wrote:
So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage 
without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown > wrote:


No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with
the magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V). 
I wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:

The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area. 
When running at 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs

they do get hot. Their temp depends on system voltage.
I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
volts without some tradeoff.
As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED. The
connector is not very hot at all.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke
mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's?
On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is
powering an AF24, and noticed that it gets VERY
hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns your
finger when you touch the green molding.  For
folks that have these installed, is this normal?
It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we
we noticed that the ethernet link on the AF24 was
dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm not
sure if it's related or not.
Josh







Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Jaime Solorza
Critics.Cables were in a box. Okay?   I guarantee this test system is
cleaner than permanent stuff I have seen.Humph
On Sep 9, 2015 11:05 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:

> I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Stored in a rectangle.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>
>> Why are your cables all kinky?
>>
>> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work
>>
>>
>> Setting up remote monitoring of wells
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Baird
Ah ha, I missed the 'Supported Voltage Range' spec earlier.  Thanks.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Bill Prince  wrote:

> Just look at the spec sheet:
>
> Specifications
> airFiber AF-5/AF-5U
> Dimensions 938.4 x 468.4 x 281.4 mm (36.94 x 18.44 x 11.08")
> Weight 16 kg (35.27 lb) Mount Included
> Max. Power Consumption 40 W
> Power Supply 50V, 1.2A PoE GigE Adapter (Included)
> Power Method Passive Power over Ethernet
> Supported Voltage Range 42-58VDC
>
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> I'd ask Ubnt what the supported range is...
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 12:04 PM, "Josh Baird"  wrote:
>
>> So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage
>> without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown < 
>> ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
>>> The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
>>>
>>> Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the
>>> magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>>
>>> Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I
>>> wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman <
 j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

> Isn't AF24 only 48v?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown < 
> ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
>> OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at
>> 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp 
>> depends
>> on system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 
>> 6-60
>> volts without some tradeoff.
>>
>> As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>
>> Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is
>> not very hot at all.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke < 
>> n...@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>
>>> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>>
>>> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24,
>>> and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly 
>>> burns
>>> your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
>>> installed, is this normal?
>>>
>>> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that
>>> the ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very 
>>> quickly).
>>> I'm not sure if it's related or not.
>>>
>>> Josh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

Just look at the spec sheet:

   Specifications
   airFiber AF-5/AF-5U
   Dimensions 938.4 x 468.4 x 281.4 mm (36.94 x 18.44 x 11.08")
   Weight 16 kg (35.27 lb) Mount Included
   Max. Power Consumption 40 W
   Power Supply 50V, 1.2A PoE GigE Adapter (Included)
   Power Method Passive Power over Ethernet
   Supported Voltage Range 42-58VDC


bp


On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


I'd ask Ubnt what the supported range is...

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

On Sep 9, 2015 12:04 PM, "Josh Baird" > wrote:


So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float)
voltage without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip
with the magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops
passing data.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP
(~54V).  I wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:

The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

OK, there are some half watt resistors in that
area.  When running at 55 volts limiting current
for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends
on system voltage. I had hard to make the LEDs
usable for a range of 6-60 volts without some
tradeoff.
As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you
are OK.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the
LED.  The connector is not very hot at all.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke
mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>>
wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's?
On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC
which is powering an AF24, and noticed that
it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost
instantly burns your finger when you touch
the green molding.  For folks that have these
installed, is this normal?
It's ran fine for a few days, but this
morning we we noticed that the ethernet link
on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back
very quickly).  I'm not sure if it's related
or not.
Josh







Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

IIRC, the AF24 and brethren will handle up to 56V.

bp


On 9/9/2015 9:04 AM, Josh Baird wrote:
So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage 
without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown > wrote:


No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with
the magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V). 
I wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:

The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area. 
When running at 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs

they do get hot. Their temp depends on system voltage.
I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
volts without some tradeoff.
As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED. The
connector is not very hot at all.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke
mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>> wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's?
On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
*From:* Josh Baird 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is
powering an AF24, and noticed that it gets VERY
hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns your
finger when you touch the green molding.  For
folks that have these installed, is this normal?
It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we
we noticed that the ethernet link on the AF24 was
dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm not
sure if it's related or not.
Josh







Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question

2015-09-09 Thread Seth Mattinen

On 9/9/15 08:34, Chris Fabien wrote:

So, $500 per month for two 16" dishes at 100feet? That seems high to me.
I would be OK paying about 250 maybe 300 if it also included some space
in their shelter and power.



A year ago American Tower quoted me $550 per month for up to two 3' 
antennas and 3' x 3' space inside the shelter. Plus $40/mo for power 
share. Plus fees.


~Seth


Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

I think Jaime is a slightly kinky kind of guy...

bp


On 9/9/2015 9:19 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


Stored in a rectangle.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof" > wrote:


Why are your cables all kinky?
*From:* Jaime Solorza 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
*To:* Animal Farm 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

Setting up remote monitoring of wells





Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread Bill Prince

We went from 11.2 to 12.1 to 13..

The config ignores the MAC address from the source config (so you're cool).

bp


On 9/9/2015 9:14 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 
11.2 all the way up, probably broke something


Im concernerd in the config file,

"srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",

is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett > wrote:


I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x

The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4

Don't quote me tho lol

-Sean


On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3
i believe on all the radios, some may be betas
what is the recomended path


-- 
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] Strange DOS attack

2015-09-09 Thread That One Guy /sarcasm
Somebody must still be using yahoo chat

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

> Had an interesting DOS attack today, All sourced from a single IP Address
> to UDP Port 80 of the customer, running about 100mb/s and 160,000 pps.
> Coming from a Comcast Business IP, destined to a customer off an FSK
> Radio.  Mitigating the traffic was easy, just drop the source at my network
> edge, but I've never seen a DOS where it's only from a single IP Address.
> And it's been going on for like 30 min.  Usually see it coming in from
> 100's of Source IP's.
>
> Nate
>



-- 
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.


[AFMUG] Strange DOS attack

2015-09-09 Thread Nate Burke
Had an interesting DOS attack today, All sourced from a single IP 
Address to UDP Port 80 of the customer, running about 100mb/s and 
160,000 pps.  Coming from a Comcast Business IP, destined to a customer 
off an FSK Radio.  Mitigating the traffic was easy, just drop the source 
at my network edge, but I've never seen a DOS where it's only from a 
single IP Address. And it's been going on for like 30 min.  Usually see 
it coming in from 100's of Source IP's.


Nate


Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread David
Ive been to all of the cambium ptp and when it was still orthagon series 
training except the new ptp810/820 series.


This link looks ok to me.
 What does link planner say the expected results should be. I would be 
concerned if the vector errors or link loss was way off on one end but

they are not



On 09/09/2015 11:05 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
if its the same as the ptp500 there is a way to calculate which 
antenna is off but i cant find the documentation one of the guys that 
worked here went to a cambium training where they taught him that, I 
assume it still applies


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:


I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals
are the same.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband"
mailto:li...@smarterbroadband.com>>
wrote:

Just a noise issue?  The manual says;

Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has
a large positive or negative value then investigate the
following potential problems:

• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected.

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the
lower value may be pointing in the wrong direction.

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be
directed using a side lobe rather than the main lobe.

I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"
mailto:li...@smarterbroadband.com>> wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal
Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam




--
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] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
I'd ask Ubnt what the supported range is...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 12:04 PM, "Josh Baird"  wrote:

> So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage
> without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
>> No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
>> The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
>>
>> Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the
>> magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>
>> Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I
>> wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at
> 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp 
> depends
> on system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
> volts without some tradeoff.
>
> As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>
> Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is
> not very hot at all.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>
>> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>
>> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24,
>> and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns
>> your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
>> installed, is this normal?
>>
>> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
>> ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  
>> I'm
>> not sure if it's related or not.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>


>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Stored in a rectangle.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 12:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> Why are your cables all kinky?
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work
>
>
> Setting up remote monitoring of wells
>


Re: [AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread That One Guy /sarcasm
I think Ill do that, my test one here on the bench finally went from 11.2
all the way up, probably broke something

Im concernerd in the config file,

"srcMacAddress": "0a-00-3e-23-53-1f",

is this going to alter the mac address if i load it into another radio?


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

> I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x
>
> The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4
>
> Don't quote me tho lol
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i believe
>> on all the radios, some may be betas
>> what is the recomended path
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread Sean Heskett
I think you have to stop at 12.1 before you can go to 13.x

The radios on 13.1.3 should go straight to 13.4

Don't quote me tho lol

-Sean

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i believe
> on all the radios, some may be betas
> what is the recomended path
>
>
> --
> 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] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
Does the path have clear LOS?  If not, that can cause signal strength ratio 
issues.

Also, is the path loss near what you calculate?  Alignment on a sidelobe can 
give you bad signal strength ratio.


From: That One Guy /sarcasm 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 11:05 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

if its the same as the ptp500 there is a way to calculate which antenna is off 
but i cant find the documentation one of the guys that worked here went to a 
cambium training where they taught him that, I assume it still applies

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:

  I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

  Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are the same.

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

  On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  
wrote:

Just a noise issue?  The manual says;



Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large 
positive or negative value then investigate the following potential problems:


• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected. 

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value may 
be pointing in the wrong direction. 

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed using 
a side lobe rather than the main lobe.



I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.







From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue



Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  
wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam









-- 

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] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Baird
So, there are people here powering AF24's with 54-55 (float) voltage
without issues?  Just trying to rule this out.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.
> The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.
>
> Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the
> magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>
> Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder
> if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman > > wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't AF24 only 48v?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>>>
 OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at
 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends
 on system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
 volts without some tradeoff.

 As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.

 *From:* Josh Baird 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

 Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is
 not very hot at all.

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>
> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>
> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24,
> and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns
> your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
> installed, is this normal?
>
> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
> ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  
> I'm
> not sure if it's related or not.
>
> Josh
>
>
>

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread That One Guy /sarcasm
if its the same as the ptp500 there is a way to calculate which antenna is
off but i cant find the documentation one of the guys that worked here went
to a cambium training where they taught him that, I assume it still applies

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.
>
> Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are the
> same.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
> wrote:
>
>> Just a noise issue?  The manual says;
>>
>>
>>
>> Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large
>> positive or negative value then investigate the following potential
>> problems:
>>
>> • An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected.
>>
>> • When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value
>> may be pointing in the wrong direction.
>>
>> • When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed
>> using a side lobe rather than the main lobe.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue
>>
>>
>>
>> Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.
>>
>> One end is 6.4 the other 19.5
>>
>> Issue is probably at one end.
>>
>> Question is which end to check first.
>>
>> I have attached the System Stats of each end.
>>
>> Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
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] Mad scientists at work

2015-09-09 Thread Ken Hohhof
Why are your cables all kinky?

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 10:48 AM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: [AFMUG] Mad scientists at work

Setting up remote monitoring of wells


Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
I was thinking signal vs noise.  Like SNR.

Seems impressive to know there's a cable issue when the signals are the
same.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:55 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
wrote:

> Just a noise issue?  The manual says;
>
>
>
> Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large
> positive or negative value then investigate the following potential
> problems:
>
> • An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected.
>
> • When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value may
> be pointing in the wrong direction.
>
> • When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed using
> a side lobe rather than the main lobe.
>
>
>
> I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue
>
>
>
> Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
> wrote:
>
> We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.
>
> One end is 6.4 the other 19.5
>
> Issue is probably at one end.
>
> Question is which end to check first.
>
> I have attached the System Stats of each end.
>
> Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?
>
> Thanks
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>


[AFMUG] pmp100 upgrade path to 13.4

2015-09-09 Thread That One Guy /sarcasm
Im not seeing a recomended path, we either have 11.2 or 13.1.3 i believe on
all the radios, some may be betas
what is the recomended path


-- 
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] ISP Radio Wednesday -- WISPA President - Alex Phillips

2015-09-09 Thread Dennis Burgess

Today Steve and Dennis talk with the new WISPA President, Alex Phillps.

Wednesday 11am CST !   http://www.ispradio.com


Don't forgot you can download the previous episodes to put on your media player 
and listen while in your car free of charge by going to 
www.ispradio.com   Remember to sign into the live chat 
to ask questions!You can find our Podcast on I-Tunes !


n  View Upcoming shows at www.ispradio.com

Dennis Burgess, Co-Host of ISP Radio!
http://www.ispradio.com




Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.
den...@linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - 
www.linktechs.net

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] ISP Radio Wednesday -- WISPA President - Alex Phillips




[AFMUG] ISP Radio Wednesday -- WISPA President - Alex Phillips

2015-09-09 Thread Dennis Burgess



Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread SmarterBroadband
Just a noise issue?  The manual says;

 

Signal Strength Ratio is an aid to debugging a link. If it has a large positive 
or negative value then investigate the following potential problems:

• An antenna coaxial lead may be disconnected. 

• When spatial diversity is employed, the antenna with the lower value may be 
pointing in the wrong direction. 

• When a dual polar antenna is deployed, the antenna may be directed using a 
side lobe rather than the main lobe.

 

I was thinking bad cable?  Maybe antenna or radio.

 

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:40 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

 

Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

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

On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband"  wrote:

We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam

 

 



Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Chuck McCown
No, 54-55 is a good float voltage for lead acid 48 VDC batteries.  
The voltage itself has nothing to do with the data.  

Too much current could affect it, but in my testing, the chip with the 
magnetics will unsolder itself before it stops passing data.

From: Josh Baird 
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder if 
this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

  The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.


  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:

Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 55 
volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on 
system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60 volts 
without some tradeoff.  

  As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.  

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is not 
very hot at all.

  On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

Or is it the area right by the LED's? 


On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

  The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

  We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24, 
and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns your 
finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these installed, 
is this normal? 

  It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the 
ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm not 
sure if it's related or not.

  Josh







Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Baird
It's not.  ~53 right now (see attachment).

Oddly enough, the ethernet link did not drop for a couple days.


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Assuming it's not regulated?  54 seems odd, sure it isn't 56?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 9, 2015 11:30 AM, "Josh Baird"  wrote:
>
>> Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I
>> wonder if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Isn't AF24 only 48v?


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

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at
> 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp 
> depends
> on system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
> volts without some tradeoff.
>
> As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>
> Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is
> not very hot at all.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>
>> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>>
>> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>
>> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24,
>> and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns
>> your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
>> installed, is this normal?
>>
>> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
>> ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  
>> I'm
>> not sure if it's related or not.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>


>>>
>>


Re: [AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Noise at the one end.  The other has 20 with the same signal.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:36 AM, "SmarterBroadband" 
wrote:

> We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.
>
> One end is 6.4 the other 19.5
>
> Issue is probably at one end.
>
> Question is which end to check first.
>
> I have attached the System Stats of each end.
>
> Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?
>
> Thanks
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
And power.  And 24/7 access.  I'd push down to 200, which is my max for two
mounts today.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:34 AM, "Chris Fabien"  wrote:

> So, $500 per month for two 16" dishes at 100feet? That seems high to me. I
> would be OK paying about 250 maybe 300 if it also included some space in
> their shelter and power.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Joseph Marsh 
> wrote:
>
>> We are going up at 100 ft its a relay tower for Alabama public tv
>> --
>> From: Lewis Bergman 
>> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 10:08 AM
>>
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>>
>> Depends. Maybe if he needs to be at 500 feet it isn't worth $1k.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015, 10:05 AM Jeremy  wrote:
>>
>>> Well that seems like a deal not even worth questioning isn't it?  Am I
>>> missing something here?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Lewis Bergman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Per foot of height is what I was presuming he meant.

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Joseph Marsh 
 wrote:

> 2.50 a foot  per antenna  per month
> --
> From: Jeremy 
> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 9:50 AM
>
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>
> $2.00 a foot?  Is this per day?  Crown Castle is $100 per foot of dish
> and $75 per sector, per month.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Joseph Marsh 
> wrote:
>
>> It's in a rural backwoods area  but fiber is right beside it and we
>> can feed from our existing network
>> --
>> From: Lewis Bergman 
>> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 8:50 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>>
>> Those are 1 foot each right? That doesn't sound out of line if it
>> isn't completely in the middle of nowhere. If it is, maybe $2 a foot.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Joseph Marsh 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 2-force 110 dishes
>>> --
>>> From: Lewis Bergman 
>>> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 8:40 AM
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>>>
>>> Depends on what you are putting up there. Is that per antenna, line,
>>> both? what sizes? anything else going up there?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Joseph Marsh >> > wrote:
>>>
 We are wanting to co locate on a tower which is owned by a tv
 station  is 2.50 a foot  a bad price or is it too high?

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lewis Bergman
>>> 325-439-0533 Cell
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lewis Bergman
>> 325-439-0533 Cell
>>
>
>


 --
 Lewis Bergman
 325-439-0533 Cell

>>>
>>>
>


Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Luthman
Assuming it's not regulated?  54 seems odd, sure it isn't 56?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:30 AM, "Josh Baird"  wrote:

> Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder
> if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman > > wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't AF24 only 48v?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>>>
 OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at
 55 volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends
 on system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
 volts without some tradeoff.

 As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.

 *From:* Josh Baird 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

 Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is
 not very hot at all.

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:

> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>
> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>
> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24,
> and noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns
> your finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
> installed, is this normal?
>
> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
> ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  
> I'm
> not sure if it's related or not.
>
> Josh
>
>
>

>>>
>>>
>>
>


[AFMUG] PTP650 Issue

2015-09-09 Thread SmarterBroadband
We have an issue with one of our PTP650 links.  Bad Signal Strength Ratio.

One end is 6.4 the other 19.5

Issue is probably at one end.

Question is which end to check first.

I have attached the System Stats of each end.

Anyone able to see which end may have the problem from these?

Thanks

Adam

 

 



Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question

2015-09-09 Thread Chris Fabien
So, $500 per month for two 16" dishes at 100feet? That seems high to me. I
would be OK paying about 250 maybe 300 if it also included some space in
their shelter and power.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Joseph Marsh 
wrote:

> We are going up at 100 ft its a relay tower for Alabama public tv
> --
> From: Lewis Bergman 
> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 10:08 AM
>
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>
> Depends. Maybe if he needs to be at 500 feet it isn't worth $1k.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015, 10:05 AM Jeremy  wrote:
>
>> Well that seems like a deal not even worth questioning isn't it?  Am I
>> missing something here?
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Lewis Bergman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Per foot of height is what I was presuming he meant.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Joseph Marsh 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 2.50 a foot  per antenna  per month
 --
 From: Jeremy 
 Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 9:50 AM

 To: af@afmug.com
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question

 $2.00 a foot?  Is this per day?  Crown Castle is $100 per foot of dish
 and $75 per sector, per month.

 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Joseph Marsh 
 wrote:

> It's in a rural backwoods area  but fiber is right beside it and we
> can feed from our existing network
> --
> From: Lewis Bergman 
> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 8:50 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>
> Those are 1 foot each right? That doesn't sound out of line if it
> isn't completely in the middle of nowhere. If it is, maybe $2 a foot.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Joseph Marsh 
> wrote:
>
>> 2-force 110 dishes
>> --
>> From: Lewis Bergman 
>> Sent: ‎9/‎9/‎2015 8:40 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower collocation question
>>
>> Depends on what you are putting up there. Is that per antenna, line,
>> both? what sizes? anything else going up there?
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Joseph Marsh 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We are wanting to co locate on a tower which is owned by a tv
>>> station  is 2.50 a foot  a bad price or is it too high?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lewis Bergman
>> 325-439-0533 Cell
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lewis Bergman
> 325-439-0533 Cell
>


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lewis Bergman
>>> 325-439-0533 Cell
>>>
>>
>>


Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Baird
Stock is 50V.  I'm running them directly off a Traco TSP (~54V).  I wonder
if this is why the ethernet keeps dropping.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> Isn't AF24 only 48v?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>>
>>> OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 55
>>> volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on
>>> system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
>>> volts without some tradeoff.
>>>
>>> As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>>
>>> Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is not
>>> very hot at all.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>>>
 Or is it the area right by the LED's?

 On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

 The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.

 *From:* Josh Baird 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

 We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24, and
 noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns your
 finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
 installed, is this normal?

 It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
 ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm
 not sure if it's related or not.

 Josh



>>>
>>
>>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Hotspot solutions?

2015-09-09 Thread Super WISP
Exactly Josh.  Free for the patron, but the business owner you could charge an 
extra $10 or so a month for this marketing tool.  It’s a way for them to 
increase their business and for you the WISP to make extra revenue.

Mark Chamerlik
WAV®, Inc
Strategic Account Manager East Coast
630-818-1004 Direct
815-822-4490 Cell Phone
630-818-4450 Fax

ma...@wavonline.com (OR URGENT NEEDS TO 
tea...@wavonline.com)
[Description: twitter-logo-100x100.png] 
[Description: fb-logo-100x100.png] 


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:21 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Hotspot solutions?


Free for the user, charge the store to manage it.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 9, 2015 11:15 AM, "Lewis Bergman" 
mailto:lewis.berg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Doesn't everyone just assume wifi is free no matter where they go now?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Super WISP 
mailto:superw...@wavonline.com>> wrote:
Hey John,

This product does not have billing features, but it’s a way that you could make 
extra revenue for your WISP by selling to café’s, restaurants, etc…  If they 
are currently paying for your internet, you could add another $10/month to 
offer them marketing capabilities by sending out coupons for their patrons when 
they log in via twitter or facebook.  You could also in turn market your WISP 
to the people that visit that business.

http://www.purplewifi.net/product/features/



Mark Chamerlik
WAV®, Inc
Strategic Account Manager East Coast
630-818-1004 Direct
815-822-4490 Cell Phone
630-818-4450 Fax

ma...@wavonline.com (OR URGENT NEEDS TO 
tea...@wavonline.com)
[Description: twitter-logo-100x100.png] 
[Description: fb-logo-100x100.png] 


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of John Babineaux
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 9:44 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Hotspot solutions?

I’m looking for a Hotspot payment gateway that a Mikrotik can auth with.
I have the Mikrotik Usermanager and I want something that I don’t have to 
manage directly.
We have very few users buying packages right now in the one test spot.
I’m looking for something low cost and reliable. Any recommendations?
I’m looking at http://www.hotspotsystem.com/ but I don’t know much about them.

John Babineaux
System Administrator
REACH4 Communications | Website: www.REACH4Com.com
Phone: 337-783-3436 x105 | Email: 
john.babine...@reach4com.com
927 N Parkerson Ave, Crowley, LA 70526






This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which

it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and

exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is

not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of

the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any

dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly

prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us

immediately by telephone at 630-818-1000.



--
Lewis Bergman
325-439-0533 Cell



This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which
it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of
the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone at 630-818-1000.

Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?

2015-09-09 Thread Mathew Howard
The stock AF24 power supply is 50v, if I remember correctly.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Isn't AF24 only 48v?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
>> OK, there are some half watt resistors in that area.  When running at 55
>> volts limiting current for the LEDs they do get hot.  Their temp depends on
>> system voltage.  I had hard to make the LEDs usable for a range of 6-60
>> volts without some tradeoff.
>>
>> As long as the large chip isn’t getting hot you are OK.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:16 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>
>> Yeah, it seems to be just the area around the LED.  The connector is not
>> very hot at all.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Nate Burke  wrote:
>>
>>> Or is it the area right by the LED's?
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2015 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>
>>> The connector is hot?  That can’t be right.
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:43 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] GIGE-POE-APC Hot?
>>>
>>> We just installed our first GIGE-POE-APC which is powering an AF24, and
>>> noticed that it gets VERY hot.  So hot that it almost instantly burns your
>>> finger when you touch the green molding.  For folks that have these
>>> installed, is this normal?
>>>
>>> It's ran fine for a few days, but this morning we we noticed that the
>>> ethernet link on the AF24 was dropping (and coming back very quickly).  I'm
>>> not sure if it's related or not.
>>>
>>> Josh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


  1   2   >