Re: [AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

[Paul McCall]

Yep.. thanks !

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 4:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

Sounds right to me, too.


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

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:55 PM, David 
> wrote:
I believe you are correct and then you have to tell CNUT to change it from 10 
to 20


On 06/27/2016 09:04 AM, Kevin Neal wrote:
If I remember correctly you had to change that with CNUT, there isn't enough 
storage on the device to hold both the 10Mhz and 20Mhz images.

-Kevin


On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Paul McCall 
> wrote:
I haven’t messed with 430APs for a long time.  The guys are programming a 5.8 
(5780APC) in the field and it says “10 Mhz” with no apparent place to change 
it.  Tried US and Other for country code and makes no difference.

What did I forget, lol ?

Paul McCall, President
PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800
pa...@pdmnet.net
www.pdmnet.com
www.floridabroadband.com





--
Kevin Neal
Network Administrator
Safelink Internet

Re: [AFMUG] Postpaid vs Prepaid / Bill in Advance?

[Ken Hohhof]

Exactly.

And most communications services (phone, cable TV, etc.) are prepaid for 
monthly charges and postpaid for usage based charges.



-Original Message- 
From: Larry Smith

Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:41 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Postpaid vs Prepaid / Bill in Advance?

If you do not "pre" bill for service, such as internet access,
there is little to no chance of collection after the fact if
they decide not to pay...   We pre-bill for the "next" month
on the 20th, due by the 1st, suspend services on the 6th
for CC, ACH, etc (auto payments) that fail, then suspend
cash, check customers on the 10th.

Our billing system handles this without issue (Freeside).

--
Larry Smith
lesm...@ecsis.net

On Mon June 27 2016 14:35, Christopher Gray wrote:

I've setup my billing so everything is expected to be paid before service
is provided (prepaid). I send invoices in advance of a service cycle and
they are due by the beginning of the service cycle. Early on, I convinced
myself this was a good idea so I would never have to deal with collections
and it seemed fair.

I'm working on switching billing systems, and the new system does not
really operate that way. This has me wondering if my method is really a
good one, or if there are good reasons to bill at the start of a service
cycle. I've gone through my bills and others I have available to me, and
very few actually bill in advance of a service cycle.

Is there a good reason to avoid prepaid service or that companies tend not
to do it?

-Chris 

Re: [AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

[Josh Luthman]

Sounds right to me, too.


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

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:55 PM, David  wrote:

> I believe you are correct and then you have to tell CNUT to change it from
> 10 to 20
>
>
>
> On 06/27/2016 09:04 AM, Kevin Neal wrote:
>
> If I remember correctly you had to change that with CNUT, there isn't
> enough storage on the device to hold both the 10Mhz and 20Mhz images.
>
> -Kevin
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>
>> I haven’t messed with 430APs for a long time.  The guys are programming a
>> 5.8 (5780APC) in the field and it says “10 Mhz” with no apparent place to
>> change it.  Tried US and Other for country code and makes no difference.
>>
>>
>>
>> What did I forget, lol ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul McCall, President
>>
>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>>
>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>
>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>
>> 772-564-6800
>>
>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>
>> www.pdmnet.com
>>
>> www.floridabroadband.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Kevin Neal*
> Network Administrator
> Safelink Internet
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

[David]

I believe you are correct and then you have to tell CNUT to change it 
from 10 to 20



On 06/27/2016 09:04 AM, Kevin Neal wrote:
If I remember correctly you had to change that with CNUT, there isn't 
enough storage on the device to hold both the 10Mhz and 20Mhz images.


-Kevin


On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Paul McCall > wrote:


I haven’t messed with 430APs for a long time.  The guys are
programming a 5.8 (5780APC) in the field and it says “10 Mhz” with
no apparent place to change it.  Tried US and Other for country
code and makes no difference.

What did I forget, lol ?

Paul McCall, President

PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.

658 Old Dixie Highway

Vero Beach, FL 32962

772-564-6800 

pa...@pdmnet.net 

www.pdmnet.com 

www.floridabroadband.com 




--
*Kevin Neal*
Network Administrator
Safelink Internet

Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

[David]

+1 us too since 2003.
 thanks Lewis :)


On 06/24/2016 04:15 PM, George Skorup wrote:

+1 We've been using Tucows OpenSRS since 2001 or so.

On 6/24/2016 2:37 PM, Doug Hass wrote:
We manage our entire domain portfolio (about 250 domains in various 
countries, and growing) through OpenSRS. I've used OpenSRS since 
shortly after they started in 1999 without any problems.  Very 
flexible, great pricing, easy to manager domains and handle transfers 
in and out, etc.


Doug

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
 wrote:


+1

I’ve been using Namecheap for a couple of years and like them.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Simon Westlake
*Sent:* Friday, June 24, 2016 1:18 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

I personally like Namecheap.

On 6/24/2016 2:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

We have most of our domains registered through Rackspace,
they actually are an Enom registration reseller or something
to that effect, its always been problematic with these guys.
Trying to transfer out a domain today it ends up they have
completely hosed the registrant contact email to show NA, to
update the info the current email address needs to verify the
change, if we attempt to make a change and dont verify within
15 days all our associated domains become suspended... see
the problem?

and to top it off, rackspaces enom portal is non functional

I use google domains for my personal domains, its slick and
supports dynamic DNS so ive been tickled pink with it, but Im
not sure its a prime time registrar as the word beta is present.

All I know is these rackspace fuckwits have irritated me more
on the domain side than I care to deal with. This should be
the least cumbersome aspect of my job

-- 


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.



-- 


Simon Westlake

Skype: Simon_Sonar

Email:simon@sonar.software 

Phone:(702) 447-1247 

---

Sonar Software Inc

The next generation of ISP billing and OSS

https://sonar.software

Re: [AFMUG] packetflux syncinjector flash codes

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

this site only has 3 people on it, weve lost more than we will ever make to
lightning, even a PTP 500, we are down to a single 320 AP split out, the
management card is croaked on the battery, just not worth any more money
moved the 320 to port 4 on the syncinjector, its getting sync now, the
sitemonitor still doesnt see it, I think ill leave it as is, packetflux for
the win, even lightning doesnt stop it

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> One flash means the power to the first port is tripped.  The five flashes
> means the same for the syncpipe ports.
>
> You may want to remove all power sources from the units to see if it
> clears the blink codes.   If they come back,  either you've got a failed
> unit,  or failed radio and/or syncpipe and/or cabling.
> On Jun 27, 2016 12:37 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i have a sync injector that appears to be passing power to a 320 ap, but
>> no sync, the site monitor is not seeing it (this is a lightning site) there
>> is a green flash code, 1 flash, 5 flash repeating, i am getting the one
>> second pulse from the syncpipe, i changed the in/out on the serial to the
>> syncinjector. I dont have any spare packetflux parts with me for onsite
>> verification, so im just trying to decide whether to pull all three (site
>> monitor, syncinjector, and syncpipe) to bring back to test, or if that code
>> is an indicator of something in particular
>>
>> --
>> 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] Postpaid vs Prepaid / Bill in Advance?

[Larry Smith]

If you do not "pre" bill for service, such as internet access,
there is little to no chance of collection after the fact if
they decide not to pay...   We pre-bill for the "next" month
on the 20th, due by the 1st, suspend services on the 6th
for CC, ACH, etc (auto payments) that fail, then suspend
cash, check customers on the 10th.

 Our billing system handles this without issue (Freeside).

-- 
Larry Smith
lesm...@ecsis.net

On Mon June 27 2016 14:35, Christopher Gray wrote:
> I've setup my billing so everything is expected to be paid before service
> is provided (prepaid). I send invoices in advance of a service cycle and
> they are due by the beginning of the service cycle. Early on, I convinced
> myself this was a good idea so I would never have to deal with collections
> and it seemed fair.
>
> I'm working on switching billing systems, and the new system does not
> really operate that way. This has me wondering if my method is really a
> good one, or if there are good reasons to bill at the start of a service
> cycle. I've gone through my bills and others I have available to me, and
> very few actually bill in advance of a service cycle.
>
> Is there a good reason to avoid prepaid service or that companies tend not
> to do it?
>
> -Chris

[AFMUG] Postpaid vs Prepaid / Bill in Advance?

[Christopher Gray]

I've setup my billing so everything is expected to be paid before service
is provided (prepaid). I send invoices in advance of a service cycle and
they are due by the beginning of the service cycle. Early on, I convinced
myself this was a good idea so I would never have to deal with collections
and it seemed fair.

I'm working on switching billing systems, and the new system does not
really operate that way. This has me wondering if my method is really a
good one, or if there are good reasons to bill at the start of a service
cycle. I've gone through my bills and others I have available to me, and
very few actually bill in advance of a service cycle.

Is there a good reason to avoid prepaid service or that companies tend not
to do it?

-Chris

Re: [AFMUG] packetflux syncinjector flash codes

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

One flash means the power to the first port is tripped.  The five flashes
means the same for the syncpipe ports.

You may want to remove all power sources from the units to see if it clears
the blink codes.   If they come back,  either you've got a failed unit,  or
failed radio and/or syncpipe and/or cabling.
On Jun 27, 2016 12:37 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" 
wrote:

> i have a sync injector that appears to be passing power to a 320 ap, but
> no sync, the site monitor is not seeing it (this is a lightning site) there
> is a green flash code, 1 flash, 5 flash repeating, i am getting the one
> second pulse from the syncpipe, i changed the in/out on the serial to the
> syncinjector. I dont have any spare packetflux parts with me for onsite
> verification, so im just trying to decide whether to pull all three (site
> monitor, syncinjector, and syncpipe) to bring back to test, or if that code
> is an indicator of something in particular
>
> --
> 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] Mimosa CPE pricing

[Chris Wright]

The A5 is limited to 2.4 miles currently (ack-timing issues beyond that). 
Mimosa support has said this will be addressed in the next firmware release.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator
Velociter Wireless
209-838-1221 x115

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 6:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing

Sounds great!

And, it works with N clients, not just AC products?   Did you just plug your 
A5C directly into an existing UNT sector, or did you buy the KP sector, or just 
an A5-18?

Was “concerned” about how much distance the A5-18 would have compared to the 
M5/sector we have now

Paul

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 9:28 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing

Yes.  We have one A5 with about 40 users on it with about half Ubiquiti, half 
Mimosa.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 6:07 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing

H…

we have a Ubiquiti sector Rocket M5  with 90 degree sector that is reaching 
capacity (not AC).  It is the only 5 Ghz AP on the tower.   Could you put up 
the A5-18 and connect the Nanostation M5s to it, and then swap out the Nanos to 
C5s?

Paul

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 8:51 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing

Definitely.  It's mostly just backward compatibility during a forklift of the 
CPEs from what I'm gathering.

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Paul McCall 
> wrote:
I see people using Ubiquiti CPE with these. I'm assuming the Mimosa CPE would 
have some advantages

Sent from my Android phone using Symantec TouchDown 
(www.symantec.com)

-Original Message-
From: Rory Conaway [r...@triadwireless.net]
Received: Saturday, 25 Jun 2016, 7:14PM
To: af@afmug.com [af@afmug.com]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing
It's $100 plus $10 for the power supply or $50 for the Power Supply/router.

Rory

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2016 4:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa CPE pricing

$90


On 6/25/2016 5:30 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
> I'm playing catch-up on the Mimosa PT MP offerings. What does their
> CPE sell for?
>
> Sent from my Android phone using Symantec TouchDown 
> (www.symantec.com)

[AFMUG] packetflux syncinjector flash codes

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

i have a sync injector that appears to be passing power to a 320 ap, but no
sync, the site monitor is not seeing it (this is a lightning site) there is
a green flash code, 1 flash, 5 flash repeating, i am getting the one second
pulse from the syncpipe, i changed the in/out on the serial to the
syncinjector. I dont have any spare packetflux parts with me for onsite
verification, so im just trying to decide whether to pull all three (site
monitor, syncinjector, and syncpipe) to bring back to test, or if that code
is an indicator of something in particular

-- 
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] FW: OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[Josh Reynolds]

I was just going to sit here quietly and not say anything.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
> Oops... not offlist.  I hate it when that happens, LOL
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:06 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.
>
> Hi  Daniel,
>
> I thought you were selling radios, not buying.  I have them in stock, New 
> condition.
>
> How many do you need?  Where are we shipping etc.
>
> Paul, PDMNet
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Gerlach
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:02 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.
>
> please make offer.
>
> thx

Re: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

Hahnope 

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone

- Reply message -
From: "Josh Luthman" 
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.
Date: Mon, Jun 27, 2016 1:06 PM

Ain't offlist bro

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



On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
Hi  Daniel,



I thought you were selling radios, not buying.  I have them in stock, New 
condition.



How many do you need?  Where are we shipping etc.



Paul, PDMNet







-Original Message-

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Gerlach

Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:02 PM

To: af@afmug.com

Subject: [AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.



please make offer.



thx

Re: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[Josh Luthman]

Ain't offlist bro


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

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:

> Hi  Daniel,
>
> I thought you were selling radios, not buying.  I have them in stock, New
> condition.
>
> How many do you need?  Where are we shipping etc.
>
> Paul, PDMNet
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Gerlach
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:02 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.
>
> please make offer.
>
> thx
>

[AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[Paul McCall]

Hi  Daniel,

I thought you were selling radios, not buying.  I have them in stock, New 
condition.

How many do you need?  Where are we shipping etc.

Paul, PDMNet



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Gerlach
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

please make offer.

thx

[AFMUG] FW: OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[Paul McCall]

Oops... not offlist.  I hate it when that happens, LOL

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:06 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

Hi  Daniel,

I thought you were selling radios, not buying.  I have them in stock, New 
condition.

How many do you need?  Where are we shipping etc.

Paul, PDMNet



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Gerlach
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 2:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

please make offer.

thx

[AFMUG] WTB: PMP 100 AP 5.4 ghz adv.

[Daniel Gerlach]

please make offer.

thx

Re: [AFMUG] speedtest.net

[Chris Wright]

Not only the stats collection, they’ll also create a subdomain just for your 
server if you’d like to force it to use only you. I repurposed a couple old 
Imagestream edge routers to be Speedtest.net servers and haven’t had to pay 
them any attention for months.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator
Velociter Wireless
209-838-1221 x115

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 9:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] speedtest.net


Company internal, resources aren't used by Joe Blow on the internet, but 
employees or subscribers can use it for testing.

You also get a very detailed stats collection with it.
On Jun 26, 2016 9:08 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
> wrote:

What's the point of a private server?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 26, 2016 10:05 PM, "Josh Reynolds" 
> wrote:

Not if it's a public server. Private one, yes.
On Jun 26, 2016 8:37 PM, "Aaron Fitzgerald" 
> wrote:

I thought the software was a cost in the thousands to run?
On Jun 26, 2016 6:10 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
> wrote:
I don't think they have boxes.  They just give you the software and 
register/monitor the daemon on your hardware.


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

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
> wrote:

Peer with ookla at the nearest IX. Or offer to colo one of their 1U boxes for 
free.
On Jun 24, 2016 2:36 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" 
> wrote:


so we have a gig backbone connection - finally purchased a "semi recent" 
computer that should be able to handle a descent speedtest.  fastest we've 
gotten is like 660 meg on the epb fiber optic in chattanooga.  anyone know of a 
test on speedtest.net where we should be able to get 
nearly the full gig?

i see my neighbors shelby broadband and jmf solutions on there but still get 
faster speeds from chattanooga...

thanks in advance ;)

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Jaime Fink]

Yes, correct Mike. Most folks don’t really understand beamforming patterns very 
well, the marketing makes it sound like it’s a super targeted pencil-beam at 
the customer, but it’s not true at all. One of the many lobes will get aimed at 
it, and the other lobes will still be transmitting in other parts of the 
coverage area.

Panels/sectors with lots of antennas don’t have single lobe beamforms, usually 
you have something that looks like the fingers on your hand pattern wise, with 
roughly the same # of nulls as MIMO streams.

So really you’re not reducing interference to the environment that much in the 
coverage area, you’re just controlling your own interference to create good 
nulls for MU-MIMO. At some point though to service the coverage area, you’re 
radiating the whole area but likely with a little bit lower duty cycle in 
varying client areas.

So I’m not confident you’d be able to make such an argument to the FCC in 
practice unless it were some form of physically restricted beam steering or 
mechanical techniques.

J


On June 27, 2016 at 9:47:36 AM, Mike Hammett 
(af...@ics-il.net) wrote:

Ugh. So they're going the opposite way of where I was hoping they'd go.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Jaime Fink" 
To: "Josh Reynolds" , af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 11:43:22 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

The FCC for 5 GHz in Part 15 defines the regulation and power level not by 
beamwidth , but by application as multipoint, so regardless of beamwidth you 
can do with beamforming (even if it’s only a few degrees for that matter), if 
it’s in a single product enclosure, it’s still a multipoint system and subject 
to lower power levels than PTP.

On the client side however, in the U-NII 3, a client of a multipoint system can 
be classified as PTP device as it directionally communicates to only one device.

In the latest OOBE NPRM, the FCC added a clarification for the U-NII 1, a 
client of a multipoint system is now also considered part of multipoint system, 
regardless if it’s only transmitting to one device directionally. So it may be 
that even U-NII 1 clients should be at the lower power level. You can thank our 
friends in the Set Top Box industry as they tried to get this expanded for 
higher power for them, and the FCC rejected it and tightened th`e rules even 
further to make a point. So even between U-NII 1 and U-NII 3 in 5 GHz, there’s 
some difference in language and confusion.

Jaime



On June 27, 2016 at 9:29:21 AM, Josh Reynolds 
(j...@kyneticwifi.com) wrote:

...

What?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Rory Conaway 
> wrote:
The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM

To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I'd assume so, but I don't know.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]

[AFMUG] Fw: OT Radio Mobile

[Chuck McCown]

The rmcore.zip is getting blocked by something upstream.  If anyone can down 
load that file and email it to me it would be appreciated.  

From: Chuck McCown 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:42 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: OT Radio Mobile

Trying to upgrade RM and the zip file will not open.  

From: Chuck McCown 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: OT Radio Mobile

Is RM just not capable of bringing in terraserver maps anymore (or is it 
terraserver that is the problem).  Like to put a map under my picture.

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[Jeremy]

Yeah, that sounds more like a bad cable or omni or something with the
chains being off 10db.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:40 AM, TJ Trout  wrote:

> I will have to do the exact path loss calculations to figure out how low
> they are but something is def wrong. Esp the chains being 10db off from
> each other that's really strange.
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Jeremy  wrote:
>
>> It must be hardware related then.  We likely need to start looking at
>> date codes.  We have 40 AC PBE-400s deployed and have not had one yet with
>> this issue.  We have another 60 on the shelf.  We will have to keep an eye
>> out.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Rory Conaway 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have seen the problem with the 400’s.  It explained why a Mimosa
>>> B5-Lite with a 5dBi small antenna had the same signal levels as a NanoBeam
>>> 400 on a PTP link.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jeremy
>>> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2016 7:17 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is also a thread going on the ubnt forums about low power on AC
>>> devices.  Robert said they are aware of the problem and that they will
>>> either be fixing it in firmware or swapping out feeds.  It sounds like it
>>> may be a hardware issue.  I haven't ran into any of them yet...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>>>
>>> I have seen odd issues when the SMA is not tight enough.. sometimes they
>>> bind while screwing on. Had it happen once or twice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:18 AM, timothy steele <
>>> timothy.pct...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing
>>> into power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the
>>> tower be sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the
>>> latest firmware
>>>
>>> Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small
>>> flash light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna
>>> then the old N gear antenna's
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout  wrote:
>>>
>>> I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two
>>> nanobeam ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft
>>> away and one has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely
>>> clear LOS and on both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from
>>> each other...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't
>>> be backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I
>>> would expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I
>>> know with the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same
>>> output power...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ideas?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT Radio Mobile

[Chuck McCown]

Trying to upgrade RM and the zip file will not open.  

From: Chuck McCown 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: OT Radio Mobile

Is RM just not capable of bringing in terraserver maps anymore (or is it 
terraserver that is the problem).  Like to put a map under my picture.

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Mike Hammett]

Ugh. So they're going the opposite way of where I was hoping they'd go. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Jaime Fink"  
To: "Josh Reynolds" , af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 11:43:22 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


The FCC for 5 GHz in Part 15 defines the regulation and power level not by 
beamwidth , but by application as multipoint, so regardless of beamwidth you 
can do with beamforming (even if it’s only a few degrees for that matter), if 
it’s in a single product enclosure, it’s still a multipoint system and subject 
to lower power levels than PTP. 


On the client side however, in the U-NII 3, a client of a multipoint system can 
be classified as PTP device as it directionally communicates to only one 
device. 


In the latest OOBE NPRM, the FCC added a clarification for the U-NII 1, a 
client of a multipoint system is now also considered part of multipoint system, 
regardless if it’s only transmitting to one device directionally. So it may be 
that even U-NII 1 clients should be at the lower power level. You can thank our 
friends in the Set Top Box industry as they tried to get this expanded for 
higher power for them, and the FCC rejected it and tightened th`e rules even 
further to make a point. So even between U-NII 1 and U-NII 3 in 5 GHz, there’s 
some difference in language and confusion. 


Jaime 



On June 27, 2016 at 9:29:21 AM, Josh Reynolds ( j...@kyneticwifi.com ) wrote: 






... 


What? 


On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Rory Conaway < r...@triadwireless.net > 
wrote: 





The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter. 

Rory 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM 


To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




I'd assume so, but I don't know. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Bill Prince" < part15...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules? 
bp  

On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees. 

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP). 

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
Please explain. 4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to. Or 
are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 10 
degrees? Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam steering 
antennas than 5GHz. 2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take advantage of 
PTP rules unless that has changed. 

Rory 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Not even close. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Rory Conaway" < r...@triadwireless.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
I think it’s called an Mimosa A5. 

Rory 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz. 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 




As wide as 360 degrees? 






From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM 

To: af 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'. 



The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly. 



You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something. 



The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance. 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt 

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Mike Hammett]

I'm not speaking authoritatively on this, but it seems as there's opportunity 
in 5150 - 5250 and 5725 - 5850 for beamforming applications to be classified as 
PtP. Yes, it isn't spelled out like it is in 15.247 for 2.4 GHz, but I see the 
potential for it to be certified that way. 5150 - 5250 does have a 17 dB 
advantage for PtP vs. PtMP. It's certainly worth of attempting. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Josh Reynolds"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 11:29:08 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



... 


What? 


On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Rory Conaway < r...@triadwireless.net > 
wrote: 





The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter. 

Rory 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM 


To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 





I'd assume so, but I don't know. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Bill Prince" < part15...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules? 
bp  

On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees. 

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP). 

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
Please explain. 4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to. Or 
are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 10 
degrees? Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam steering 
antennas than 5GHz. 2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take advantage of 
PTP rules unless that has changed. 

Rory 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Not even close. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Rory Conaway" < r...@triadwireless.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
I think it’s called an Mimosa A5. 

Rory 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz. 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 




As wide as 360 degrees? 






From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM 

To: af 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'. 



The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly. 



You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something. 



The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance. 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < lists.wavel...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 

So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out accordingly, 
alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of the 6 degree "strip 
patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as much throughput increase per AP? 
:( 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince < part15...@gmail.com > wrote: 

You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 



Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the throughput of 
existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I am wondering why the same 
massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz 
channel can then achieve 1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel? 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
Are these uplink and 

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Jaime Fink]

The FCC for 5 GHz in Part 15 defines the regulation and power level not by 
beamwidth , but by application as multipoint, so regardless of beamwidth you 
can do with beamforming (even if it’s only a few degrees for that matter), if 
it’s in a single product enclosure, it’s still a multipoint system and subject 
to lower power levels than PTP.

On the client side however, in the U-NII 3, a client of a multipoint system can 
be classified as PTP device as it directionally communicates to only one device.

In the latest OOBE NPRM, the FCC added a clarification for the U-NII 1, a 
client of a multipoint system is now also considered part of multipoint system, 
regardless if it’s only transmitting to one device directionally. So it may be 
that even U-NII 1 clients should be at the lower power level. You can thank our 
friends in the Set Top Box industry as they tried to get this expanded for 
higher power for them, and the FCC rejected it and tightened th`e rules even 
further to make a point. So even between U-NII 1 and U-NII 3 in 5 GHz, there’s 
some difference in language and confusion.

Jaime



On June 27, 2016 at 9:29:21 AM, Josh Reynolds 
(j...@kyneticwifi.com) wrote:

...

What?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Rory Conaway 
> wrote:
The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM

To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I'd assume so, but I don't know.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Bill Prince" >
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules?



bp




On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees.

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP).

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Rory Conaway" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m
Please explain.  4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to.  
Or are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 
10 degrees?  Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam 
steering antennas than 5GHz.  2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take 

Re: [AFMUG] OT Bailey Cartoon

[Chuck McCown]

Yeah, I was hopeful the editor would get it.
Was thinking of some other variations like “he wants to know if you are 
available to consult” or something like that.  

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Bailey Cartoon

You don't have a chance. Less than 1% will get the open source reference. But I 
like it. Does that count?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:07 AM Josh Reynolds  wrote:

  That's pretty good :)

  On Jun 26, 2016 1:37 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

Every other week, the Salt Lake Tribune puts  up a drawing in the editorial 
space and asks readers to submit captions.   Today this was the drawing and my 
caption.  Hope I win.  


“General Secretary Kim Jong-un is on the phone.  He wants to know if the 
design is open source”

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[Jeremy]

It must be hardware related then.  We likely need to start looking at date
codes.  We have 40 AC PBE-400s deployed and have not had one yet with this
issue.  We have another 60 on the shelf.  We will have to keep an eye out.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Rory Conaway 
wrote:

> We have seen the problem with the 400’s.  It explained why a Mimosa
> B5-Lite with a 5dBi small antenna had the same signal levels as a NanoBeam
> 400 on a PTP link.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jeremy
> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2016 7:17 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?
>
>
>
> There is also a thread going on the ubnt forums about low power on AC
> devices.  Robert said they are aware of the problem and that they will
> either be fixing it in firmware or swapping out feeds.  It sounds like it
> may be a hardware issue.  I haven't ran into any of them yet...
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>
> I have seen odd issues when the SMA is not tight enough.. sometimes they
> bind while screwing on. Had it happen once or twice.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:18 AM, timothy steele 
> wrote:
>
> If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing into
> power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the tower
> be sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the latest
> firmware
>
> Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small
> flash light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna
> then the old N gear antenna's
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout  wrote:
>
> I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two
> nanobeam ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft
> away and one has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely
> clear LOS and on both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from
> each other...
>
>
>
> I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't be
> backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I would
> expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...
>
>
>
> Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I know
> with the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same output
> power...
>
>
>
> Ideas?
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT Bailey Cartoon

[Lewis Bergman]

You don't have a chance. Less than 1% will get the open source reference.
But I like it. Does that count?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:07 AM Josh Reynolds  wrote:

> That's pretty good :)
> On Jun 26, 2016 1:37 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:
>
>> Every other week, the Salt Lake Tribune puts  up a drawing in the
>> editorial space and asks readers to submit captions.   Today this was the
>> drawing and my caption.  Hope I win.
>>
>>
>> *“General Secretary Kim Jong-un is on the phone.  He wants to know if the
>> design is open source”*
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Josh Reynolds]

...

What?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Rory Conaway 
wrote:

> The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
>
>
> I'd assume so, but I don't know.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Bill Prince" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
> Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules?
>
>
>
> bp
>
> 
>
>
>
> On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> 4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees.
>
> The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It
> wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's
> preferential in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not
> for performance (RF or IP).
>
> It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that
> they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c
> is available and on a 90* sector.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Rory Conaway"  
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
> Please explain.  4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects
> to.  Or are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of
> something like 10 degrees?  Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more
> benefit with beam steering antennas than 5GHz.  2.4GHz can bring the power
> output up and take advantage of PTP rules unless that has changed.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
>
>
> Not even close.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Rory Conaway" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
> I think it’s called an Mimosa A5.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
>
>
> I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
> As wide as 360 degrees?
>
>
>
> *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM
>
> *To:* af 
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m
>
>
>
> That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'.
>
>
>
> The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get
> 7x if everything is aligned correctly.
>
>
>
> You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're
> dynamically 

Re: [AFMUG] CMM4 Question

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

Oh, and yes, it will support all the 450 platforms.  Won't require a dongle for 
450i either.

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

> On Jun 27, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Matt  wrote:
> 
> When will the CMM5 be out?  Any information on it yet?  Will it
> support PMP450 and PMP450i?  Will it be more affordable?  Right now
> the CMM4 seems very expensive for a mere 8 ports.

Re: [AFMUG] CMM4 Question

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

August.

No info or pricing yet...I asked.

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

> On Jun 27, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Matt  wrote:
> 
> When will the CMM5 be out?  Any information on it yet?  Will it
> support PMP450 and PMP450i?  Will it be more affordable?  Right now
> the CMM4 seems very expensive for a mere 8 ports.

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Rory Conaway]

The beam pattern size in 5GHz doesn’t matter.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 8:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I'd assume so, but I don't know.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Bill Prince" >
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules?



bp




On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees.

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP).

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Rory Conaway" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m
Please explain.  4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to.  
Or are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 
10 degrees?  Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam 
steering antennas than 5GHz.  2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take 
advantage of PTP rules unless that has changed.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Not even close.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Rory Conaway" >
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 

[AFMUG] OT Radio Mobile

[Chuck McCown]

Is RM just not capable of bringing in terraserver maps anymore (or is it 
terraserver that is the problem).  Like to put a map under my picture.

Re: [AFMUG] CMM4 Question

[Matt]

When will the CMM5 be out?  Any information on it yet?  Will it
support PMP450 and PMP450i?  Will it be more affordable?  Right now
the CMM4 seems very expensive for a mere 8 ports.

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Mike Hammett]

I'd assume so, but I don't know. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:49:23 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules? 

bp
 
On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees. 

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP). 

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



Please explain. 4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to. Or 
are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 10 
degrees? Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam steering 
antennas than 5GHz. 2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take advantage of 
PTP rules unless that has changed. 

Rory 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Not even close. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -


From: "Rory Conaway" < r...@triadwireless.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
I think it’s called an Mimosa A5. 

Rory 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz. 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 




As wide as 360 degrees? 






From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM 

To: af 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'. 



The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly. 



You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something. 



The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance. 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < lists.wavel...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 

So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out accordingly, 
alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of the 6 degree "strip 
patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as much throughput increase per AP? 
:( 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince < part15...@gmail.com > wrote: 

You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 



Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the throughput of 
existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I am wondering why the same 
massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz 
channel can then achieve 1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel? 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
Are these uplink and downlink? 
The epmp 2000 is only uplink. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Jun 22, 2016 12:54 PM, "Peter Kranz" < pkr...@unwiredltd.com > wrote: 






With the ETI beamformer antenna.. you get ~20db gain since you have the 
electrical capture of all the active antennas going on.. in theory creating a 
high gain very narrow spot beam of 15 degrees or so.. 14 implies something 
else.. 


Peter Kranz 
www.UnwiredLtd.com 
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 
Mobile: 510-207- 
pkr...@unwiredltd.com 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Prince 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:51 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 

They beam-form the power coming in. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 9:40 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote: 


Over poe though? That’s pushing a lot of watts 

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Bill Prince]

Are the approximate 12° beams small enough to qualify for PTP rules?


bp


On 6/27/2016 8:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees.

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. 
It wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's 
preferential in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but 
not for performance (RF or IP).


It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in 
that they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when 
the 8x8 A5c is available and on a 90* sector.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Rory Conaway" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Please explain.  4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE 
connects to.  Or are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees 
instead of something like 10 degrees?  Just for the record, 2.4GHz has 
much more benefit with beam steering antennas than 5GHz.  2.4GHz can 
bring the power output up and take advantage of PTP rules unless that 
has changed.


Rory

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
*Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Not even close.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







*From: *"Rory Conaway" >

*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I think it’s called an Mimosa A5.

Rory

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
*Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz.

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof > wrote:


As wide as 360 degrees?

*From:*Forrest Christian (List Account) 

*Sent:*Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM

*To:*af 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] 450m

That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'.

The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can 
get 7x if everything is aligned correctly.


You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're 
dynamically pointable, and my understanding is that it can be 
re-pointed in each timeslot, so as long as all of your customers 
aren't in a very narrow slice, and are relatively spread out, you 
should gain something.


The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to 
as wide of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance.


On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:


So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out 
accordingly, alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of 
the 6 degree "strip patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as 
much throughput increase per AP? :(


On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince > wrote:


You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link.

bp


On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:

Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the
throughput of existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I
am wondering why the same massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so
a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz channel can then achieve
1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel?

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Mike Hammett]

4 chains over 360 degrees vs. 14 chains over 90 degrees. 

The Quamni doesn't really count when looking at a non-micro-POP model. It 
wouldn't be narrow enough to qualify for any PtP rules. To me it's preferential 
in situations where cost or aesthetics are important, but not for performance 
(RF or IP). 

It's technically similar, but that's comparing a Cruze and a Vette in that 
they're both cars. That said, it'll be a closer comparison when the 8x8 A5c is 
available and on a 90* sector. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:29:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



Please explain. 4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to. Or 
are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 10 
degrees? Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam steering 
antennas than 5GHz. 2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take advantage of 
PTP rules unless that has changed. 

Rory 



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Not even close. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -


From: "Rory Conaway" < r...@triadwireless.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
I think it’s called an Mimosa A5. 

Rory 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz. 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 




As wide as 360 degrees? 






From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM 

To: af 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'. 



The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly. 



You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something. 



The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance. 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < lists.wavel...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 

So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out accordingly, 
alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of the 6 degree "strip 
patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as much throughput increase per AP? 
:( 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince < part15...@gmail.com > wrote: 

You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 



Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the throughput of 
existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I am wondering why the same 
massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz 
channel can then achieve 1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel? 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
Are these uplink and downlink? 
The epmp 2000 is only uplink. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Jun 22, 2016 12:54 PM, "Peter Kranz" < pkr...@unwiredltd.com > wrote: 






With the ETI beamformer antenna.. you get ~20db gain since you have the 
electrical capture of all the active antennas going on.. in theory creating a 
high gain very narrow spot beam of 15 degrees or so.. 14 implies something 
else.. 


Peter Kranz 
www.UnwiredLtd.com 
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 
Mobile: 510-207- 
pkr...@unwiredltd.com 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Prince 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:51 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 

They beam-form the power coming in. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 9:40 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote: 


Over poe though? That’s pushing a lot of watts over it, I didn’t hear them say 
it had a separate power port? 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:40 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



48v to 56 or 59v I believe 



On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Craig Schmaderer < cr...@skywaveconnect.com > 
wrote: 




Spec sheet says 70watts, how are we going to power this thing, they never said 
the power options did they? 

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[Rory Conaway]

We have seen the problem with the 400’s.  It explained why a Mimosa B5-Lite 
with a 5dBi small antenna had the same signal levels as a NanoBeam 400 on a PTP 
link.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 7:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

There is also a thread going on the ubnt forums about low power on AC devices.  
Robert said they are aware of the problem and that they will either be fixing 
it in firmware or swapping out feeds.  It sounds like it may be a hardware 
issue.  I haven't ran into any of them yet...

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Joe Novak 
> wrote:
I have seen odd issues when the SMA is not tight enough.. sometimes they bind 
while screwing on. Had it happen once or twice.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:18 AM, timothy steele 
> wrote:

If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing into 
power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the tower be 
sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the latest firmware

Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small  flash 
light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna then the 
old N gear antenna's

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout 
> wrote:
I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two nanobeam 
ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft away and one 
has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely clear LOS and on 
both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from each other...

I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't be 
backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I would 
expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...

Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I know with 
the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same output power...

Ideas?

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Rory Conaway]

Please explain.  4 sectors, lights up the 1 or 2 sectors the CPE connects to.  
Or are you referring to the sector being 90 degrees instead of something like 
10 degrees?  Just for the record, 2.4GHz has much more benefit with beam 
steering antennas than 5GHz.  2.4GHz can bring the power output up and take 
advantage of PTP rules unless that has changed.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:15 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

Not even close.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Rory Conaway" >
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m
I think it’s called an Mimosa A5.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz.

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof 
> wrote:
As wide as 360 degrees?

From: Forrest Christian (List Account)
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m

That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'.

The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly.

You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something.

The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance.

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out accordingly, 
alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of the 6 degree "strip 
patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as much throughput increase per AP? 
:(

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince 
> wrote:

You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link.



bp




On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the throughput of 
existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I am wondering why the same 
massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz 
channel can then achieve 1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel?

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:

Are these uplink and downlink?

The epmp 2000 is only uplink.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 22, 2016 12:54 PM, "Peter Kranz" 
> wrote:
With the ETI beamformer antenna.. you get ~20db gain since you have the 
electrical capture of all the active antennas going on.. in theory creating a 
high gain very narrow spot beam of 15 degrees or so.. 14 implies something 
else..

Peter Kranz
www.UnwiredLtd.com
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
Mobile: 510-207-
pkr...@unwiredltd.com

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Bill Prince
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m


They beam-form the power coming in.



bp




On 6/22/2016 9:40 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote:
Over poe though?  That’s pushing a lot of watts over it, I didn’t hear them say 
it 

Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

[Mike Hammett]

Agreed. I won't use Google for anything important... other than my phone. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Simon Westlake"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 10:01:12 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar? 

I've stopped using Google for anything business critical, other than email. 
Been burned too many times with them deciding to radically change their 
business model or stop supporting a product. Probably safe with Google Domains, 
but who knows. 


On 6/27/2016 9:32 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: 



Yeah, they're not bad. They're my fallback when Google Domains won't handle 
some of the newer TLDs :( 
On Jun 24, 2016 2:17 PM, "Simon Westlake"  wrote: 



I personally like Namecheap. 


On 6/24/2016 2:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote: 



We have most of our domains registered through Rackspace, they actually are an 
Enom registration reseller or something to that effect, its always been 
problematic with these guys. Trying to transfer out a domain today it ends up 
they have completely hosed the registrant contact email to show NA, to update 
the info the current email address needs to verify the change, if we attempt to 
make a change and dont verify within 15 days all our associated domains become 
suspended... see the problem? 


and to top it off, rackspaces enom portal is non functional 


I use google domains for my personal domains, its slick and supports dynamic 
DNS so ive been tickled pink with it, but Im not sure its a prime time 
registrar as the word beta is present. 


All I know is these rackspace fuckwits have irritated me more on the domain 
side than I care to deal with. This should be the least cumbersome aspect of my 
job 


-- 




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. 


-- 
Simon Westlake
Skype: Simon_Sonar
Email: simon@sonar.software Phone: (702) 447-1247 ---
Sonar Software Inc
The next generation of ISP billing and OSS https://sonar.software 




-- 
Simon Westlake
Skype: Simon_Sonar
Email: simon@sonar.software Phone: (702) 447-1247
---
Sonar Software Inc
The next generation of ISP billing and OSS https://sonar.software 

Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

[Josh Reynolds]

I just use them for email, search, and android ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Simon Westlake  wrote:
> I've stopped using Google for anything business critical, other than email.
> Been burned too many times with them deciding to radically change their
> business model or stop supporting a product. Probably safe with Google
> Domains, but who knows.
>
> On 6/27/2016 9:32 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>
> Yeah, they're not bad. They're my fallback when Google Domains won't handle
> some of the newer TLDs :(
>
> On Jun 24, 2016 2:17 PM, "Simon Westlake"  wrote:
>>
>> I personally like Namecheap.
>>
>> On 6/24/2016 2:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
>>
>> We have most of our domains registered through Rackspace, they actually
>> are an Enom registration reseller or something to that effect, its always
>> been problematic with these guys. Trying to transfer out a domain today it
>> ends up they have completely hosed the registrant contact email to show NA,
>> to update the info the current email address needs to verify the change, if
>> we attempt to make a change and dont verify within 15 days all our
>> associated domains become suspended... see the problem?
>>
>> and to top it off, rackspaces enom portal is non functional
>>
>> I use google domains for my personal domains, its slick and supports
>> dynamic DNS so ive been tickled pink with it, but Im not sure its a prime
>> time registrar as the word beta is present.
>>
>> All I know is these rackspace fuckwits have irritated me more on the
>> domain side than I care to deal with. This should be the least cumbersome
>> aspect of my job
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Simon Westlake
>> Skype: Simon_Sonar
>> Email: simon@sonar.software
>> Phone: (702) 447-1247
>> ---
>> Sonar Software Inc
>> The next generation of ISP billing and OSS
>> https://sonar.software
>
>
> --
> Simon Westlake
> Skype: Simon_Sonar
> Email: simon@sonar.software
> Phone: (702) 447-1247
> ---
> Sonar Software Inc
> The next generation of ISP billing and OSS
> https://sonar.software

Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

[Simon Westlake]

I've stopped using Google for anything business critical, other than 
email. Been burned too many times with them deciding to radically change 
their business model or stop supporting a product. Probably safe with 
Google Domains, but who knows.


On 6/27/2016 9:32 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:


Yeah, they're not bad. They're my fallback when Google Domains won't 
handle some of the newer TLDs :(


On Jun 24, 2016 2:17 PM, "Simon Westlake"  wrote:

I personally like Namecheap.

On 6/24/2016 2:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:

We have most of our domains registered through Rackspace, they
actually are an Enom registration reseller or something to that
effect, its always been problematic with these guys. Trying to
transfer out a domain today it ends up they have completely hosed
the registrant contact email to show NA, to update the info the
current email address needs to verify the change, if we attempt
to make a change and dont verify within 15 days all our
associated domains become suspended... see the problem?

and to top it off, rackspaces enom portal is non functional

I use google domains for my personal domains, its slick and
supports dynamic DNS so ive been tickled pink with it, but Im not
sure its a prime time registrar as the word beta is present.

All I know is these rackspace fuckwits have irritated me more on
the domain side than I care to deal with. This should be the
least cumbersome aspect of my job

-- 
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.


-- 
Simon Westlake

Skype: Simon_Sonar
Email:simon@sonar.software 
Phone:(702) 447-1247 
---
Sonar Software Inc
The next generation of ISP billing and OSS
https://sonar.software



--
Simon Westlake
Skype: Simon_Sonar
Email: simon@sonar.software
Phone: (702) 447-1247
---
Sonar Software Inc
The next generation of ISP billing and OSS
https://sonar.software

[AFMUG] R200 / R201 4.2.3 Firmware Cannot Be Downgraded

[Christopher Gray]

Just a heads up for other cnPilot users, the new R200 / R201 4.2.3 firmware
cannot be downgraded if you experience any issues. I missed the note in the
release notes.

"Downgrade from 4.2.3 to a lower version is not allowed as it checks for
signed certificate"

-Chris

Re: [AFMUG] best domain registrar?

[Josh Reynolds]

Yeah, they're not bad. They're my fallback when Google Domains won't handle
some of the newer TLDs :(
On Jun 24, 2016 2:17 PM, "Simon Westlake"  wrote:

> I personally like Namecheap.
>
> On 6/24/2016 2:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
>
> We have most of our domains registered through Rackspace, they actually
> are an Enom registration reseller or something to that effect, its always
> been problematic with these guys. Trying to transfer out a domain today it
> ends up they have completely hosed the registrant contact email to show NA,
> to update the info the current email address needs to verify the change, if
> we attempt to make a change and dont verify within 15 days all our
> associated domains become suspended... see the problem?
>
> and to top it off, rackspaces enom portal is non functional
>
> I use google domains for my personal domains, its slick and supports
> dynamic DNS so ive been tickled pink with it, but Im not sure its a prime
> time registrar as the word beta is present.
>
> All I know is these rackspace fuckwits have irritated me more on the
> domain side than I care to deal with. This should be the least cumbersome
> aspect of my job
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
> --
> Simon Westlake
> Skype: Simon_Sonar
> Email: simon@sonar.software
> Phone: (702) 447-1247
> ---
> Sonar Software Inc
> The next generation of ISP billing and OSShttps://sonar.software
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[Jeremy]

There is also a thread going on the ubnt forums about low power on AC
devices.  Robert said they are aware of the problem and that they will
either be fixing it in firmware or swapping out feeds.  It sounds like it
may be a hardware issue.  I haven't ran into any of them yet...

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

> I have seen odd issues when the SMA is not tight enough.. sometimes they
> bind while screwing on. Had it happen once or twice.
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:18 AM, timothy steele 
> wrote:
>
>> If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing
>> into power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the
>> tower be sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the
>> latest firmware
>>
>> Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small
>> flash light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna
>> then the old N gear antenna's
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout  wrote:
>>
>>> I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two
>>> nanobeam ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft
>>> away and one has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely
>>> clear LOS and on both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from
>>> each other...
>>>
>>> I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't
>>> be backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I
>>> would expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...
>>>
>>> Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I
>>> know with the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same
>>> output power...
>>>
>>> Ideas?
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT Bailey Cartoon

[Josh Reynolds]

That's pretty good :)
On Jun 26, 2016 1:37 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> Every other week, the Salt Lake Tribune puts  up a drawing in the
> editorial space and asks readers to submit captions.   Today this was the
> drawing and my caption.  Hope I win.
>
>
> *“General Secretary Kim Jong-un is on the phone.  He wants to know if the
> design is open source”*
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

[Kevin Neal]

If I remember correctly you had to change that with CNUT, there isn't
enough storage on the device to hold both the 10Mhz and 20Mhz images.

-Kevin


On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Paul McCall  wrote:

> I haven’t messed with 430APs for a long time.  The guys are programming a
> 5.8 (5780APC) in the field and it says “10 Mhz” with no apparent place to
> change it.  Tried US and Other for country code and makes no difference.
>
>
>
> What did I forget, lol ?
>
>
>
> Paul McCall, President
>
> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>
> 772-564-6800
>
> pa...@pdmnet.net
>
> www.pdmnet.com
>
> www.floridabroadband.com
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
*Kevin Neal*
Network Administrator
Safelink Internet

[AFMUG] dumb question / brain fart

[Paul McCall]

I haven't messed with 430APs for a long time.  The guys are programming a 5.8 
(5780APC) in the field and it says "10 Mhz" with no apparent place to change 
it.  Tried US and Other for country code and makes no difference.

What did I forget, lol ?

Paul McCall, President
PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800
pa...@pdmnet.net
www.pdmnet.com
www.floridabroadband.com

Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for

[Robert]

You can watch Jay with his hand on the roof and he pulls it in JUST in 
time to keep from losing his fingers.   No you do not go around with 
your hand on the frame!   Bad.


On 6/27/16 6:22 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

Good thing all arms and fingers remained inside.
-Original Message- From: Glen Waldrop Sent: Monday, June 27, 
2016 7:05 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets 
more than he bargained for

Holy crap.

I kinda got sick to my stomach watching that pristine bit of history 
get mangled.


Looks like they worst they got out of it was an adrenaline rush and 
Uay's hair got messed up.




-Original Message- From: Ken Hohhof
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 10:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for


For the car enthusiasts on the list -

Rollover crash while going for a ride in a "Hemi under glass" Barracuda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LabX19ocJZA

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jay-leno-survives-scary-race-022709005.html

Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for

[Chuck McCown]

Good thing all arms and fingers remained inside.  

-Original Message- 
From: Glen Waldrop 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 7:05 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for 


Holy crap.

I kinda got sick to my stomach watching that pristine bit of history get 
mangled.


Looks like they worst they got out of it was an adrenaline rush and Uay's 
hair got messed up.




-Original Message- 
From: Ken Hohhof

Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 10:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for


For the car enthusiasts on the list -

Rollover crash while going for a ride in a "Hemi under glass" Barracuda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LabX19ocJZA

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jay-leno-survives-scary-race-022709005.html

Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for

[Jay Weekley]

Jay was probably thinking of jokes to make as he was rolling down the 
track.


Glen Waldrop wrote:

Holy crap.

I kinda got sick to my stomach watching that pristine bit of history 
get mangled.


Looks like they worst they got out of it was an adrenaline rush and 
Uay's hair got messed up.




-Original Message- From: Ken Hohhof
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 10:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for


For the car enthusiasts on the list -

Rollover crash while going for a ride in a "Hemi under glass" Barracuda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LabX19ocJZA

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jay-leno-survives-scary-race-022709005.html

Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for

[Josh Luthman]

Wow.  I'm really impressed with the harness.  Knew it was coming and was
still shocked when it rolled.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 27, 2016 9:05 AM, "Glen Waldrop"  wrote:

> Holy crap.
>
> I kinda got sick to my stomach watching that pristine bit of history get
> mangled.
>
> Looks like they worst they got out of it was an adrenaline rush and Uay's
> hair got messed up.
>
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Ken Hohhof
> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 10:00 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for
>
>
> For the car enthusiasts on the list -
>
> Rollover crash while going for a ride in a "Hemi under glass" Barracuda.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LabX19ocJZA
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/jay-leno-survives-scary-race-022709005.html
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FreeCast

[Joe Novak]

They are also the people that made 'Rabbit TV'

https://www.amazon.com/Telebrands-6686-6-Rabbit-TV/dp/B00AWC51DW

More or less link aggregation.  I wouldn't hold my breathe given the
history of past devices.

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 6:02 PM,  wrote:

> Their website seems to be lacking content detail.
> -Original Message- From: Jerry Head Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016
> 12:38 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] FreeCast
> This company FreeCast cold called me today trying to sell OTT video
> services.
> Looks mildly interesting.
> Does anyone have any opinions/experiences they might share?
>

Re: [AFMUG] 450m

[Mike Hammett]

Not even close. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:00:40 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



I think it’s called an Mimosa A5. 

Rory 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:13 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


I would love to see an omni beemsteering antenna in 5ghz. 



On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 




As wide as 360 degrees? 






From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 PM 

To: af 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 




That is why they said 'about 3-4 times the throughput'. 



The better the spacial diversity the better the throughput - they can get 7x if 
everything is aligned correctly. 



You also need to remember that these aren't fixed beams - they're dynamically 
pointable, and my understanding is that it can be re-pointed in each timeslot, 
so as long as all of your customers aren't in a very narrow slice, and are 
relatively spread out, you should gain something. 



The other thought is that this is going to encourage people to move to as wide 
of sector as possible to improve the beamsteering performance. 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < lists.wavel...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 

So if i have a tower like the one below with customers spaced out accordingly, 
alot of the customers are going to fall wthin 1 or 2 of the 6 degree "strip 
patches" on the antenna and thus i wont see as much throughput increase per AP? 
:( 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Bill Prince < part15...@gmail.com > wrote: 

You can't do that kind of spatial diversity in a PTP link. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 10:11 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 



Will there be a PTP version of Medusa that can triple the throughput of 
existing PTP650 links on the same channel width? I am wondering why the same 
massive-mimo can't be applied to PTP so a 450mbps PTP650 link running on 45mhz 
channel can then achieve 1.35Gbps on the same 45mhz channel? 




On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
Are these uplink and downlink? 
The epmp 2000 is only uplink. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Jun 22, 2016 12:54 PM, "Peter Kranz" < pkr...@unwiredltd.com > wrote: 






With the ETI beamformer antenna.. you get ~20db gain since you have the 
electrical capture of all the active antennas going on.. in theory creating a 
high gain very narrow spot beam of 15 degrees or so.. 14 implies something 
else.. 


Peter Kranz 
www.UnwiredLtd.com 
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 
Mobile: 510-207- 
pkr...@unwiredltd.com 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Prince 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:51 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 

They beam-form the power coming in. 
bp  



On 6/22/2016 9:40 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote: 


Over poe though? That’s pushing a lot of watts over it, I didn’t hear them say 
it had a separate power port? 

From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:40 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



48v to 56 or 59v I believe 



On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Craig Schmaderer < cr...@skywaveconnect.com > 
wrote: 




Spec sheet says 70watts, how are we going to power this thing, they never said 
the power options did they? 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Daniel White 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:37 AM 



To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 



Yes there is a GigE roadmap that includes 40MHz channels. 

Daniel White 
Managing Director – Hardware Distribution Sales 
ConVergence Technologies 
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 
dwh...@converge-tech.com 




From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:30 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 


Any plans to offer 40mhz channel on this thing for 800-1000mbps throughput? 



On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




That does a lot of nothing now. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Bill Prince" < part15...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:21:33 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450m 
Take whatever you like from here: 


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO9JfpcaZRA 

bp  

On 6/22/2016 9:17 AM, Matt wrote: 



There is a webinar going on now as we speak introducing the product. 

Is there anywhere to download slides or video from the webinar? 

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[Joe Novak]

I have seen odd issues when the SMA is not tight enough.. sometimes they
bind while screwing on. Had it happen once or twice.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:18 AM, timothy steele 
wrote:

> If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing into
> power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the tower
> be sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the latest
> firmware
>
> Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small
> flash light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna
> then the old N gear antenna's
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout  wrote:
>
>> I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two
>> nanobeam ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft
>> away and one has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely
>> clear LOS and on both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from
>> each other...
>>
>> I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't be
>> backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I would
>> expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...
>>
>> Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I
>> know with the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same
>> output power...
>>
>> Ideas?
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for

[Glen Waldrop]

Holy crap.

I kinda got sick to my stomach watching that pristine bit of history get 
mangled.


Looks like they worst they got out of it was an adrenaline rush and Uay's 
hair got messed up.




-Original Message- 
From: Ken Hohhof

Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 10:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT - Jay Leno gets more than he bargained for


For the car enthusiasts on the list -

Rollover crash while going for a ride in a "Hemi under glass" Barracuda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LabX19ocJZA

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jay-leno-survives-scary-race-022709005.html

Re: [AFMUG] Rocket AC low signal?

[timothy steele]

If your chains are off by 10db there is interference or your pointing into
power lines corn or part of a tree also that's very close to to the tower
be sure you have the right up tilt on the nanobeam and running the latest
firmware

Also you did not say what nanobeam you have  if you are using the small
flash light style nano beam many have reported that 1 has a weaker antenna
then the old N gear antenna's

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016, 1:32 AM TJ Trout  wrote:

> I have a rocket 5ac lite connected to the large 5ghz omni with two
> nanobeam ac's connected to it, one about 1000ft away and the other 2000ft
> away and one has a signal of -70 and the other -64, both are absolutely
> clear LOS and on both clients the chain 0 and chain 1 are 10db off from
> each other...
>
> I don't think it's possible to get the sma cables reversed so it can't be
> backwards, both units are at full power 26 and 27dbm on the rocket, I would
> expect like -30 or -40 at this distance...
>
> Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? This is my first test of AC but I know
> with the N stuff the signal would be atleast 20db better at the same output
> power...
>
> Ideas?
>