Re: [AFMUG] Email Server Options

[Paul Stewart]

I really like Surgemail …. great system for small to mid sized deployments.
I wanted to use Surgemail for a larger installation (160k mailboxes) but 
project never got started - I think it could scale quite well though …. 


> On Nov 17, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Matt  wrote:
> 
> For those providing email for there customers yet what are they using
> for a platform?  We were looking at switching to Surgemail.  Anyone
> else using it?  Any other good options?

[AFMUG] For Sale

[Timothy Yent]

We still have the following for sale.  If interested, please let me know.
Make offer, no reasonable offer will be refused.  Shipping to be paid by
buyer.

41 12dB 2.4 Ghz ePMP WBMFG Reflector Dish 

1 Allot NetEnforcer AC-1440   

1 Allot NetEnforcer Bypass 

You can view product specifications at

http://www.allot.com/products/platforms/netenforcer/

 

Timothy Yent

Mercury Network

 

 

[AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Carl Peterson]

I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed
tests in the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m
on a 200m plan.  If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to 100m+

Two feeds in the same data center.  Each connected to a juniper MX5 with
fiber between the MX5s.

If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with
good speeds to everything else.

What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for
fast.com as far as I can tell.

The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I
dropped bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests.

Has anyone else seen this with level3?  Could someone else with a level 3
connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like?

[image: Inline image 1]
[image: Inline image 2]

-- 

Carl Peterson

*PORT NETWORKS*

401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553

Baltimore, MD 21202

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Mike Hammett]

You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection to 
Netflix must suck. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Carl Peterson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed tests in 
the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m on a 200m 
plan. If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to 100m+ 


Two feeds in the same data center. Each connected to a juniper MX5 with fiber 
between the MX5s. 


If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with good 
speeds to everything else. 


What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or 
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for fast.com 
as far as I can tell. 


The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I dropped 
bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests. 


Has anyone else seen this with level3? Could someone else with a level 3 
connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like? 


Inline image 1

Inline image 2



-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 

[AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Ray Savich]

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw

Join the Conversation
Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[chuck]

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

From: Ray Savich 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com' 
Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 

 

Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum

 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Nate Burke]

Is there anywhere that actually documents anything with the test? 
Throughput per Machine, Total throughput at AP.  Single AP or multiple 
AP setup?  (the video shows 2 physical AP units)  Signal levels, noise?  
Anything?  The video is cool and all, but really doesn't prove anything 
without more data.


On 11/18/2016 9:36 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 
50 football games at the same time. Animations compress pretty tight.

*From:* Ray Savich
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
*To:* 'af@afmug.com'
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate 
simultaneous video streaming to 50 
clients.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw


Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Josh Reynolds]

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:

> I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50
> football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.
>
> *From:* Ray Savich
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
> *To:* 'af@afmug.com'
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
> cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate
> simultaneous video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.
> com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw
>
>
>
> Join the Conversation
>
> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[chuck]

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

From: Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.


On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:

  I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

  From: Ray Savich 
  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
  To: 'af@afmug.com' 
  Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

  cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 



  Join the Conversation

  Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Carl Peterson]

L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content.  They prefer to send it to me
over the L3 connection.  Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in
Baltimore just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so
it might be connection specific.


On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection
> to Netflix must suck.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Carl Peterson" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.
>
>
> I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed
> tests in the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m
> on a 200m plan.  If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to
> 100m+
>
> Two feeds in the same data center.  Each connected to a juniper MX5 with
> fiber between the MX5s.
>
> If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with
> good speeds to everything else.
>
> What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or
> directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for
> fast.com as far as I can tell.
>
> The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I
> dropped bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests.
>
> Has anyone else seen this with level3?  Could someone else with a level 3
> connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like?
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
> [image: Inline image 2]
>
> --
>
> Carl Peterson
>
> *PORT NETWORKS*
>
> 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
>
> Baltimore, MD 21202
>
>
>
>


-- 

Carl Peterson

*PORT NETWORKS*

401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553

Baltimore, MD 21202

(410) 637-3707

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Chris Wright]

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC.

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until Cambium 
gives us real numbers.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users


Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

From: Ray Savich
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw

Join the Conversation
Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[chuck]

Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

From: Chris Wright 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

 

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC. 

 

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until Cambium 
gives us real numbers.

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

 

From: Josh Reynolds 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

 

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

 

From: Ray Savich 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

To: 'af@afmug.com' 

Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 

 

Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum

 

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Mike Hammett]

With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed and see if 
it still works properly with both connections up, but Netflix only available 
over Cogent? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Carl Peterson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content. They prefer to send it to me over 
the L3 connection. Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in Baltimore 
just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so it might be 
connection specific. 




On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection to 
Netflix must suck. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Carl Peterson" < cpeter...@portnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 




I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed tests in 
the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m on a 200m 
plan. If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to 100m+ 


Two feeds in the same data center. Each connected to a juniper MX5 with fiber 
between the MX5s. 


If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with good 
speeds to everything else. 


What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or 
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for fast.com 
as far as I can tell. 


The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I dropped 
bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests. 


Has anyone else seen this with level3? Could someone else with a level 3 
connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like? 


Inline image 1

Inline image 2



-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 








-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 
(410) 637-3707 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Josh Luthman]

What do you mean "we"


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

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM,  wrote:

> Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!
>
> *From:* Chris Wright
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
> Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what
> appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous
> with our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native
> resolution. Given this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s
> resolution about ½ of this, based on the attached screenshot of the video.
> So we have a 960x540 resolution video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s
> be generous again and give it 1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio,
> totaling to a hair under 2mbps per stream (real-world for this resolution
> encoded in h.264 you can expect about 1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)
>
>
>
> So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps
> test video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or
> near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on
> N/AC.
>
>
>
> I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until
> Cambium gives us real numbers.
>
>
>
> Chris Wright
>
> Network Administrator
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Reynolds
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50
> different 7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.
>
>
>
> On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:
>
> I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50
> football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ray Savich
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
>
> *To:* 'af@afmug.com'
>
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate
> simultaneous video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.
> com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw
>
>
>
> Join the Conversation
>
> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[chuck]

The royal “we”...

From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

What do you mean "we"


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

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM,  wrote:

  Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

  From: Chris Wright 
  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

  Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)



  So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC. 



  I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until 
Cambium gives us real numbers.



  Chris Wright

  Network Administrator



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users



  I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?



  From: Josh Reynolds 

  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users



  Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.



  On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:

  I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.



  From: Ray Savich 

  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

  To: 'af@afmug.com' 

  Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users



  cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 



  Join the Conversation

  Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Bill Prince]

Netflix may also be caching your IP range for CDN selection. You change 
from one upstream to another, and they're still distributing from the 
old place?



bp


On 11/18/2016 10:05 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed 
and see if it still works properly with both connections up, but 
Netflix only available over Cogent?




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Carl Peterson" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content. They prefer to send it to 
me over the L3 connection. Someone with a VM connected to L3 in 
another DC in Baltimore just reached out to me and they are not seeing 
the same issue so it might be connection specific.



On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett > wrote:


You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's
connection to Netflix must suck.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


Midwest Internet Exchange 


The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Carl Peterson" mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com>>
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] fast.com  speed issues.


I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com
 shows speed tests in the ~5m range while
speedtest.net  shows correct speeds, i.e
200m on a 200m plan.  If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com
 speeds increase to 100m+

Two feeds in the same data center. Each connected to a juniper MX5
with fiber between the MX5s.

If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com  tests
are still around 5m with good speeds to everything else.

What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be
hosting or directly connected to the netflix content servers that
feed data for fast.com  as far as I can tell.

The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is
when I dropped bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com
 speed tests.

Has anyone else seen this with level3? Could someone else with a
level 3 connection test to fast.com  and let me
know what it looks like?

Inline image 1
Inline image 2

-- 


Carl Peterson

*PORT NETWORKS*

401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553

Baltimore, MD 21202






--

Carl Peterson

*PORT NETWORKS*

401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553

Baltimore, MD 21202

(410) 637-3707

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Ray Savich]

I am getting the details for you. Good questions.
Ray

Join the Conversation
Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Mike Hammett]

One thing to keep in mind is where your resolving DNS servers sit. Keep them 
on-net for the best performance. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:17:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


Netflix may also be caching your IP range for CDN selection. You change from 
one upstream to another, and they're still distributing from the old place? 

bp
 
On 11/18/2016 10:05 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed and see if 
it still works properly with both connections up, but Netflix only available 
over Cogent? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Carl Peterson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content. They prefer to send it to me over 
the L3 connection. Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in Baltimore 
just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so it might be 
connection specific. 




On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection to 
Netflix must suck. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Carl Peterson" < cpeter...@portnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 




I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed tests in 
the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m on a 200m 
plan. If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to 100m+ 


Two feeds in the same data center. Each connected to a juniper MX5 with fiber 
between the MX5s. 


If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with good 
speeds to everything else. 


What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or 
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for fast.com 
as far as I can tell. 


The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I dropped 
bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests. 


Has anyone else seen this with level3? Could someone else with a level 3 
connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like? 


Inline image 1

Inline image 2



-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 








-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 
(410) 637-3707 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Ken Hohhof]

Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in.  Preferably 
beginning with @.

 

As in @chuckmccown is not amused.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

The royal “we”...

 

From: Josh Luthman 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

What do you mean "we"

 

 

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

 

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > 
wrote:

Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

 

From: Chris Wright 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

 

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC. 

 

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until Cambium 
gives us real numbers.

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com 
 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

 

From: Josh Reynolds 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

 

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

 

From: Ray Savich 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

To: 'af@afmug.com' 

Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 

 

Join the Conversation

  Cambium Networks Community Forum

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[chuck]

Chuck McCown  is too old to adopt anything that is “in”

From: Ken Hohhof 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:34 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in.  Preferably 
beginning with @.

 

As in @chuckmccown is not amused.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

The royal “we”...

 

From: Josh Luthman 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

What do you mean "we"

 

 

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

 

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM,  wrote:

  Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

   

  From: Chris Wright 

  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

   

  Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

   

  So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC. 

   

  I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until 
Cambium gives us real numbers.

   

  Chris Wright

  Network Administrator

   

  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

   

  I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

   

  From: Josh Reynolds 

  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

   

  Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

   

  On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:

  I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

   

  From: Ray Savich 

  Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

  To: 'af@afmug.com' 

  Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

   

  cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 

   

  Join the Conversation

  Cambium Networks Community Forum

   

 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Bill Prince]

and neither is @part15...@gmail.com

bp


On 11/18/2016 10:34 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in. 
Preferably beginning with @.


As in @chuckmccown is not amused.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

The royal “we”...

*From:*Josh Luthman

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

What do you mean "we"

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

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM, > wrote:


Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

*From:*Chris Wright

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging
by what appears to be the default resolution of the test video.
Let’s be generous with our assumptions and assume these laptops
are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given this assumption, we can
infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, based on
the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540
resolution video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous
again and give it 1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling
to a hair under 2mbps per stream (real-world for this resolution
encoded in h.264 you can expect about 1200-1400kbps to work
beautifully.)

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a
2mbps test video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room,
with perfect or near-perfect line of sight to each. Total
aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC.

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption
until Cambium gives us real numbers.

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of
*ch...@wbmfg.com 
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

*From:*Josh Reynolds

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50
different 7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them
streaming 50 football games at the same time. Animations compress
pretty tight.

*From:*Ray Savich

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

*To:*'af@afmug.com'

*Subject:*[AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate
simultaneous video streaming to 50
clients.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw

Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Ken Hohhof]

Seems like there are many moving parts to this.  Upstream routes, downstream 
routes, DNS, and whatever anycast tricks Netflix does.

 

I would imagine both Level3 and Cogent have on net Netflix servers, and that 
the worst situation would be the traffic has to go from one of them to the 
other in order to reach you.

 

Might need to contact Netflix and get their engineers to help you troubleshoot.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:33 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

 

One thing to keep in mind is where your resolving DNS servers sit. Keep them 
on-net for the best performance.



-
Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
   
  
  
 
  Midwest Internet Exchange
   
  
 
  The Brothers WISP
   
 




  _  

From: "Bill Prince" mailto:part15...@gmail.com> >
To: af@afmug.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:17:26 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

Netflix may also be caching your IP range for CDN selection. You change from 
one upstream to another, and they're still distributing from the old place?

 

bp

 

On 11/18/2016 10:05 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed and see if 
it still works properly with both connections up, but Netflix only available 
over Cogent?



-
Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
   
  
  
 
  Midwest Internet Exchange
   
  
 
  The Brothers WISP
   
 





  _  


From: "Carl Peterson"   

To: af@afmug.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content.  They prefer to send it to me over 
the L3 connection.  Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in 
Baltimore just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so it 
might be connection specific.   

 

 

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett mailto:af...@ics-il.net> > wrote:

You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection to 
Netflix must suck.



-
Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
   
  
  
 
  Midwest Internet Exchange
   
  
 
  The Brothers WISP
   
 





  _  


From: "Carl Peterson" mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com> >
To: af@afmug.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] fast.com   speed issues. 

 

I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com   
shows speed tests in the ~5m range while speedtest.net   
shows correct speeds, i.e 200m on a 200m plan.  If I drop BGP to Level3, 
fast.com   speeds increase to 100m+  

 

Two feeds in the same data center.  Each connected to a juniper MX5 with fiber 
between the MX5s. 

 

If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com   tests are still 
around 5m with good speeds to everything else.

 

What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or 
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for fast.com 
  as far as I can tell.

 

The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I dropped 
bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com   speed tests.

 

Has anyone else seen this with level3?  Could someone else with a level 3 
connection test to 

Re: [AFMUG] Email Server Options

[George Skorup]

We used Ipswitch Imail for a long, long time. Then we moved everything 
over to our cPanel server. Now we're shutting down our ISP mail at the 
end of the year. It's just not worth it anymore.


On 11/18/2016 6:25 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:

I really like Surgemail …. great system for small to mid sized deployments.
I wanted to use Surgemail for a larger installation (160k mailboxes) but 
project never got started - I think it could scale quite well though ….



On Nov 17, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Matt  wrote:

For those providing email for there customers yet what are they using
for a platform?  We were looking at switching to Surgemail.  Anyone
else using it?  Any other good options?

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Ken Hohhof]

You may continue to use the royal “we” since you are a Prince.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

and neither is @part15...@gmail.com

bp

 

On 11/18/2016 10:34 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in.  Preferably 
beginning with @.

 

As in @chuckmccown is not amused.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com 
 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

The royal “we”...

 

From: Josh Luthman 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

What do you mean "we"

 

 

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

 

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > 
wrote:

Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

 

From: Chris Wright 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what 
appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous with 
our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given 
this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution about ½ of this, 
based on the attached screenshot of the video. So we have a 960x540 resolution 
video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 
1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per 
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you can expect about 
1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

 

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps test 
video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or 
near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC. 

 

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until Cambium 
gives us real numbers.

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com 
 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

 

From: Josh Reynolds 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

To: af@afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50 different 
7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

 

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50 
football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.

 

From: Ray Savich 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

To: 'af@afmug.com  ' 

Subject: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

 

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate simultaneous 
video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw 

 

Join the Conversation

  Cambium Networks Community Forum

 

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Josh Luthman]

/slap

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

On Nov 18, 2016 1:57 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> You may continue to use the royal “we” since you are a Prince.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Prince
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:38 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> and neither is @part15...@gmail.com
>
> bp
>
> 
>
>
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:34 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in.
> Preferably beginning with @.
>
>
>
> As in @chuckmccown is not amused.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> The royal “we”...
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Luthman
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> What do you mean "we"
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM,  wrote:
>
> Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!
>
>
>
> *From:* Chris Wright
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this, judging by what
> appears to be the default resolution of the test video. Let’s be generous
> with our assumptions and assume these laptops are 1920x1080 native
> resolution. Given this assumption, we can infer that the test video’s
> resolution about ½ of this, based on the attached screenshot of the video.
> So we have a 960x540 resolution video to playback. What of bitrate? Let’s
> be generous again and give it 1800kbps for video, 192kbps for audio,
> totaling to a hair under 2mbps per stream (real-world for this resolution
> encoded in h.264 you can expect about 1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)
>
>
>
> So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this is a 2mbps
> test video being streamed to 50 clients in the same room, with perfect or
> near-perfect line of sight to each. Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on
> N/AC.
>
>
>
> I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this assumption until
> Cambium gives us real numbers.
>
>
>
> Chris Wright
>
> Network Administrator
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Reynolds
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy. 50
> different 7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.
>
>
>
> On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM,  wrote:
>
> I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them streaming 50
> football games at the same time.  Animations compress pretty tight.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ray Savich
>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM
>
> *To:* 'af@afmug.com'
>
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users
>
>
>
> cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions demonstrate
> simultaneous video streaming to 50 clients. https://www.youtube.
> com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw
>
>
>
> Join the Conversation
>
> Cambium Networks Community Forum 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[George Skorup]

Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.

Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

[Bill Prince]

Not just a prince, but I am, in fact, Prince William.

I write that on all my legal documents.


bp


On 11/18/2016 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


You may continue to use the royal “we” since you are a Prince.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Prince
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:38 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

and neither is @part15...@gmail.com

bp


On 11/18/2016 10:34 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

Royal we is out, referring to yourself in the third person is in. 
Preferably beginning with @.


As in @chuckmccown is not amused.

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of
*ch...@wbmfg.com 
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:16 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

The royal “we”...

*From:*Josh Luthman

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 11:07 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

What do you mean "we"

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

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

Sorry Ray, we are a tough crowd at times!

*From:*Chris Wright

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 10:14 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Multicast probably isn’t even necessary to justify this,
judging by what appears to be the default resolution of the
test video. Let’s be generous with our assumptions and assume
these laptops are 1920x1080 native resolution. Given this
assumption, we can infer that the test video’s resolution
about ½ of this, based on the attached screenshot of the
video. So we have a 960x540 resolution video to playback. What
of bitrate? Let’s be generous again and give it 1800kbps for
video, 192kbps for audio, totaling to a hair under 2mbps per
stream (real-world for this resolution encoded in h.264 you
can expect about 1200-1400kbps to work beautifully.)

So now things are starting to seem less groundbreaking – this
is a 2mbps test video being streamed to 50 clients in the same
room, with perfect or near-perfect line of sight to each.
Total aggregate traffic is 100mbps on N/AC.

I’m far too jaded by whitepapers, so I’ll keep to this
assumption until Cambium gives us real numbers.

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of
*ch...@wbmfg.com 
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 8:00 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

I was not thinking multicast.  Do you think this is multicast?

*From:*Josh Reynolds

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 8:58 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

Not watching the video, but doing this with multicast is easy.
50 different 7-25Mbps streams would be much more difficult.

On Nov 18, 2016 9:36 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

I would be interested in seeing the same video showing them
streaming 50 football games at the same time. Animations
compress pretty tight.

*From:*Ray Savich

*Sent:*Friday, November 18, 2016 8:18 AM

*To:*'af@afmug.com '

*Subject:*[AFMUG] Streaming video to 50 simultaneous users

cnPilot WiFi E400 indoor and E500 outdoor solutions
demonstrate simultaneous video streaming to 50
clients.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfP2D019JYw

Join the Conversation

Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[chuck]

I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  
I can easily put it into production.  
It will not be cheap.
How long before UBNT knocks it off.  

Not sure I want to release a new product.  

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:11 PM 
To: memb...@wispa.org 
Cc: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[George Skorup]

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm 
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be 
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.


On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put 
it into production.  It will not be cheap.

How long before UBNT knocks it off.
Not sure I want to release a new product.
-Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 
18, 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: 
[AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get 
that made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter 
available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Keefe John]

does radiowaves have an adapter ready?


On 11/18/2016 1:39 PM, George Skorup wrote:
For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm 
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would 
be easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.


On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put 
it into production.  It will not be cheap.

How long before UBNT knocks it off.
Not sure I want to release a new product.
-Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 
18, 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: 
[AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get 
that made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter 
available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[chuck]

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set 
screw.

A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put it 
into production.  It will not be cheap.

How long before UBNT knocks it off.
Not sure I want to release a new product.
-Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
[WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[chuck]

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put it 
into production.  It will not be cheap.

How long before UBNT knocks it off.
Not sure I want to release a new product.
-Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
[WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Mike Hammett]

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater
 

This and the next few pictures. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already. 

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas. 
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set 
screw. 
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too. 
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all. But will I? Should I? 

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm 
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be 
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X. 

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: 
> I have the design. Designed it about 4 months ago. I can easily put it 
> into production. It will not be cheap. 
> How long before UBNT knocks it off. 
> Not sure I want to release a new product. 
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too. 
> 
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote: 
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available. 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Keefe John]

you should


On 11/18/2016 1:53 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a 
set screw.

A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put 
it into production.  It will not be cheap.

How long before UBNT knocks it off.
Not sure I want to release a new product.
-Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 
18, 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: 
[AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get 
that made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.


On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter 
available.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[chuck]

And there you have it.

From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:59 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater

This and the next few pictures.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: ch...@wbmfg.com
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put it 
> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
>

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Mike Hammett]

I've seen this conversation a couple times and figured I'd chime in with the 
link. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08:39 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 




And there you have it. 




From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:59 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 


https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater
 

This and the next few pictures. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already. 

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas. 
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set 
screw. 
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too. 
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all. But will I? Should I? 

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm 
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be 
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X. 

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: 
> I have the design. Designed it about 4 months ago. I can easily put it 
> into production. It will not be cheap. 
> How long before UBNT knocks it off. 
> Not sure I want to release a new product. 
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First? 
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too. 
> 
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote: 
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available. 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Bill Prince]

Don't have a facebook account. No can look.


bp


On 11/18/2016 11:59 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater

This and the next few pictures.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 





*From: *ch...@wbmfg.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message-
From: ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message-
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily 
put it

> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, 
November 18,
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: 
[AFMUG]

> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get 
that

> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter 
available.

>

[AFMUG] sunmax

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

anybody deployed any of this yet? is it ubntbuggy?

-- 
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] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Ken Hohhof]

Wow, I can’t quite define why, but I like the silicone boot over an N connector 
a lot less than over an SMA connector.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 2:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

 

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3
 

 &theater

This and the next few pictures.



-
Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
   
  
  
 
  Midwest Internet Exchange
   
  
 
  The Brothers WISP
   
 




  _  

From: ch...@wbmfg.com  
To: af@afmug.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com   wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put it 
> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org   Cc: Animal 
> Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
>

 

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Carl Peterson]

How would one go about filtering AS2906 on one feed?  I can control my
outbound traffic but I don't have a lot of control over who sends what in.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Seems like there are many moving parts to this.  Upstream routes,
> downstream routes, DNS, and whatever anycast tricks Netflix does.
>
>
>
> I would imagine both Level3 and Cogent have on net Netflix servers, and
> that the worst situation would be the traffic has to go from one of them to
> the other in order to reach you.
>
>
>
> Might need to contact Netflix and get their engineers to help you
> troubleshoot.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 12:33 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.
>
>
>
> One thing to keep in mind is where your resolving DNS servers sit. Keep
> them on-net for the best performance.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Bill Prince" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 12:17:26 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.
>
> Netflix may also be caching your IP range for CDN selection. You change
> from one upstream to another, and they're still distributing from the old
> place?
>
>
>
> bp
>
> 
>
>
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:05 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed and
> see if it still works properly with both connections up, but Netflix only
> available over Cogent?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Carl Peterson" 
> 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.
>
> L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content.  They prefer to send it to me
> over the L3 connection.  Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in
> Baltimore just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so
> it might be connection specific.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection
> to Netflix must suck.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Carl Peterson" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.
>
>
>
> I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed
> tests in the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m
> on a 200m plan.  If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to
> 100m+
>
>
>
> Two feeds in the same data center.  Each connected to a juniper MX5 with
> fiber between the MX5s.
>
>
>
> If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with
> good speeds to everything else.
>
>
>
> What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or
> directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for
> fast.com as far as I can tell.
>
>
>
> The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I
> dropped bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.c

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Ken Hohhof]

Does TBW page require a login?  You should not assume you need a FB account to 
visit a FB page, especially a business page.  You may need one to post comments.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 2:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

 

Don't have a facebook account. No can look.

 

bp

 

On 11/18/2016 11:59 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3
 

 &theater

This and the next few pictures.



-
Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
   
  
  
 
  Midwest Internet Exchange
   
  
 
  The Brothers WISP
   
 





  _  


From: ch...@wbmfg.com  
To: af@afmug.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message- 
From: ch...@wbmfg.com  
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message- 
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com   wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily put it 
> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, November 18, 
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org   Cc: Animal 
> Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get that 
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
>

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Bill Prince]

When it covered the window with login prompts (yes, more than one), I 
went away. Turns out there was a "Not Now" link in faded blue that I did 
not see. That dismisses the big login prompt that covers the window.


Back to your regular programming.


bp


On 11/18/2016 12:34 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


Does TBW page require a login?  You should not assume you need a FB 
account to visit a FB page, especially a business page. You may need 
one to post comments.


*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Prince
*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:10 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

Don't have a facebook account. No can look.

bp


On 11/18/2016 11:59 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:


https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater

This and the next few pictures.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


Midwest Internet Exchange 


The Brothers WISP 







*From: *ch...@wbmfg.com 
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message-
From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by
a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message-
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed.
Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com  wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can
easily put it
> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday,
November 18,
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org 
Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG]
> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to
get that
> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter
available.
>

Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues.

[Mike Hammett]

Route Filters 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Carl Peterson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 2:32:03 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


How would one go about filtering AS2906 on one feed? I can control my outbound 
traffic but I don't have a lot of control over who sends what in. 


On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: 





Seems like there are many moving parts to this. Upstream routes, downstream 
routes, DNS, and whatever anycast tricks Netflix does. 

I would imagine both Level3 and Cogent have on net Netflix servers, and that 
the worst situation would be the traffic has to go from one of them to the 
other in order to reach you. 

Might need to contact Netflix and get their engineers to help you troubleshoot. 




From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:33 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 


One thing to keep in mind is where your resolving DNS servers sit. Keep them 
on-net for the best performance. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Bill Prince" < part15...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:17:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 
Netflix may also be caching your IP range for CDN selection. You change from 
one upstream to another, and they're still distributing from the old place? 
bp  

On 11/18/2016 10:05 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 



With that connection up, filter Netflix's AS from your Level 3 feed and see if 
it still works properly with both connections up, but Netflix only available 
over Cogent? 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Carl Peterson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:06:29 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 

L3 is hosting most of the Netflix content. They prefer to send it to me over 
the L3 connection. Someone with a VM connected to L3 in another DC in Baltimore 
just reached out to me and they are not seeing the same issue so it might be 
connection specific. 





On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 






You must be preferring L3 to Netflix instead of Cogent and L3's connection to 
Netflix must suck. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Carl Peterson" < cpeter...@portnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 8:43:34 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] fast.com speed issues. 




I just brought up a Gig level3 connection and now fast.com shows speed tests in 
the ~5m range while speedtest.net shows correct speeds, i.e 200m on a 200m 
plan. If I drop BGP to Level3, fast.com speeds increase to 100m+ 



Two feeds in the same data center. Each connected to a juniper MX5 with fiber 
between the MX5s. 



If I drop BGP on the cogent feed, fast.com tests are still around 5m with good 
speeds to everything else. 



What seems to be nuts abut this is that Level3 appears to be hosting or 
directly connected to the netflix content servers that feed data for fast.com 
as far as I can tell. 



The spike in netflix traffic coming in over the cogent feed is when I dropped 
bgp on the lvl3 feed to run fast.com speed tests. 



Has anyone else seen this with level3? Could someone else with a level 3 
connection test to fast.com and let me know what it looks like? 



Inline image 1

Inline image 2



-- 


Carl Peterson 
PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 









-- 




Carl Peterson 
PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 
(410) 637-3707 










-- 



Carl Peterson 

PORT NETWORKS 
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 
Baltimore, MD 21202 
(410) 637-3707 

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Bill Prince]

So there is an interesting question. Does the AF11X use diplexers or 
does it use duplexers? The little boxes that connect the RF side are 
labled "duplexer".  The key difference is going to be that there is a 
circulator in a duplexor, and that it would allow the TX and RX 
frequencies to be very close to one another. A diplexer on the other 
hand is mainly high/low filters and requires some frequency separation 
between the RX and TX frequencies.



Although they are labeled "duplexer", I would argue that they look more 
like diplexers.



bp


On 11/18/2016 11:59 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater

This and the next few pictures.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 





*From: *ch...@wbmfg.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 1:57:28 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I am guessing UBNT is hard at work doing this already.

-Original Message-
From: ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

I can easily spin the adapter to fit all ODU style antennas.
The adapter fits over the antenna feedhorn nose and is secured by a set
screw.
A bit more work but a whole adapter plate could be done too.
REMEC, SAF, Exalt, DW, I can do them all.  But will I?  Should I?

-Original Message-
From: George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

For RadioWaves, sounds like the feedhorn has to be replaced. But I'm
also thinking of all the Trango OEM antennas we have deployed. Would be
easier/universal to have a Remec adapter plate for the AF-11X.

On 11/18/2016 1:25 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> I have the design.  Designed it about 4 months ago.  I can easily 
put it

> into production.  It will not be cheap.
> How long before UBNT knocks it off.
> Not sure I want to release a new product.
> -Original Message- From: George Skorup Sent: Friday, 
November 18,
> 2016 12:11 PM To: memb...@wispa.org Cc: Animal Farm Subject: Re: 
[AFMUG]

> [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
> Yup. Someone here on the members list said they were looking to get 
that

> made. Was that you, Brad? I'm sure Chuck McCown could make it, too.
>
> On 11/18/2016 10:09 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter 
available.

>

[AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[Sam Kirsch]

We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100 
platform we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even 
if its going to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste 
of our time to climb up and mount this stuff.


I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down 
and won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).  
I'll be gathering more (probably double that) in the coming months out 
towards the spring.  There will also be somewhere in the realm of 120 
900mhz PMP100 SMs before the new year.


Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy 
train? =D



Regards,


-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support
Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109 | Fax: 1.866.852.4688
Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 | sam...@plexicomm.net

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[George Skorup]

We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec 
round for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have 
Trango AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we 
wouldn't be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.


The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the 
feedhorn swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec 
adapter plate, especially in the case of the Trango dishes.


So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs $400? 
for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.


This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for 
waveguide, IMO.


On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:


Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping 
someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.


Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any 
antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.


Brad

*From:*members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett

*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
*To:* memb...@wispa.org
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




*From: *"Brad Belton" mailto:b...@belwave.com>>
*To: *memb...@wispa.org 
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 2:06:47 PM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

So, what are we looking for?  SFP port?

I don�t see any REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapters in your 
pictures!  


Brad

*From:*members-boun...@wispa.org  
[mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett

*Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:02 PM
*To:* memb...@wispa.org 
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




*From: *"Brad Belton" mailto:b...@belwave.com>>
*To: *memb...@wispa.org 
*Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 10:09:25 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

You'll need to order a new feed horn for your RadioWaves antenna.  I don't
have the SKUs yet, but I'm hearing they might be shipping by end of the
month or early next.  They are basically a standard dual polarity N-Type
feed horn except the feed horn "kit" also comes with a UBNT specific
mounting bracket for the radio.

I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
Sure would be easier than a feed horn swap...and likely less expensive 
too.
I've got a call into Pasternack to see if such an adapter is even 
feasible.

I'm thinking it is, but would depend on demand.

Brad



-Original Message-
From: members-boun...@wispa.org  
[mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf

Of Keefe John
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:59 AM
To: memb...@wispa.org 
Subject: Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

What was on the dish you had before?  Can I make these work on a a
Radiowaves Dragonwave dish?


On 11/17/2016 8:54 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
> DoubleRadius should have them.  Our AF-11X order filled, but waiting on
new
> RadioWaves dual polarity feed horns before they can be put to use.
>
> Brad
>
> -Original Message-
> From: members-boun...@wispa.org  
[mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On

Behalf
> Of Keefe John
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 7:17

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Bill Prince]

And that will always be the mystery...


bp


On 11/18/2016 3:44 PM, George Skorup wrote:
This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for 
waveguide, IMO.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Josh Reynolds]

They are designing for a lot of different mounting options, but they have
to hit the ones that are the easiest sells out the gate.

Stay tuned.

On Nov 18, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

> We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec round
> for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have Trango
> AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we wouldn't
> be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.
>
> The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the feedhorn
> swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec adapter plate,
> especially in the case of the Trango dishes.
>
> So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs $400?
> for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.
>
> This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for
> waveguide, IMO.
>
> On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
>
> Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping
> someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.�
>
> �
>
> Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any
> antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.
>
> �
>
> Brad
>
> �
>
> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> �
>
> Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 2:06:47 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> So, what are we looking for?� SFP port?
>
> �
>
> I don�t see any REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapters in your
> pictures!� 
>
> �
>
> Brad
>
> �
>
> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:02 PM
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> �
>
> https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.
> 997555730369879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 10:09:25 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> You'll need to order a new feed horn for your RadioWaves antenna. �I
> don't
> have the SKUs yet, but I'm hearing they might be shipping by end of the
> month or early next. �They are basically a standard dual polarity N-Type
> feed horn except the feed horn "kit" also comes with a UBNT specific
> mounting bracket for the radio.
>
> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
> Sure would be easier than a feed horn swap...and likely less expensive too.
> I've got a call into Pasternack to see if such an adapter is even feasible.
> I'm thinking it is, but would depend on demand.
>
> Brad
>
> �
>
> -Original Message-
> From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
> ] On Behalf
> Of Keefe John
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:59 AM
> To: memb...@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> What was on the dish you had before? �Can I make these work on a a
> Radiowaves Dragonwave dish?
>
>
> On 11/17/2016 8:54 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
> > DoubleRadius should have them. �Our AF-11X order filled, but waiting on
> new
> > RadioWaves dual polarity feed horns before they can be put to use.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > -Original

Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[George Skorup]

I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like 
$10/board. We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a 
little more for P10 and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul 
said he has hundreds.


On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:
We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100 
platform we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even 
if its going to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste 
of our time to climb up and mount this stuff.
I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down 
and won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s 
too).  I'll be gathering more (probably double that) in the coming 
months out towards the spring.  There will also be somewhere in the 
realm of 120 900mhz PMP100 SMs before the new year.
Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy 
train? =D

Regards,
*-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support
Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net 
**

Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109 | Fax: 1.866.852.4688*
*Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 | *sam...@plexicomm.net* 
*

Re: [AFMUG] OT... Relax ese

[Ken Hohhof]

Everyone looks 100% more handsome in a nice Stetson, no?

 

Someone should send our new presidente and his cabinet some nice sombreros, 
they would still be a bunch of old white guys, but at least they would look 
good.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 6:25 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: [AFMUG] OT... Relax ese

 

Hola vatos locos

Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[Ken Hohhof]

I think the only ones worth the shipping cost, judging from past posts, are the 
5.2 ones.  Hmmm, you think maybe because they are pre-DFS?

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 6:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

 

I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like $10/board. 
We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a little more for P10 
and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul said he has hundreds.

On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:

We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100 platform 
we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even if its going to 
more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste of our time to climb up 
and mount this stuff.

 

I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down and won't 
be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).  I'll be gathering 
more (probably double that) in the coming months out towards the spring.  There 
will also be somewhere in the realm of 120 900mhz PMP100 SMs before the new 
year.

 

Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy train? =D

 

 

Regards,

 

 

-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support
Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net  
Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109 | Fax: 1.866.852.4688

Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 |   
sam...@plexicomm.net

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] OT... Relax ese

[Jaime Solorza]

Actually this one is me Aussie hat..

On Nov 18, 2016 5:41 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> Everyone looks 100% more handsome in a nice Stetson, no?
>
>
>
> Someone should send our new presidente and his cabinet some nice
> sombreros, they would still be a bunch of old white guys, but at least they
> would look good.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jaime Solorza
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 6:25 PM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] OT... Relax ese
>
>
>
> Hola vatos locos
>

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux 1U SyncInjector

[Matt]

> The 1U injector is very close.  I need to finish validation on the latest
> board revisions and then will be releasing it to production assuming there
> isn't some showstopper I missed.

So how many port will this unit be?  Will it support the new Cambium
Sync format for the 450m?

Holding off on a few site upgrades since this unit will save me so MUCH space.

Re: [AFMUG] sunmax

[Kurt Fankhauser]

I have it on the roof of the office. Works surprisingly well. I'm going to
put more up.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> anybody deployed any of this yet? is it ubntbuggy?
>
> --
> 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] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[Kurt Fankhauser]

Why doesn't anyone want the 5.4 FSK radios?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> I think the only ones worth the shipping cost, judging from past posts,
> are the 5.2 ones.  Hmmm, you think maybe because they are pre-DFS?
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 6:40 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?
>
>
>
> I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like
> $10/board. We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a
> little more for P10 and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul said
> he has hundreds.
>
> On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:
>
> We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100 platform
> we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even if its going
> to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste of our time to
> climb up and mount this stuff.
>
>
>
> I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down and
> won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).  I'll be
> gathering more (probably double that) in the coming months out towards the
> spring.  There will also be somewhere in the realm of 120 900mhz PMP100 SMs
> before the new year.
>
>
>
> Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy
> train? =D
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> *-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support*
>
> *Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
> Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109
> <1.866.759.4678%20x109> | Fax: 1.866.852.4688 <1.866.852.4688>*
>
> *Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 <1.866.759.9713> | **sam...@plexicomm.net
> *
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] sunmax

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

is the "ease of install" what it claims?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
wrote:

> I have it on the roof of the office. Works surprisingly well. I'm going to
> put more up.
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> anybody deployed any of this yet? is it ubntbuggy?
>>
>> --
>> 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] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

i got some 5.4
some 2.4
and a shit ton of 900
I say the illinois guys get together with some shotguns
for real kicks, I even have some alvarion VL, somebody might need to bring
a .50 for those
but seriously, I have like 300 12v 4a power supplies, whats a guy to do
with those
im down for shooting them too
I drink to much to be part of the shooting, so I usually just toss the
stuff in the air for the rednecks

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
wrote:

> Why doesn't anyone want the 5.4 FSK radios?
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> I think the only ones worth the shipping cost, judging from past posts,
>> are the 5.2 ones.  Hmmm, you think maybe because they are pre-DFS?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 6:40 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like
>> $10/board. We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a
>> little more for P10 and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul said
>> he has hundreds.
>>
>> On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:
>>
>> We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100
>> platform we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even if
>> its going to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste of our
>> time to climb up and mount this stuff.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down and
>> won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).  I'll be
>> gathering more (probably double that) in the coming months out towards the
>> spring.  There will also be somewhere in the realm of 120 900mhz PMP100 SMs
>> before the new year.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy
>> train? =D
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support*
>>
>> *Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
>> Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109
>> <1.866.759.4678%20x109> | Fax: 1.866.852.4688 <1.866.852.4688>*
>>
>> *Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 <1.866.759.9713> | **sam...@plexicomm.net
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
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] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

this isnt my usual asshole distrust of UBNT, I know UBNT chuck is behind
it, so its solid gear, but are people really ready to put their faith in
the limited and $$$ spectrum on UBNT?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Josh Reynolds  wrote:

> They are designing for a lot of different mounting options, but they have
> to hit the ones that are the easiest sells out the gate.
>
> Stay tuned.
>
> On Nov 18, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>> We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec
>> round for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have Trango
>> AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we wouldn't
>> be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.
>>
>> The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the feedhorn
>> swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec adapter plate,
>> especially in the case of the Trango dishes.
>>
>> So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs $400?
>> for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.
>>
>> This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for
>> waveguide, IMO.
>>
>> On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
>>
>> Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping
>> someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.�
>>
>> �
>>
>> Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any
>> antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.
>>
>> �
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> �
>>
>> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
>> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>
>> �
>>
>> Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
>> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
>> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 2:06:47 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>
>> So, what are we looking for?� SFP port?
>>
>> �
>>
>> I don�t see any REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapters in your
>> pictures!� 
>>
>> �
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> �
>>
>> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:02 PM
>> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>
>> �
>>
>> https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.9975557303
>> 69879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
>> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
>> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 10:09:25 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>
>> You'll need to order a new feed horn for your RadioWaves antenna. �I
>> don't
>> have the SKUs yet, but I'm hearing they might be shipping by end of the
>> month or early next. �They are basically a standard dual polarity N-Type
>> feed horn except the feed horn "kit" also comes with a UBNT specific
>> mounting bracket for the radio.
>>
>> I wish there was a REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapter available.
>> Sure would be easier than a feed horn swap...and likely less expensive
>> too.
>> I've got a call into Pasternack to see if such an adapter is even
>> feasible.
>> I'm thinking it is, but would depend on demand.
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> �
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
>> ] On Behalf
>> Of Keefe John
>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:59 AM
>> To: memb...@wispa.org
>> Subje

Re: [AFMUG] sunmax

[Kurt Fankhauser]

I just have them laying on the roof on some blocks with some wire running
out of the breaker box, never fully installed them, but it does look like
an easy install

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:41 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> is the "ease of install" what it claims?
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  > wrote:
>
>> I have it on the roof of the office. Works surprisingly well. I'm going
>> to put more up.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> anybody deployed any of this yet? is it ubntbuggy?
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[Josh Reynolds]

I know of a company that already has 8 links deployed that they replaced
existing radios with.

They built their own radio core. (Second time for UBNT, if you count
Invictus core and then this one... Not counting the ones they made before
UBNT.)

You underestimate them a lot. They're making more money across the board
and investing even more money in R&D and labor than they ever have. The
past few years they've made major internal changes, and things are just now
starting to bare fruit from those decisions.

They also have a huge cash reserve, and it wouldn't surprise me at all for
them to start making acquisitions if they choose to.

On Nov 18, 2016 9:50 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" 
wrote:

> this isnt my usual asshole distrust of UBNT, I know UBNT chuck is behind
> it, so its solid gear, but are people really ready to put their faith in
> the limited and $$$ spectrum on UBNT?
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Josh Reynolds 
> wrote:
>
>> They are designing for a lot of different mounting options, but they have
>> to hit the ones that are the easiest sells out the gate.
>>
>> Stay tuned.
>>
>> On Nov 18, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>>
>>> We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec
>>> round for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have Trango
>>> AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we wouldn't
>>> be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.
>>>
>>> The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the
>>> feedhorn swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec adapter
>>> plate, especially in the case of the Trango dishes.
>>>
>>> So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs $400?
>>> for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.
>>>
>>> This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for
>>> waveguide, IMO.
>>>
>>> On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
>>>
>>> Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping
>>> someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.�
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any
>>> antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
>>> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
>>> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Brothers WISP 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
>>> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
>>> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 2:06:47 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>>
>>> So, what are we looking for?� SFP port?
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> I don�t see any REMEC round to dual polarity N-Type adapters in your
>>> pictures!� 
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
>>> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
>>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:02 PM
>>> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/photos/a.9975557303
>>> 69879.1073741834.186874744771319/997557797036339/?type=3&theater
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Brothers WISP 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Brad Belton" 
>>> *To: *memb...@wispa.org
>>> *Sent: *Friday, November 18, 2016 10:09:25 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>>>
>>> You'll need to order a new feed ho

Re: [AFMUG] sunmax

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

Im central illinois, not prime solar grounds, but Im looking at a quick,
cheap(ish) easy entry into secondary power at our sites, mostly brain
elevators or legs on farmground where we have an easy footprint, would you
say cost/output/simplicity, this is worth toying with over a mutlivendor
solution?

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
wrote:

> I just have them laying on the roof on some blocks with some wire running
> out of the breaker box, never fully installed them, but it does look like
> an easy install
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:41 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> is the "ease of install" what it claims?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <
>> lists.wavel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have it on the roof of the office. Works surprisingly well. I'm going
>>> to put more up.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:15 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 anybody deployed any of this yet? is it ubntbuggy?

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

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


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

Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[Mathew Howard]

Depending what kind of power supplies they are, they might have some decent
scrap value... or so I've been told.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> i got some 5.4
> some 2.4
> and a shit ton of 900
> I say the illinois guys get together with some shotguns
> for real kicks, I even have some alvarion VL, somebody might need to bring
> a .50 for those
> but seriously, I have like 300 12v 4a power supplies, whats a guy to do
> with those
> im down for shooting them too
> I drink to much to be part of the shooting, so I usually just toss the
> stuff in the air for the rednecks
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  > wrote:
>
>> Why doesn't anyone want the 5.4 FSK radios?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>>> I think the only ones worth the shipping cost, judging from past posts,
>>> are the 5.2 ones.  Hmmm, you think maybe because they are pre-DFS?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
>>> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 6:40 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like
>>> $10/board. We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a
>>> little more for P10 and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul said
>>> he has hundreds.
>>>
>>> On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:
>>>
>>> We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100
>>> platform we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even if
>>> its going to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste of our
>>> time to climb up and mount this stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down
>>> and won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).
>>> I'll be gathering more (probably double that) in the coming months out
>>> towards the spring.  There will also be somewhere in the realm of 120
>>> 900mhz PMP100 SMs before the new year.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy
>>> train? =D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support*
>>>
>>> *Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
>>> Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109
>>> <1.866.759.4678%20x109> | Fax: 1.866.852.4688 <1.866.852.4688>*
>>>
>>> *Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 <1.866.759.9713> | **sam...@plexicomm.net
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

We got on board with airfiber 24 day 1. but under 1 mile shots, there were
some ... hurdles, down to power supplies (i mean seriously, how do you mess
up power supplies?!?!) the radios however havent been replaced.
the links we have put 11ghz in, we chose the company we chose after a full
year of checking and poking, and in that year spent probably close to the
cost of the links dealing with 5ghz issues. The only time we deal with
these links now is when the sales guys bother us about renewing 24 hour
replacement.
Google has a shit ton of cash to make acquisitions, UBNT was going to
acquire a nobody NFL team, buying stuff doesnt make me trust a company.
Feeding my kids, theyre hungry little bastards, always wanting to be fed,
clothed, school, when it rains they think they should be dry, when its
snowing, the little jerks think they should be warm, and an occasional beef
roast, cut thin, and served as a steak. My boss lets me have that stuff for
those self centered little hooligans because I occasionally make good
choices, historically, UBNT products havent been what one would consider a
"good enough to thin slice a roast into a steak for your bastard kids"
product. But Chuck M always throws wrenches in stuff, well, cause he is
Motorola. but when we have to throw the FCC all that dough and another 1k
each time we want to change it
is it good enough to lie to my kids and tell them that thin sliced roast is
a steak?


On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Josh Reynolds 
wrote:

> I know of a company that already has 8 links deployed that they replaced
> existing radios with.
>
> They built their own radio core. (Second time for UBNT, if you count
> Invictus core and then this one... Not counting the ones they made before
> UBNT.)
>
> You underestimate them a lot. They're making more money across the board
> and investing even more money in R&D and labor than they ever have. The
> past few years they've made major internal changes, and things are just now
> starting to bare fruit from those decisions.
>
> They also have a huge cash reserve, and it wouldn't surprise me at all for
> them to start making acquisitions if they choose to.
>
> On Nov 18, 2016 9:50 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> this isnt my usual asshole distrust of UBNT, I know UBNT chuck is behind
>> it, so its solid gear, but are people really ready to put their faith in
>> the limited and $$$ spectrum on UBNT?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Josh Reynolds 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> They are designing for a lot of different mounting options, but they
>>> have to hit the ones that are the easiest sells out the gate.
>>>
>>> Stay tuned.
>>>
>>> On Nov 18, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>>>
 We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec
 round for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have Trango
 AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we wouldn't
 be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.

 The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the
 feedhorn swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec adapter
 plate, especially in the case of the Trango dishes.

 So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs
 $400? for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.

 This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for
 waveguide, IMO.

 On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:

 Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping
 someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.�

 �

 Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any
 antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.

 �

 Brad

 �

 *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
 ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
 *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
 *To:* memb...@wispa.org
 *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

 �

 Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.



 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 
 
 Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 
 
 The Brothers WISP 
 
 
 --

 *From: *"Brad Belton" 
 *To: *memb...@wispa.

Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

btw, im afraid of my daughter

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:04 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We got on board with airfiber 24 day 1. but under 1 mile shots, there were
> some ... hurdles, down to power supplies (i mean seriously, how do you mess
> up power supplies?!?!) the radios however havent been replaced.
> the links we have put 11ghz in, we chose the company we chose after a full
> year of checking and poking, and in that year spent probably close to the
> cost of the links dealing with 5ghz issues. The only time we deal with
> these links now is when the sales guys bother us about renewing 24 hour
> replacement.
> Google has a shit ton of cash to make acquisitions, UBNT was going to
> acquire a nobody NFL team, buying stuff doesnt make me trust a company.
> Feeding my kids, theyre hungry little bastards, always wanting to be fed,
> clothed, school, when it rains they think they should be dry, when its
> snowing, the little jerks think they should be warm, and an occasional beef
> roast, cut thin, and served as a steak. My boss lets me have that stuff for
> those self centered little hooligans because I occasionally make good
> choices, historically, UBNT products havent been what one would consider a
> "good enough to thin slice a roast into a steak for your bastard kids"
> product. But Chuck M always throws wrenches in stuff, well, cause he is
> Motorola. but when we have to throw the FCC all that dough and another 1k
> each time we want to change it
> is it good enough to lie to my kids and tell them that thin sliced roast
> is a steak?
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Josh Reynolds 
> wrote:
>
>> I know of a company that already has 8 links deployed that they replaced
>> existing radios with.
>>
>> They built their own radio core. (Second time for UBNT, if you count
>> Invictus core and then this one... Not counting the ones they made before
>> UBNT.)
>>
>> You underestimate them a lot. They're making more money across the board
>> and investing even more money in R&D and labor than they ever have. The
>> past few years they've made major internal changes, and things are just now
>> starting to bare fruit from those decisions.
>>
>> They also have a huge cash reserve, and it wouldn't surprise me at all
>> for them to start making acquisitions if they choose to.
>>
>> On Nov 18, 2016 9:50 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> this isnt my usual asshole distrust of UBNT, I know UBNT chuck is behind
>>> it, so its solid gear, but are people really ready to put their faith in
>>> the limited and $$$ spectrum on UBNT?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Josh Reynolds 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 They are designing for a lot of different mounting options, but they
 have to hit the ones that are the easiest sells out the gate.

 Stay tuned.

 On Nov 18, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

> We have RadioWaves HP2 and HP3s' in a couple flavors. HPx-11R, Remec
> round for Trango ApexPlus and HPx-11EX, for Exalt G2. Then we have Trango
> AD11G2-S2's and 3-S2's for ApexPlus, Remec round. So obviously we wouldn't
> be able to do the feedhorn swap on those.
>
> The RadioWaves 11EX are single-pol only, so those would need the
> feedhorn swapped. But the 11R is where it makes sense for the Remec 
> adapter
> plate, especially in the case of the Trango dishes.
>
> So for me it would come down to $250-300? for the adapter plate vs
> $400? for a new RW feedhorn vs $1k for a whole new dish.
>
> This would probably be half as difficult if UBNT would've designed for
> waveguide, IMO.
>
> On 11/18/2016 2:13 PM, Brad Belton wrote:
>
> Right, I see the RadioWaves DP N-Type feed, but we�re looking/hoping
> someone comes out with a REMEC round to DP N-Type adapter.�
>
> �
>
> Quicker, cheaper than replacing the feed horn and could be used on any
> antenna with a REMEC round feed horn�not just a RadioWaves antenna.
>
> �
>
> Brad
>
> �
>
> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 2:08 PM
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA Members] Who will have AF-11X First?
>
> �
>
> Non-UBNT licensed dish to N connectors and radio mount.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

these are the old alvarion breeze access II power supplies, built in
isreal, I assume by scrapping dead Israeli fighters gold fillings and
russian tanks

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Mathew Howard 
wrote:

> Depending what kind of power supplies they are, they might have some
> decent scrap value... or so I've been told.
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:47 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i got some 5.4
>> some 2.4
>> and a shit ton of 900
>> I say the illinois guys get together with some shotguns
>> for real kicks, I even have some alvarion VL, somebody might need to
>> bring a .50 for those
>> but seriously, I have like 300 12v 4a power supplies, whats a guy to do
>> with those
>> im down for shooting them too
>> I drink to much to be part of the shooting, so I usually just toss the
>> stuff in the air for the rednecks
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <
>> lists.wavel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why doesn't anyone want the 5.4 FSK radios?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>>
 I think the only ones worth the shipping cost, judging from past posts,
 are the 5.2 ones.  Hmmm, you think maybe because they are pre-DFS?



 *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup
 *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2016 6:40 PM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Any worth in trying to sell 5.7 PMP100s?



 I think the last offer that was made to us for 900 FSK SMs was like
 $10/board. We're sitting on probably more than 100 right now. Maybe a
 little more for P10 and P11 5.7's. Nobody wants 5.4 FSK. I think Paul said
 he has hundreds.

 On 11/18/2016 4:37 PM, Sam Kirsch wrote:

 We just made the decision that redeploying anything on the PMP100
 platform we've been pulling down with 450 deployments is a waste, even if
 its going to more rural areas, unproven markets, etc... its a waste of our
 time to climb up and mount this stuff.



 I have somewhere in the realm of 70 SMs that we've already taken down
 and won't be redeploying, they're P9s - P11s (I have tons of P8s too).
 I'll be gathering more (probably double that) in the coming months out
 towards the spring.  There will also be somewhere in the realm of 120
 900mhz PMP100 SMs before the new year.



 Is anyone still buying these up or have we missed the used merch gravy
 train? =D





 Regards,





 *-- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support*

 *Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
 Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109
 <1.866.759.4678%20x109> | Fax: 1.866.852.4688 <1.866.852.4688>*

 *Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 <1.866.759.9713> | 
 **sam...@plexicomm.net
 *





>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.