Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Brett A Mansfield]

Eventually, yes. 

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 8:13 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
> 
> Also, they are supposed to eventually support up to 32 clients. 
> 
>> On Sep 11, 2017 8:49 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>> I don't think anyone has a higher CPE limit in 60 GHz.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: "Brett A Mansfield" 
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 7:31:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>> 
>> True, until you realize you can only put 8 or 16 customers on an AP. Their 
>> pricing isn’t terrible, and I’m going to be buying at least some Ignitenet 
>> for this project. I was just hoping for some less expensive stuff I can use 
>> for customers on the lower plans.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>> 
>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>> 
>> It's certainly more expensive than most of us are used to with PTMP, but 
>> it's not really that bad... if you consider the cost of the APs, compared to 
>> something like PMP450 or LTE, it doesn't start to look so bad.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Brett A Mansfield 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality 
>>> wise when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> 
>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than 
>>> everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th 
>>> of that.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> 
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> 
>>> The Brothers WISP
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: "Brett A Mansfield" 
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>>> 
>>> I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
>>> Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive 
>>> without deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 
>>> 5-6 years. The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with 
>>> wireless, as well as less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t 
>>> have to replace as many electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh 
>>> when I say Ignitenet is cost prohibitive. 
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> 
>>> > On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
>>> > 
>>> > Chris Wright
>>> > Network Administrator
>>> > 
>>> > -Original Message-
>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
>>> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
>>> > To: af@afmug.com
>>> > Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>>> > 
>>> > Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for 
>>> > some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
>>> > prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
>>> > need a couple hundred radios. 
>>> > 
>>> > Thank you,
>>> > Brett A Mansfield
>>> > 
>>> 
>> 
>> 

af@afmug.com

[Mike Hammett]

If you could ask Cambium a question on their Elevate process or their roadmap, 
what would it be? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mathew Howard]

Also, they are supposed to eventually support up to 32 clients.

On Sep 11, 2017 8:49 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> I don't think anyone has a higher CPE limit in 60 GHz.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Brett A Mansfield" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, September 11, 2017 7:31:25 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>
> True, until you realize you can only put 8 or 16 customers on an AP. Their
> pricing isn’t terrible, and I’m going to be buying at least some Ignitenet
> for this project. I was just hoping for some less expensive stuff I can use
> for customers on the lower plans.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>
> It's certainly more expensive than most of us are used to with PTMP, but
> it's not really that bad... if you consider the cost of the APs, compared
> to something like PMP450 or LTE, it doesn't start to look so bad.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> li...@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality
>> wise when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>> Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than
>> everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th
>> of that.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Brett A Mansfield" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>>
>> I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than
>> the Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive
>> without deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s
>> 5-6 years. The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with
>> wireless, as well as less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t
>> have to replace as many electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh
>> when I say Ignitenet is cost prohibitive.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>>
>> > On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
>> >
>> > Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
>> >
>> > Chris Wright
>> > Network Administrator
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On
>> Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
>> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>> >
>> > Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking
>> for some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost
>> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I
>> need a couple hundred radios.
>> >
>> > Thank you,
>> > Brett A Mansfield
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mike Hammett]

I don't think anyone has a higher CPE limit in 60 GHz. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Brett A Mansfield"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 7:31:25 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz 

True, until you realize you can only put 8 or 16 customers on an AP. Their 
pricing isn’t terrible, and I’m going to be buying at least some Ignitenet for 
this project. I was just hoping for some less expensive stuff I can use for 
customers on the lower plans. 


Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 

On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 





It's certainly more expensive than most of us are used to with PTMP, but it's 
not really that bad... if you consider the cost of the APs, compared to 
something like PMP450 or LTE, it doesn't start to look so bad. 



On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Brett A Mansfield < 
li...@silverlakeinternet.com > wrote: 



Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality wise 
when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think. 


Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 



On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 





Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than 
everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th of 
that. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Brett A Mansfield" < li...@silverlakeinternet.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz 

I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive without 
deep pockets. A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 5-6 years. 
The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with wireless, as well as 
less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t have to replace as many 
electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh when I say Ignitenet is 
cost prohibitive. 

Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright < ch...@velociter.net > wrote: 
> 
> Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL 
> 
> Chris Wright 
> Network Administrator 
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield 
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM 
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz 
> 
> Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
> good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
> need a couple hundred radios. 
> 
> Thank you, 
> Brett A Mansfield 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Brett A Mansfield]

True, until you realize you can only put 8 or 16 customers on an AP. Their 
pricing isn’t terrible, and I’m going to be buying at least some Ignitenet for 
this project. I was just hoping for some less expensive stuff I can use for 
customers on the lower plans.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
> 
> It's certainly more expensive than most of us are used to with PTMP, but it's 
> not really that bad... if you consider the cost of the APs, compared to 
> something like PMP450 or LTE, it doesn't start to look so bad.
> 
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Brett A Mansfield 
>>  wrote:
>> Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality 
>> wise when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>> 
>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than 
>>> everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th 
>>> of that.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> 
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> 
>>> The Brothers WISP
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: "Brett A Mansfield" 
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>>> 
>>> I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
>>> Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive 
>>> without deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 
>>> 5-6 years. The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with 
>>> wireless, as well as less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t 
>>> have to replace as many electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh 
>>> when I say Ignitenet is cost prohibitive. 
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> 
>>> > On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
>>> > 
>>> > Chris Wright
>>> > Network Administrator
>>> > 
>>> > -Original Message-
>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
>>> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
>>> > To: af@afmug.com
>>> > Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>>> > 
>>> > Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for 
>>> > some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
>>> > prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
>>> > need a couple hundred radios. 
>>> > 
>>> > Thank you,
>>> > Brett A Mansfield
>>> > 
>>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Chris Wright]

Because IgniteNet is cheaper than anyone else out there. The only reason we all 
know their name is because their 60GHz radios deliver gigabit speeds for at 
least tenth of the cost of anyone else in the game. Why do you mention fiber?

Chris Wright
Network Administrator


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive without 
deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 5-6 years. 
The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with wireless, as well as 
less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t have to replace as many 
electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh when I say Ignitenet is 
cost prohibitive. 

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
> 
> Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
> 
> Chris Wright
> Network Administrator
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
> 
> Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
> good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
> need a couple hundred radios. 
> 
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mathew Howard]

It's certainly more expensive than most of us are used to with PTMP, but
it's not really that bad... if you consider the cost of the APs, compared
to something like PMP450 or LTE, it doesn't start to look so bad.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
li...@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:

> Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality
> wise when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than
> everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th
> of that.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Brett A Mansfield" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
>
> I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the
> Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive
> without deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s
> 5-6 years. The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with
> wireless, as well as less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t
> have to replace as many electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh
> when I say Ignitenet is cost prohibitive.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
> > On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
> >
> > Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
> >
> > Chris Wright
> > Network Administrator
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf
> Of Brett A Mansfield
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
> >
> > Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for
> some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I
> need a couple hundred radios.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Brett A Mansfield
> >
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mathew Howard]

It will be interesting to see what Mikrotik comes out with... but I notice
that FCC application lists it as only going up to 62.64ghz - that's going
to limit it's range compared to Ignitenet.



On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/posts/1297938056998310
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Brett A Mansfield" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Monday, September 11, 2017 5:24:23 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] 60GHz
>
> Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for
> some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I
> need a couple hundred radios.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Brett A Mansfield]

Yeah, that makes sense. I think Ignitenet is excellent price and quality wise 
when talking PTP. It’s PTMP that it is cost prohibitive I think.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> 
> Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than 
> everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th of 
> that.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> 
> The Brothers WISP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: "Brett A Mansfield" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
> 
> I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
> Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive 
> without deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 
> 5-6 years. The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with wireless, 
> as well as less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t have to 
> replace as many electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh when I 
> say Ignitenet is cost prohibitive. 
> 
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
> 
> > On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
> > 
> > Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
> > 
> > Chris Wright
> > Network Administrator
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
> > 
> > Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for 
> > some good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
> > prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
> > need a couple hundred radios. 
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > Brett A Mansfield
> > 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mike Hammett]

Because IgniteNet is way cheaper than Siklu, which is way cheaper than 
everything else. There's links going for over $10k and IgniteNet is 1/10th of 
that. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Brett A Mansfield"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:55:42 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz 

I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive without 
deep pockets. A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 5-6 years. 
The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with wireless, as well as 
less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t have to replace as many 
electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh when I say Ignitenet is 
cost prohibitive. 

Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote: 
> 
> Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL 
> 
> Chris Wright 
> Network Administrator 
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield 
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM 
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz 
> 
> Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
> good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
> need a couple hundred radios. 
> 
> Thank you, 
> Brett A Mansfield 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Mike Hammett]

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/posts/1297938056998310 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Brett A Mansfield"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:24:23 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz 

Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost prohibitive. 
I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I need a couple 
hundred radios. 

Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Brett A Mansfield]

I’m not sure why that is funny. The average CPE cost is much less than the 
Ignitenet radios. I’m not running fiber, which is also cost prohibitive without 
deep pockets.  A good ROI for a WISP is 6-12 months. For fiber it’s 5-6 years. 
The reason being you’ll get many more service calls with wireless, as well as 
less consistent speeds. Fiber is solid and you don’t have to replace as many 
electronics as often. So I’m not sure why you laugh when I say Ignitenet is 
cost prohibitive. 

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

> On Sep 11, 2017, at 4:25 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
> 
> Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL
> 
> Chris Wright
> Network Administrator
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz
> 
> Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
> good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost 
> prohibitive. I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I 
> need a couple hundred radios. 
> 
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz

[Chris Wright]

Ignitenet is cost prohibitive? LOL

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 3:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 60GHz

Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost prohibitive. 
I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I need a couple 
hundred radios. 

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

[AFMUG] 60GHz

[Brett A Mansfield]

Anyone know anything about the Mikrotik 60GHz stuff yet? I’m looking for some 
good gear and I use some Ignitenet. Ignitenet is great but so cost prohibitive. 
I’m hoping Mikrotik will have theirs released very soon as I need a couple 
hundred radios. 

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[Bill Prince]

I thought Trellium was an ore found in "the Expanse" in Star trek 
Enterprise. They used it for shielding against the spatial anomalies.



bp


On 9/10/2017 7:33 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.� 
Unfortunately a heart attack got him several years ago.

The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe.

- Original Message -
*From:* Rory Conaway 
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Sent:* Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM
*Subject:* [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.� There
were allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and
that they were supposed to bring in matching funds that never
materialized.� Just wanted to confirm that.

*Rory Conaway **� Triad Wireless �**CEO*

*4226 S. 37^th Street � Phoenix � AZ 85040*

*602-426-0542*

*r...@triadwireless.net *

*www.triadwireless.net *

**

/�A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz.�/� Humphrey
Bogart

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

I remember reading about all of that when it happened.  Some of the people who 
tried to put it together reorganized under a non-profit run by local church 
leaders - but from what I know - they got no where.  Fiber is not cheap... :(

  - Original Message - 
  From: Rory Conaway 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 2:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


  That’s the company.  Here is the announcement when they got their funding.

   

  
http://www.trillionusa.com/2010/09/15/trillion-communications-receives-59-million-broadband-grant-alabama/

  here is when it got axed.

   

  http://www.selmatimesjournal.com/2012/10/04/massive-broadband-project-axed/

  Just wondered if they were able to get reinstatement.

  Rory






   

  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
  Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:29 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

   

   

  must be a different company - this was trillion

   

  https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/stories/1999/09/06/smallb1.html

   

   

- Original Message - 

From: Jaime Solorza 

To: Animal Farm 

Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:58 AM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

 

Friend of mine from Austin worked for them for several years.. they used 
Nera (sic) licensed gear for point to point. I thought it was spelled Trillium?

 

On Sep 11, 2017 9:46 AM, "Hardy, Tim"  wrote:

The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

 

 

I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.  
Unfortunately a heart attack got him several years ago.

The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe. 

 

  - Original Message - 

  From: Rory Conaway 

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM

  Subject: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

   

  Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were 
allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were 
supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted to 
confirm that.

   

  Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

  4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

  602-426-0542

  r...@triadwireless.net

  www.triadwireless.net

   

  “A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz.” — Humphrey Bogart

   

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[Rory Conaway]

That’s the company.  Here is the announcement when they got their funding.

http://www.trillionusa.com/2010/09/15/trillion-communications-receives-59-million-broadband-grant-alabama/

here is when it got axed.

http://www.selmatimesjournal.com/2012/10/04/massive-broadband-project-axed/

Just wondered if they were able to get reinstatement.

Rory





From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:29 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


must be a different company - this was trillion

https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/stories/1999/09/06/smallb1.html


- Original Message -
From: Jaime Solorza
To: Animal Farm
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

Friend of mine from Austin worked for them for several years.. they used Nera 
(sic) licensed gear for point to point. I thought it was spelled Trillium?

On Sep 11, 2017 9:46 AM, "Hardy, Tim" 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.  Unfortunately 
a heart attack got him several years ago.
The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe.

- Original Message -
From: Rory Conaway
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were 
allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were 
supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted to 
confirm that.

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO
4226 S. 37th Street 
• Phoenix • AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

“A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz.” — Humphrey Bogart

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[George Skorup]

Pretty sure that's why this is out of stock: 
http://store.packetflux.com/sitemonitor-gigabit-poe-injector-for-airfiber/


And this is the same price: 
http://store.packetflux.com/sitemonitor-single-port-gigabit-poe-injector/


Like Forrest said, it's a single-port PowerInjector w/o sync. Open it up 
to change jumpers for 2-pair or 4-pair GigE injection.


Something that myself, Adam and maybe a couple others have asked for is 
a -48 version of something. I'd prefer the 5ch PDU. Trango's and a 
handful of other licensed radios are under 2A. Then there's stuff like 
Telrad eNBs at 100+ watts. Maybe you could run 3 or 4 of those on a PDU.


On 9/11/2017 2:22 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Or notes in the gigE powerinjector that says it works with
*this radio
*that radio
*the next radio


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

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Mathew Howard > wrote:


You might want to consider renaming it or something, because it
does tend to give the impression that you need something special
for an airFiber.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account)
mailto:li...@packetflux.com>> wrote:

You're close.   The AirFiber came out because I expected it to
need more power than the 4 or 8 port port poe could handle.

Nowadays it's just a single port version of the gige
powerinjector, complete with internal jumpers, minus the sync.



On Sep 11, 2017 11:41 AM, "George Skorup"
mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>>
wrote:

I want to say the single-port AF injector came out before
Forrest had the 4/8-port GigE injectors done. Or maybe
even before they were designed. And that's simply because
of the GigE + 4-pair injection scheme. That was one of the
few radios at the time that required 4 pairs because of
the power consumption.

Forrest said the newer relays he's using on the GigE
4/8-port injectors will handle the current fine. The older
orange Omron relays not so much. I've burned up quite a
few of them over the years. Luckily they're not too
difficult to replace.

I'd just use a GigE PowerInjector+Sync these days. You get
2A per port using 4-pair injection. Plus solid-state
over-current protection. Or the 5ch PDU and GigE-POE-APCs.
There are many good options now. The RackInjector is gonna
be awesome. And I hope to see the 12-port
PowerInjector+Sync later for the smaller cabinets. Fuses
and wiring drives me nuts.


On 9/11/2017 12:08 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.


-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>>
To: "af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE


If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think
the reason for the special one was because the airFiber
24 draws so much power, but if I remember right, it was
determined later on that the normal injectors would
handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on
one at one point). It certainly wouldn't be an issue
with anything other than the 24ghz airfbers anyhow,
since the others all use a lot less power.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE
device for Packetflux. Will AirFiber not work with
the 4 port gigE POE adapter?

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Josh Luthman]

Or notes in the gigE powerinjector that says it works with
*this radio
*that radio
*the next radio


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

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> You might want to consider renaming it or something, because it does tend
> to give the impression that you need something special for an airFiber.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> You're close.   The AirFiber came out because I expected it to need more
>> power than the 4 or 8 port port poe could handle.
>>
>> Nowadays it's just a single port version of the gige powerinjector,
>> complete with internal jumpers, minus the sync.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2017 11:41 AM, "George Skorup" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I want to say the single-port AF injector came out before Forrest had the
>> 4/8-port GigE injectors done. Or maybe even before they were designed. And
>> that's simply because of the GigE + 4-pair injection scheme. That was one
>> of the few radios at the time that required 4 pairs because of the power
>> consumption.
>>
>> Forrest said the newer relays he's using on the GigE 4/8-port injectors
>> will handle the current fine. The older orange Omron relays not so much.
>> I've burned up quite a few of them over the years. Luckily they're not too
>> difficult to replace.
>>
>> I'd just use a GigE PowerInjector+Sync these days. You get 2A per port
>> using 4-pair injection. Plus solid-state over-current protection. Or the
>> 5ch PDU and GigE-POE-APCs. There are many good options now. The
>> RackInjector is gonna be awesome. And I hope to see the 12-port
>> PowerInjector+Sync later for the smaller cabinets. Fuses and wiring drives
>> me nuts.
>>
>>
>> On 9/11/2017 12:08 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>>
>> It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.
>>
>>
>> -- Original Message --
>> From: "Mathew Howard" 
>> To: "af" 
>> Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE
>>
>> If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason for
>> the special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, but if I
>> remember right, it was determined later on that the normal injectors would
>> handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on one at one point).
>> It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything other than the 24ghz
>> airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot less power.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for
>>> Packetflux.  Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Mathew Howard]

You might want to consider renaming it or something, because it does tend
to give the impression that you need something special for an airFiber.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> You're close.   The AirFiber came out because I expected it to need more
> power than the 4 or 8 port port poe could handle.
>
> Nowadays it's just a single port version of the gige powerinjector,
> complete with internal jumpers, minus the sync.
>
>
>
> On Sep 11, 2017 11:41 AM, "George Skorup" 
> wrote:
>
> I want to say the single-port AF injector came out before Forrest had the
> 4/8-port GigE injectors done. Or maybe even before they were designed. And
> that's simply because of the GigE + 4-pair injection scheme. That was one
> of the few radios at the time that required 4 pairs because of the power
> consumption.
>
> Forrest said the newer relays he's using on the GigE 4/8-port injectors
> will handle the current fine. The older orange Omron relays not so much.
> I've burned up quite a few of them over the years. Luckily they're not too
> difficult to replace.
>
> I'd just use a GigE PowerInjector+Sync these days. You get 2A per port
> using 4-pair injection. Plus solid-state over-current protection. Or the
> 5ch PDU and GigE-POE-APCs. There are many good options now. The
> RackInjector is gonna be awesome. And I hope to see the 12-port
> PowerInjector+Sync later for the smaller cabinets. Fuses and wiring drives
> me nuts.
>
>
> On 9/11/2017 12:08 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>
> It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mathew Howard" 
> To: "af" 
> Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE
>
> If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason for the
> special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, but if I
> remember right, it was determined later on that the normal injectors would
> handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on one at one point).
> It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything other than the 24ghz
> airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot less power.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for Packetflux.
>> Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?
>>
>>
>
>
>

[AFMUG] Fw: [Cambium-users] We need 450 SM's in the Virgin Islands

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

FYI


- Original Message - 
From: Mike Meluskey 
To: cambium-us...@wispa.org 
Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 9:01 AM
Subject: [Cambium-users] We need 450 SM's in the Virgin Islands


450b's preferred. ROW will work. 
Aaron at Winncom is trying. Can you assist?
Drop ship 200-500 to St. Croix from factory?
We will pay, not asking for a donation. 450m's survived the storm at first STT 
tower we lit up. 
Thanks 
Mike Meluskey 
Broadband VI
340-643-1588

Sent from my iPhone
___
Cambium-users mailing list
cambium-us...@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/cambium-users

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

You're close.   The AirFiber came out because I expected it to need more
power than the 4 or 8 port port poe could handle.

Nowadays it's just a single port version of the gige powerinjector,
complete with internal jumpers, minus the sync.



On Sep 11, 2017 11:41 AM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

I want to say the single-port AF injector came out before Forrest had the
4/8-port GigE injectors done. Or maybe even before they were designed. And
that's simply because of the GigE + 4-pair injection scheme. That was one
of the few radios at the time that required 4 pairs because of the power
consumption.

Forrest said the newer relays he's using on the GigE 4/8-port injectors
will handle the current fine. The older orange Omron relays not so much.
I've burned up quite a few of them over the years. Luckily they're not too
difficult to replace.

I'd just use a GigE PowerInjector+Sync these days. You get 2A per port
using 4-pair injection. Plus solid-state over-current protection. Or the
5ch PDU and GigE-POE-APCs. There are many good options now. The
RackInjector is gonna be awesome. And I hope to see the 12-port
PowerInjector+Sync later for the smaller cabinets. Fuses and wiring drives
me nuts.


On 9/11/2017 12:08 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.


-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason for the
special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, but if I
remember right, it was determined later on that the normal injectors would
handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on one at one point).
It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything other than the 24ghz
airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot less power.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for Packetflux.
> Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

must be a different company - this was trillion

https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/stories/1999/09/06/smallb1.html


  - Original Message - 
  From: Jaime Solorza 
  To: Animal Farm 
  Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:58 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


  Friend of mine from Austin worked for them for several years.. they used Nera 
(sic) licensed gear for point to point. I thought it was spelled Trillium?


  On Sep 11, 2017 9:46 AM, "Hardy, Tim"  wrote:

The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama





I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.  
Unfortunately a heart attack got him several years ago.

The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe. 



  - Original Message - 

  From: Rory Conaway 

  To: af@afmug.com 

  Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM

  Subject: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama



  Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were 
allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were 
supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted to 
confirm that.



  Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

  4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

  602-426-0542

  r...@triadwireless.net

  www.triadwireless.net



  “A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz.” — Humphrey Bogart

Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat

[George Skorup]

http://batswireless.com. Same stuff as Cambium's QDP.

On 9/11/2017 12:51 PM, Christopher Gray wrote:

I saw a nice automatic aiming mount made by Winegard:
http://www.winegard.com/wireless?q=enterprise

Never checked on the price, but it sure looks expensive.


On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Rory Conaway > wrote:


Mesh vendors aside,

Peplink used to make a device specifically for this application
you run on a mobile device.  It has dual radios, one to connect,
one to look ahead and connect to the next AP, no drop off off
connection.  Unfortunately, they are discontinued.

What you can do though, is use a Peplink router with 2-3 WAN
connections, put up 3 wireless omni antennas on the boat, each one
assigned to a different SSID on shore.  Use a Peplink on shore and
create a VPN tunnel across all 3 links.  The Peplink will
automatically load-balance each of the 3 connections as they drop
on/off.

Not a cheap solution but it works.  If 30Mbps is sufficient, the
routers start at around $400, you would need 2.

Rory


*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett
*Sent:* Saturday, September 9, 2017 7:53 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 


*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat

I don't think any of the WISP priced Wimax or LTE stuff has decent
roaming capability.  At least not the ones I have worked with.

Technically a mobile device on an NN license is supposed to be
limited to +2db Tx power. I doubt any enforcement happens with NN,
but I'm just throwing it out there.

-- Original Message --

From: "Lewis Bergman" mailto:lewis.berg...@gmail.com>>

To: af@afmug.com 

Sent: 9/7/2017 11:50:45 AM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat

Putting aside the sub question and RF for the moment, I would
suggest creating a separate subnet shared across all three
routers joined by EOIP for just this specific case. If the 3
routers share an upstream this might be the best place for the
gateway for the subnet. This *should* let you roam across them
at least without completely losing the stream. There is still
rereg time. Of course, mobile protocols have this sort of
thing built in so WiMAX, as much as I dislike it, and LTE both
make allowances for this to different degrees. You will have
to hope the rereg time doesn't exceed the buffer.

The SM's flipping back and forth would be a big killer I would
think. Boat hits waves, starts to rock, SM's start to flip
back an forth between AP's. Sounds like something I want my
competition to support instead of me. That is of course,
unless there is just to much money at stake to resist.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:08 AM Craig House
mailto:cr...@totalhighspeed.net>>
wrote:

Stupid voice to text it should've said turn the Omni
upside down. ??

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 10:08, Craig House
mailto:cr...@totalhighspeed.net>> wrote:
>
> Turning on the upside down. ??
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 09:58, Dave mailto:dmilho...@wletc.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Ok, either I am getting to old for these crazy
challenges or I am subjecting my self to motivation I have
not figured this one out yet LOL
> >
> > We have a large site seeing Boat that sits on one of
our lakes which navigates north and south of the lake and
some to the east.
> > We have 3 towers that can easily see a majority of the
lake. One tower can see most of the north end and the
other 2 can see south and east.
> >
> > So the challenge is to provide a content streaming
connection to this boat which moves slowly across the lake.
> > My answer first was use an omni on 3Ghz but the omni
has downtilt built in so thats a no go.
> > The plan B was to use a 4 cluster of integrated
subscribers to talk to the towers.
> > The next question would be if these subs are able to
move from one ap to the next.
> > How would you connect them to a router IE:RB493G to
provide a single seemless connection in the boat?
> >
> > Im open to anything at this point. Oh yeah there is a
Mobile hotspot for failover.
> >
> > I think I know the answer but wanted to see what
others would do.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dave
> >
> > --
  

Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat

[Christopher Gray]

I saw a nice automatic aiming mount made by Winegard:
http://www.winegard.com/wireless?q=enterprise

Never checked on the price, but it sure looks expensive.


On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Rory Conaway 
wrote:

> Mesh vendors aside,
>
> Peplink used to make a device specifically for this application you run on
> a mobile device.  It has dual radios, one to connect, one to look ahead and
> connect to the next AP, no drop off off connection.  Unfortunately, they
> are discontinued.
>
> What you can do though, is use a Peplink router with 2-3 WAN connections,
> put up 3 wireless omni antennas on the boat, each one assigned to a
> different SSID on shore.  Use a Peplink on shore and create a VPN tunnel
> across all 3 links.  The Peplink will automatically load-balance each of
> the 3 connections as they drop on/off.
>
> Not a cheap solution but it works.  If 30Mbps is sufficient, the routers
> start at around $400, you would need 2.
>
> Rory
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 9, 2017 7:53 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat
>
>
>
> I don't think any of the WISP priced Wimax or LTE stuff has decent roaming
> capability.  At least not the ones I have worked with.
>
>
>
> Technically a mobile device on an NN license is supposed to be limited to
> +2db Tx power.  I doubt any enforcement happens with NN, but I'm just
> throwing it out there.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Original Message --
>
> From: "Lewis Bergman" 
>
> To: af@afmug.com
>
> Sent: 9/7/2017 11:50:45 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Link to Large Boat
>
>
>
> Putting aside the sub question and RF for the moment, I would suggest
> creating a separate subnet shared across all three routers joined by EOIP
> for just this specific case. If the 3 routers share an upstream this might
> be the best place for the gateway for the subnet. This *should* let you
> roam across them at least without completely losing the stream. There is
> still rereg time. Of course, mobile protocols have this sort of thing built
> in so WiMAX, as much as I dislike it, and LTE both make allowances for this
> to different degrees. You will have to hope the rereg time doesn't exceed
> the buffer.
>
>
>
> The SM's flipping back and forth would be a big killer I would think. Boat
> hits waves, starts to rock, SM's start to flip back an forth between AP's.
> Sounds like something I want my competition to support instead of me. That
> is of course, unless there is just to much money at stake to resist.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:08 AM Craig House 
> wrote:
>
> Stupid voice to text it should've said turn the Omni upside down. ??
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 10:08, Craig House  wrote:
> >
> > Turning on the upside down. ??
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Sep 7, 2017, at 09:58, Dave  wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok, either I am getting to old for these crazy challenges or I am
> subjecting my self to motivation I have not figured this one out yet LOL
> > >
> > > We have a large site seeing Boat that sits on one of our lakes which
> navigates north and south of the lake and some to the east.
> > > We have 3 towers that can easily see a majority of the lake. One tower
> can see most of the north end and the other 2 can see south and east.
> > >
> > > So the challenge is to provide a content streaming connection to this
> boat which moves slowly across the lake.
> > > My answer first was use an omni on 3Ghz but the omni has downtilt
> built in so thats a no go.
> > > The plan B was to use a 4 cluster of integrated subscribers to talk to
> the towers.
> > > The next question would be if these subs are able to move from one ap
> to the next.
> > > How would you connect them to a router IE:RB493G to provide a single
> seemless connection in the boat?
> > >
> > > Im open to anything at this point. Oh yeah there is a Mobile hotspot
> for failover.
> > >
> > > I think I know the answer but wanted to see what others would do.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > --
> > > 
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[George Skorup]

I want to say the single-port AF injector came out before Forrest had 
the 4/8-port GigE injectors done. Or maybe even before they were 
designed. And that's simply because of the GigE + 4-pair injection 
scheme. That was one of the few radios at the time that required 4 pairs 
because of the power consumption.


Forrest said the newer relays he's using on the GigE 4/8-port injectors 
will handle the current fine. The older orange Omron relays not so much. 
I've burned up quite a few of them over the years. Luckily they're not 
too difficult to replace.


I'd just use a GigE PowerInjector+Sync these days. You get 2A per port 
using 4-pair injection. Plus solid-state over-current protection. Or the 
5ch PDU and GigE-POE-APCs. There are many good options now. The 
RackInjector is gonna be awesome. And I hope to see the 12-port 
PowerInjector+Sync later for the smaller cabinets. Fuses and wiring 
drives me nuts.


On 9/11/2017 12:08 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.


-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>>
To: "af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason 
for the special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, 
but if I remember right, it was determined later on that the normal 
injectors would handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running 
on one at one point). It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything 
other than the 24ghz airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot 
less power.


On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for
Packetflux.  Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE
adapter?

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Adam Moffett]

It so happens an AF24 is exactly what I'm looking at.


-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: 9/11/2017 12:56:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason for 
the special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, but if 
I remember right, it was determined later on that the normal injectors 
would handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on one at 
one point). It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything other than 
the 24ghz airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot less power.


On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett  
wrote:
I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for 
Packetflux.  Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[Jaime Solorza]

Friend of mine from Austin worked for them for several years.. they used
Nera (sic) licensed gear for point to point. I thought it was spelled
Trillium?

On Sep 11, 2017 9:46 AM, "Hardy, Tim"  wrote:

> The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *CBB - Jay Fuller
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama
>
>
>
>
>
> I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.
> Unfortunately a heart attack got him several years ago.
>
> The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe.
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> *From:* Rory Conaway 
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM
>
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama
>
>
>
> Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were
> allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were
> supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted
> to confirm that.
>
>
>
> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37 th
> Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>
> *602-426-0542 <(602)%20426-0542>*
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>
> *www.triadwireless.net *
>
>
>
> *“A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz.”* — Humphrey Bogart
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Mathew Howard]

If I remember correctly, the 4 port works fine. I think the reason for the
special one was because the airFiber 24 draws so much power, but if I
remember right, it was determined later on that the normal injectors would
handle it fine (and I'm pretty sure I had one running on one at one point).
It certainly wouldn't be an issue with anything other than the 24ghz
airfbers anyhow, since the others all use a lot less power.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for Packetflux.
> Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?
>
>

[AFMUG] Packetflux Airfiber POE

[Adam Moffett]

I'm wondering why there is a special AirFiber POE device for Packetflux. 
 Will AirFiber not work with the 4 port gigE POE adapter?

Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[Hardy, Tim]

The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.  Unfortunately 
a heart attack got him several years ago.
The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe.

- Original Message -
From: Rory Conaway
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were 
allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were 
supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted to 
confirm that.

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

"A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart