Re: [AFMUG] UBNT Titanium; Narrower Sectors and GPS
Who needs it... Just proliferate the air with great wifi data streams where spectrum is abundant as water. On 12/23/2014 7:30 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: Ubnt flat out doesn't have GPS. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 23, 2014 8:26 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I don't know anyone using GPS on ubnt On December 23, 2014 4:23:20 PM AKST, Jerry Richardson (airCloud) via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Our region is pretty noisy and getting noisier. Currently we are using Ubnt Rocket 90deg sectors although I have considered these to really be more like 75 degrees due UBNT using -6dB as the rolloff point. We have seen a dramatic improvement with a Titanium sector and plan on replacing the other rockets with Titaniums and considering going to 60deg or maybe even 45 degree and using GPS sync to reuse channels. What if any have been your experiences with going to narrower sectors for a given area? I would expect to see ~3dB improvement in links just by reducing the antenna pattern, and ~3dB due to power density. Additional gains might be made from improved F/B rejection and improved shielding, possibly another ~3dB? This could mean anywhere from 6-9dB improveme nt on every link. What are your experiences with UBNT GPS? We would not use dynamic, but rather fixed downlink %. I know we will give up some B/W but better spectrum management might be worth the trade. The link improvements should push the radios into higher modulation further mitigating the loss by using GPS Thoughts? Comments? Jerry -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. --
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium CMM4
without switch its around $400 less than CTM2 On 12/28/2014 2:58 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) via Af wrote: Just curious, what are you paying for the CMM4s? On Dec 27, 2014 8:21 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I have CTM2 at some sites.. I like the pricing I get with the CMM4 and I also like the gui better. I also dont have issues with management interface wanting to stop working. Also CTM is geared toward a universal crowd of devices I want the error free interfaces that the CMM4 has to offer with use of the 450 platform. Nothing against Lastmile whatsoever they make great stuff and I have purchased bunches of gear over the life of our wisp but since I have deployed the cmm4 units at sites where I had ctm1 series my problems of ethernet errors and weird interface issues disappeared. The CMM4 is a perfect match for cambium gear. It just outdated as far as the portfolio goes and needs some TLC. On 12/27/2014 5:43 PM, Josh Baird via Af wrote: It sounds like you are asking for a CTM2? :) On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Dear Cambium, we love the current CMM4,but we need gigE interface support and power monitoring via snmp. Also, can we get a dual input for either or DC supply 48/24v and be able to dial down via software from 48 to 29. We need these basics with or without a switch. I know Im asking alot here but the 450's deserve better LOL thanks Dave -- -- --
Re: [AFMUG] Someone automated their Speed test
thats what id do LOL or better have a web page that just says stop the speed test of death before your computer explodes with a nuclear GIff as a background cycle. On 12/26/2014 9:55 PM, Jay Weekley via Af wrote: Redirect to fbi.gov. Mike Hammett via Af wrote: Dropping it is no fun. Low and varying limits would be. If you can script to route them in a circle, that'd be fun too. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Kade Sullivan via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Friday, December 26, 2014 4:52:14 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Someone automated their Speed test Dropping all their traffic sounds like a more fun solution. On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Josh Luthman via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Waste of your time IMO. Not very fun. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Nate Burke via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I guess what I should do is set them up so that their IP Address is queued to a random speed each time they pull the files. Or would that be rude? On 12/26/2014 4:28 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: It's good to know there are still rude people out there. I was beginning to worry. Thanks for the heads up! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Nate Burke via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Been trying to track down a 20 second 400mb spike in outbound traffic that has been happening every 10 minutes all day. Finally tracked it down to my Speedtest.net server. Someone automated pulling the test files via HTTP. It shows up in my server logs, but not in the speedtest.net http://speedtest.net reports. They simultaneously pull 8 copies of all 10 test .jpg files. I've blocked their IP Address, automating it like that just seems a little rude. Just wanted to give anyone else running a speedtest.net http://speedtest.net server a heads up. Nate --
[AFMUG] Cambium CMM4
Dear Cambium, we love the current CMM4,but we need gigE interface support and power monitoring via snmp. Also, can we get a dual input for either or DC supply 48/24v and be able to dial down via software from 48 to 29. We need these basics with or without a switch. I know Im asking alot here but the 450's deserve better LOL thanks Dave --
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium CMM4
I have CTM2 at some sites.. I like the pricing I get with the CMM4 and I also like the gui better. I also dont have issues with management interface wanting to stop working. Also CTM is geared toward a universal crowd of devices I want the error free interfaces that the CMM4 has to offer with use of the 450 platform. Nothing against Lastmile whatsoever they make great stuff and I have purchased bunches of gear over the life of our wisp but since I have deployed the cmm4 units at sites where I had ctm1 series my problems of ethernet errors and weird interface issues disappeared. The CMM4 is a perfect match for cambium gear. It just outdated as far as the portfolio goes and needs some TLC. On 12/27/2014 5:43 PM, Josh Baird via Af wrote: It sounds like you are asking for a CTM2? :) On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Dear Cambium, we love the current CMM4,but we need gigE interface support and power monitoring via snmp. Also, can we get a dual input for either or DC supply 48/24v and be able to dial down via software from 48 to 29. We need these basics with or without a switch. I know Im asking alot here but the 450's deserve better LOL thanks Dave -- --
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium CMM4
Well its more the CTM1's than anything the CTM2's seem pretty stable but expensive On 12/27/2014 9:37 PM, Eric Muehleisen via Af wrote: We don't experience any of those issues with our CTM2's. We power Canopy, ePMP, Trango, UBNT and AirFibers all the above with no issues. The only issues we've had is with our PMP320 AP's. The ports are very sensitive to those AP's and will trip frequently. On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 9:21 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I have CTM2 at some sites.. I like the pricing I get with the CMM4 and I also like the gui better. I also dont have issues with management interface wanting to stop working. Also CTM is geared toward a universal crowd of devices I want the error free interfaces that the CMM4 has to offer with use of the 450 platform. Nothing against Lastmile whatsoever they make great stuff and I have purchased bunches of gear over the life of our wisp but since I have deployed the cmm4 units at sites where I had ctm1 series my problems of ethernet errors and weird interface issues disappeared. The CMM4 is a perfect match for cambium gear. It just outdated as far as the portfolio goes and needs some TLC. On 12/27/2014 5:43 PM, Josh Baird via Af wrote: It sounds like you are asking for a CTM2? :) On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Dear Cambium, we love the current CMM4,but we need gigE interface support and power monitoring via snmp. Also, can we get a dual input for either or DC supply 48/24v and be able to dial down via software from 48 to 29. We need these basics with or without a switch. I know Im asking alot here but the 450's deserve better LOL thanks Dave -- -- --
Re: [AFMUG] Playstation, Xbox Live networks reported down?
PUKE! On 12/25/2014 2:06 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: Yup Xbox. That's how games are made :/ Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 25, 2014 2:30 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Xbox? is that just because the game is stupidly made, or is it everything? *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Josh Luthman via Af [af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com] *Sent:* Thursday, December 25, 2014 1:25 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Playstation, Xbox Live networks reported down? I can't play a single player game... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Comm. Inc via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Yep my brother can't play his new game Sent from my iPhone On Dec 25, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Well, at least they took down both, so as to not give an unfair advantage to one. :P From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Ken Hohhof via Af [af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com] Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2014 12:54 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] Playstation, Xbox Live networks reported down? https://gigaom.com/2014/12/25/scrooges-strike-xbox-live-playstation-network-hacked-outage/ --
Re: [AFMUG] my christmas post....
Only on my moms side of the family LOL MERRY CHRISTMAS On 12/24/2014 10:03 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller via Af wrote: .cause my girlfriend reminds me it's always all about me anyway... . bwhahaha merry christmas everyone - - and here's my treat to you. If somehow you have missed this for years and years like i have, well, you'll enjoy this as much as I did. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTx-sdR6Yzk ENJOY! Merry Christmas. :) --
Re: [AFMUG] OT Linkedin
You would think.. On 12/25/2014 10:18 AM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote: I wish there was a way to un-endorse certain people... --
Re: [AFMUG] Epmp results
We have been deploying them as an extension of our existing canopy/cambium network to pick up new and existing customers on 900 fsk. +'s are : the pricing is great modular design Throughput and consistent access are good. -'s are: Slow gui Alignment is sometimes a bear without tones. On 12/21/2014 9:36 PM, Craig House via Af wrote: Just curious Who out there has had positive or negative results from EPMP. What are the pluses and minuses? I know price is a plus but other than that?? Craig --
Re: [AFMUG] Wireless router internet help video?
Sign me up.. I want to be the guy in the back of the Semi with butchers apron and Mini-vulcan LOL On 12/15/2014 2:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: I think we need a legal Purge day for all network ignorant customers. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Sterling Jacobson via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOdOBVKenzQ Just got another support ticket complaining of crappy to no internet for 10 days... Response to my queries of specifics: we are wireless. The fastest we've seen in the last two weeks is about 30 mbps up or down. Sometimes it's so weak, I can't even test it. I reset our router several times... It's always slow, but sometimes our devices can't even open pages because it's so slow or even dead for a few minutes. It's the same old my internet hasn't worked for days problem that isn't our problem. Does anyone have a better video/solution than this one, for explaining to customers your 'wireless router' sucks problem? --
Re: [AFMUG] Wireless router internet help video?
My next purchase is a M1A1 tank with depleted U tip Sabot rounds On 12/15/2014 6:17 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: I'm sure you're already prepared for that today :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 15, 2014 7:13 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Sign me up.. I want to be the guy in the back of the Semi with butchers apron and Mini-vulcan LOL On 12/15/2014 2:14 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: I think we need a legal Purge day for all network ignorant customers. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Sterling Jacobson via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOdOBVKenzQ Just got another support ticket complaining of crappy to no internet for 10 days... Response to my queries of specifics: we are wireless. The fastest we've seen in the last two weeks is about 30 mbps up or down. Sometimes it's so weak, I can't even test it. I reset our router several times... It's always slow, but sometimes our devices can't even open pages because it's so slow or even dead for a few minutes. It's the same old my internet hasn't worked for days problem that isn't our problem. Does anyone have a better video/solution than this one, for explaining to customers your 'wireless router' sucks problem? -- --
Re: [AFMUG] Camera work
We call those trunk slammers.. Here today gone tomorrow :) On 12/12/2014 10:19 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af wrote: I got a gig checking why 12 cameras were failing for the last few weeks. Well these enclosures were full of water ...when I opened them !! Connectors rusted.. they asked me to replace cameras..I told them cables were probably bad as well. I cut one a few feet behind the damage parts and they leaked.. The company that installed was called and shown pictures I took of damage...the enclosures were installed with access ports up and No attempt to seal 10 of the 12!!! And then the other two had holes drill into back of enclosure where ingress occured. This company did a huge project for a school district. ...not sure what transpired with them and my client but they glared at me as they left and I just smirked. I am easily intimidated. .. Jaime Solorza --
Re: [AFMUG] Camera work
They make people like us look good :) Just a short term of irritation that we all deal with in some form or fashion. If you cant do it right dont do it at all. I think that some that get to do a professional job think there is nothing to it and can do it cheaper without consequence. On 12/13/2014 7:21 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af wrote: Good name Jaime Solorza On Dec 13, 2014 6:13 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: We call those trunk slammers.. Here today gone tomorrow :) On 12/12/2014 10:19 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af wrote: I got a gig checking why 12 cameras were failing for the last few weeks. Well these enclosures were full of water ...when I opened them !! Connectors rusted.. they asked me to replace cameras..I told them cables were probably bad as well. I cut one a few feet behind the damage parts and they leaked.. The company that installed was called and shown pictures I took of damage...the enclosures were installed with access ports up and No attempt to seal 10 of the 12!!! And then the other two had holes drill into back of enclosure where ingress occured. This company did a huge project for a school district. ...not sure what transpired with them and my client but they glared at me as they left and I just smirked. I am easily intimidated. .. Jaime Solorza -- --
Re: [AFMUG] simulating interference
Love my ptp650's Rock solid :) On 12/10/2014 7:00 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: Lol ya ptp650 has ruin the spectrum mode to take things out. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 10, 2014 7:49 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Try some Non UBNT 5GHz products like canopy or cambium ...a 5GHz video transmitter will be noticed in the normal US 5.7/5.8GHz channels be most geardo you have an old Tsunami FD 5GHz radio lying around? Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 tel:915-861-1390 On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Ty Featherling via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: What is the easiest way to simulate noise in a lab environment. I would like to play with a couple Rocket AC Lites I have here and see what throughput looks like with some noise adjacent to their channel. Can I just turn up another AP on the necessary channel or does it need a client associated? If so, does their need to be traffic passing to the client? Does an AP get noisier when talking to more clients or with more throughput? -Ty --
Re: [AFMUG] I'm driving around a new area and just found this
holy snikeys ... I wonder if it was one of the actual movie props :) On 12/10/2014 6:14 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: Rory Conaway Triad Wireless Sent from a mobile device. Please ignore typos. --
Re: [AFMUG] IP Management
George, I feel err bodies pain when it comes to ip plan records and what helps me is having radius provision our networks for us. Built into freeside it keeps up with ip inventory and what blocks or subnets go where. We get a new block and add it to inventory and when it gets broken down into smaller subnets to distribute to different sites we just add what we need to those sites in freeside and radius takes care of the rest. The other really cool thing is our up front folks enter the customers info and ip. If the ip is a duplicate or has not been decommissioned from an older account then it will not let it add that ip in the system and I get a call about it. They have done it long enough now that I rarely get called. I also get weekly reports on ip inventory. I use the reports to export to csv(spread sheet) which updates my racktables. I started with ipplan when I only had a /22 IPv6 is not kind :) On 11/30/2014 12:18 AM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: Simple hierarchical IP management is what IPPlan does. It might be old and ugly, but it's better than a spreadsheet. And it also has an audit log so I can see who changed/added/deleted what. I have no reason to move away from it, at least right now. If I'm going to do something different, it will be custom integrated with RADIUS to act as provisioning and DHCP backend. Too much shit to do right now to tackle that. On 11/29/2014 11:04 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: racktables is relaly cool, though i question long term support. We have one of our contract customers that hired a full time IT guy, we sent him a racktables VM, this is a multis site customer, with multiple racks mixing POE VLAN multiple providers. One huge problem was we never go to the out of state sites, documentation on ports was always lacking and site disasters always ended up with stuff where it belonged, this should help to resolve that But for simple subnet management and documentation there is zero easy product out there, everything is full IPAM or Excel. Ive been looking for something other than a spreadsheet to keep tract of the subnets, and where I put them, whats available next. PITA to say the least. Other than a spreadsheed, theres not much that scales down to just the subnets divisions, if you dont care about the hosts. and every one of them results an a sales call within 5 minites of submission if you put your real info. Its like, seriously motherfu%%er, I just downloaded it, do you think I have it installed and tested yet enough to tell the boss to cut you a 10k check? On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:44 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Ken, We used to do that up until a few years ago and we have moved on LOL I have had so many spread sheets that have since moved into automation of today and now the cloud(still a mystery) LOL Easy to do get a LAMP stack server and roll with it. On 11/29/2014 9:26 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote: I use IP management software called “Excel”. It is not free, but I hear of alternatives called “Open Office” and “Google Docs”. *From:* Mike Hammett via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 29, 2014 9:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IP Management All of the above. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Saturday, November 29, 2014 8:59:15 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] IP Management How much public IP space do you guys have? Seems kind of like a first world problem, if you know what I mean. Or are you talking about managing private IP space in a large enterprise network? That can be a mess, but you mentioned ARIN, so I assumed you meant public addresses. Or maybe you are worried about IPv6 space where lightbulbs get their own addresses? Oh crap, do we have to SWIP all the addresses we assign to the Internet of Things? -Original Message- From: Butch Evans via Af Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 8:44 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IP Management On 11/29/2014 07:06 PM, Josh Baird via Af wrote: 6Connect is good. Men Mice is also good (but doesn't SWIP or do ARIN). Solarwinds also has an IPAM offering. There really isn't a good -free- solution that I know of (especially one that hasn't turned to vaporware). Many people will suggest IPPlan, but I hated it (although it can be easily customized and/or modified if you have any PHP clue). I wasn't impressed with IPPlan, either. HaCi is another free option that may do what you want. I haven't looked
Re: [AFMUG] Star Wars: The Force Awakens.
Yes, yes indeed young padawan :) On 11/29/2014 1:04 PM, Jay Weekley via Af wrote: It's going to be a long year. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgZOz4nZlLk --
Re: [AFMUG] IP Management
I have tried Haci and had some difficulty understanding it clearly but I have used Racktables for a while and its been a great help. I am still tailoring the racks and hardware stuff but its great for keeping up with ips both v4 and v6 It seems to be one that is still maintained also. Using a radius server with a nice gui to auto provision dns or other objects would be cool. On 11/29/2014 7:02 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address_management What are you guys doing for IP management? Ideally, the system I used would be free, support ARIN's RESTful API, IPv4 and IPv6, building of DNS zones. The only one I've seen that does the ARIN stuff doesn't meet the free qualification. There's no price listed anywhere, only scheduling a demo. (6Connect) Trying to forge ahead with IPPlan, but there's been no updates in 4.5 years and the documentation available doesn't seem to be for the beta version that supports IPv6. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com --
Re: [AFMUG] IP Management
Ken, We used to do that up until a few years ago and we have moved on LOL I have had so many spread sheets that have since moved into automation of today and now the cloud(still a mystery) LOL Easy to do get a LAMP stack server and roll with it. On 11/29/2014 9:26 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote: I use IP management software called “Excel”. It is not free, but I hear of alternatives called “Open Office” and “Google Docs”. *From:* Mike Hammett via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 29, 2014 9:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] IP Management All of the above. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Saturday, November 29, 2014 8:59:15 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] IP Management How much public IP space do you guys have? Seems kind of like a first world problem, if you know what I mean. Or are you talking about managing private IP space in a large enterprise network? That can be a mess, but you mentioned ARIN, so I assumed you meant public addresses. Or maybe you are worried about IPv6 space where lightbulbs get their own addresses? Oh crap, do we have to SWIP all the addresses we assign to the Internet of Things? -Original Message- From: Butch Evans via Af Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 8:44 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IP Management On 11/29/2014 07:06 PM, Josh Baird via Af wrote: 6Connect is good. Men Mice is also good (but doesn't SWIP or do ARIN). Solarwinds also has an IPAM offering. There really isn't a good -free- solution that I know of (especially one that hasn't turned to vaporware). Many people will suggest IPPlan, but I hated it (although it can be easily customized and/or modified if you have any PHP clue). I wasn't impressed with IPPlan, either. HaCi is another free option that may do what you want. I haven't looked at it recently, so I can't even recall all the features of it at the moment. -- Butch Evans 702-537-0979 Network Support and Engineering http://store.wispgear.net/ http://www.butchevans.com/ --
Re: [AFMUG] For Cambium
+1.. I have couple in play now shot links of about 3 miles with 8x8 modulation getting 60+Mbs both directions. 12mile LOS would be much with good dishes On 11/24/2014 8:41 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote: ptp450s� Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Reply-To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Date: Monday, November 24, 2014 at 10:30 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] For Cambium Unfortunately, the 14, 15, 16 mile links in Florida would be fairly difficult at 11 ghz, even with 4ft dishes, which I cant load up on a Rohn 25G tower. *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Sean Heskett via Af *Sent:* Monday, November 24, 2014 2:25 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] For Cambium i would go licensed gear from SAF (or your favorite licensed PTP vendor). we keep all the unlicensed bands available for PMP...we use licensed for PTP. the difference between a wifi backhaul and a licensed backhaul is like the difference between a Ford Focus and a Ferrari F12berlinetta. they are both cars that drive on roads but that's about where the similarities end. same thing with backhauls. 2 cents -sean On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Paul McCall via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Cambium, Can you please make a suggestion as to what equipment that you recommend to us for this type of problem/solution? Paul -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall via Af Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:32 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force For Cambium we have a very remote tower that feeds several other towers. Everything is OSPF but logically... Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several anti-twist devices) is fed by... Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik RB912 5 Ghz This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable bandwidth and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5 This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G Tower R then feeds... Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling act. There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect (chain) to each other on the back side and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT radios on the backside links. The challenge... First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C. And, I need better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect and then I get customer complaints etc. I hate that. So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other than a ton of licensed links? Obviously, the gear I am using now is inexpensive. The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsyncedcan it sync, now or tomorrow? Latency with sync? Paul -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt via Af Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force Hi, Please allow me to clarify. The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 FE ports. The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary PoE. GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on board GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates). The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release 2.4 and will apply to both products. Reading this spec sheet. http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf LATENCY (nominal, one way) 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode) --
Re: [AFMUG] OT Barbie
OMG... that made my head hurt and Roll On Floor Laughing :) On 11/22/2014 1:22 PM, Chuck McCown via Af wrote: This made me laugh: http://gizmodo.com/barbie-f-cks-it-up-again-1660326671 --
Re: [AFMUG] [OT] Weird MT situation
Anything from Outside is when I use vpn and inside it gets limited by certain ips. makes nice for techs that are on the network from inside. They still have to use port knock On 11/16/2014 11:00 PM, Butch Evans via Af wrote: On 11/16/2014 10:15 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote: Love Port Knocking :) :-) This is one method that can be helpful for some parts of your security approach. By itself, of course, it isn't the whole approach. But it is a big step forward from nothing. Personally, I generally make ssh available from only a very limited subset of IP addresses and those require a VPN, even within the network. --
Re: [AFMUG] [OT] Weird MT situation
Love Port Knocking :) On 11/16/2014 7:57 PM, Butch Evans via Af wrote: On 11/16/2014 03:27 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote: Properly protected however sounds a bit like blaming the victim. I would say it's a lot easier to protect a castle that just has one gate. If I use it once a year, why leave it running all the time beckoning to bad guys or waiting for me to slip up on firewall rules? I understand your reticence to leave it turned on. I was simply responding to the idea that turning it off (without qualification) was the only, best solution. Best practice is to protect necessary services. If it isn't necessary for you, then turning it off IS part of proper protection. In addition to SSH, the other attractive nuisance seems to be RDP. There's a simple little tool called DUBrute the kiddies will run against tcp/3389, they don't have to be successful, just the traffic will mess you up. Agreed. Again, though, protecting the port is key. It should not be open to the world. There are better practices than a simple nat that opens this up to the world. I'm waiting for webcams to be the next big target, so many of them use UPnP and DynDNS to expose a webserver on a public IP, and end users buy them at Amazon and Costco, even supposed computer and networking professionals install them with no thoughts about network security. Rinse and repeat above comments. --
Re: [AFMUG] AF24 Ghz - Good Download / No Upload
Grins :) On 11/15/2014 12:02 PM, Josh Luthman via Af wrote: I laughed. Could you imagine if Ubnt wanted to charge for their incomplete software? LOL! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Nov 15, 2014 1:00 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Sorry, my smart assed – tongue in cheek - comments are not always as obvious as I think... *From:* Mike Dudgeon via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:50 AM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] AF24 Ghz - Good Download / No Upload There isn't a software renewal fee on our gear (including AF24). The support files will really provide the best information to help determine the issue. I can't say this is a common issue (don't recall any specific cases off the top of my head), assuming the injectors are good and 1247 date code or later. -- Mike Dudgeon Ubiquiti Networks, Inc. http://www.ubnt.com/ http://www.ubnt.com/ Sent from my iPhone On Nov 15, 2014, at 12:14, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Did you pay the software license renewal fee? *From:* mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 15, 2014 9:21 AM *To:* memb...@wispa.org mailto:memb...@wispa.org *Cc:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] AF24 Ghz - Good Download / No Upload Hey guys, Before I send the support files, I wanted to see if any of you have seen this… A rock solid Air Fiber link (2years now) started acting up this past Thursday. No changes have been made and it was working fine the day before. Everything in the interface looks great. Despite this, we went ahead and replaced the PoE and terminated to be safe. The SNR on the cables are 29 on each side. This device started having upload issues. At best, it might do 2-5Mbs on the upload side. It began limiting the number of PPPoE traffic connections it could handle. (assuming the small upload is causing this) Download seems stable but does vary. If you log in to either side, the numbers are great. I am thinking bad hardware, but JUST in case someone has seen this please let me know. Running v2.2 beta 3. Tried downgrading to 2.0 and got the same result. Back to Beta. Same result. *Tyson Burris, President** **Internet Communications Inc.** **739 Commerce Dr.** **Franklin, IN 46131** *** *317-738-0320 tel:317-738-0320 Daytime #* *317-412-1540 tel:317-412-1540 Cell/Direct #* *Online: **www.surfici.net* image001.png *What can ICI do for you?* *Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - WiMax - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones - IP Security - Fiber - Tower - Infrastructure.* ** *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is intended for the* *addressee shown. It contains information that is* *confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review,* *dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by* *unauthorized organizations or individuals is strictly* *prohibited.* --
Re: [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower
Yes, that is a quality tie. I just try to avoid any thing with a tie in it. when we first started doing cat5 bestronics foil cable up a tower we used PVC and #12 black wire to tie most every thing down. We have since come acustom to using cable trays and support hangers using HDPFE 2 conduit with superior essex armored on all new sites or any rebuild that has to be done. We even go as far as using the 3/8 grommets and hangers to the radios to support the essex cable. It seems a little excessive on our part but when deploying a 5k radio sector it only makes sense to put a little more into the backbone supporting it. On 11/9/2014 1:54 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: We use TY25MX Ty-Raps. UV and stainless lock. They do not break in the cold. We've had the equivalent Panduit's on towers for 10 years and they have not failed. I agree with no zip ties on towers but these are not zip ties. On 11/9/2014 12:29 AM, Darin Steffl via Af wrote: What are the good zip ties you use? It's very hard finding some that don't snap below 55 degrees. On Sunday, November 9, 2014, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Bout to say, our company has been doing installs with super88 and good quality zip ties in Alaska for about 10 years now. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 11/08/2014 07:59 PM, Jason McKemie via Af wrote: If you use quality zip ties they are just fine. On Saturday, November 8, 2014, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); wrote: I need to find my old pics of a company that used Zip ties on towers instead of hangers or cable tray. A 400' run of lmr400 came loose during a winter storm and the Electric company thought it was a guy wire flappin in the wind from a distance and had everyone pacing the floor and trying to get to the site to look to see what needs to be done. Needless to say as a standard policy we do not allow for any zip ties anywhere on any of our towers including metal ones unless they are rated for outdoor use and only for short distances. As for type of hybrid cable we use. We use Bestronics to customize the ends for good terminations. On 11/8/2014 4:26 PM, Craig House via Af wrote: We have purchased outdoor rated unarmored fiber to run up many towers over the last 2 to 3 years I have not yet had a problem with any of it wearing through and we do not put it in conduit As long as you zip tie it frequently so that it is not rubbing around on anything it shouldn't be a problem We have been buying our fiber preterminated from discount low-voltage.com http://low-voltage.com I have never had anything sent to me that was not as we ordered it or that didn't work when we installed everything is been top-quality from them It even comes with a Kevlar Pullhook and plastic shroud over the pull in so you don't hang it on anything as you pull it up Craig Sent from my iPhone On Nov 8, 2014, at 16:19, Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I don’t know much if anything about fiber, but I see lots of options here: http://ce.superioressex.com/products/communications/osp-cable/fiber/ I would think armor would provide gopher protection in direct burial applications and cut resistance in tower and grain leg applications, but I also see several rugged non-armored types listed there including: double jacket non-armor (series 1G) ADSS 100/200/400 heavy duty LT (series 1H) *From:* Darin Steffl via Af *Sent:* Saturday, November 08, 2014 3:57 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower So you're saying don't go armored fiber at all but just outdoor rated fiber and make sure nothing can rub through the jacket? We're looking for something tougher that can withstand the pull up the tower and then the elements since we don't want to run conduit. On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com wrote: I cannot imagine a benefit to having armored/shielded on a fiber up the tower other than mechanical protection. It would not offer any electrical benefits and could actually pick up and transfer RF and induced impulses from lightening. *From:* Darin Steffl via Af *Sent:* Saturday, November 08, 2014 1:47 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower Hey guys, For fiber runs to a switch or radio on top
Re: [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower
I need to find my old pics of a company that used Zip ties on towers instead of hangers or cable tray. A 400' run of lmr400 came loose during a winter storm and the Electric company thought it was a guy wire flappin in the wind from a distance and had everyone pacing the floor and trying to get to the site to look to see what needs to be done. Needless to say as a standard policy we do not allow for any zip ties anywhere on any of our towers including metal ones unless they are rated for outdoor use and only for short distances. As for type of hybrid cable we use. We use Bestronics to customize the ends for good terminations. On 11/8/2014 4:26 PM, Craig House via Af wrote: We have purchased outdoor rated unarmored fiber to run up many towers over the last 2 to 3 years I have not yet had a problem with any of it wearing through and we do not put it in conduit As long as you zip tie it frequently so that it is not rubbing around on anything it shouldn't be a problem We have been buying our fiber preterminated from discount low-voltage.com http://low-voltage.com I have never had anything sent to me that was not as we ordered it or that didn't work when we installed everything is been top-quality from them It even comes with a Kevlar Pullhook and plastic shroud over the pull in so you don't hang it on anything as you pull it up Craig Sent from my iPhone On Nov 8, 2014, at 16:19, Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I don’t know much if anything about fiber, but I see lots of options here: http://ce.superioressex.com/products/communications/osp-cable/fiber/ I would think armor would provide gopher protection in direct burial applications and cut resistance in tower and grain leg applications, but I also see several rugged non-armored types listed there including: double jacket non-armor (series 1G) ADSS 100/200/400 heavy duty LT (series 1H) *From:* Darin Steffl via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 08, 2014 3:57 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower So you're saying don't go armored fiber at all but just outdoor rated fiber and make sure nothing can rub through the jacket? We're looking for something tougher that can withstand the pull up the tower and then the elements since we don't want to run conduit. On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Chuck McCown via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I cannot imagine a benefit to having armored/shielded on a fiber up the tower other than mechanical protection. It would not offer any electrical benefits and could actually pick up and transfer RF and induced impulses from lightening. *From:* Darin Steffl via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, November 08, 2014 1:47 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fiber to top of tower Hey guys, For fiber runs to a switch or radio on top of the tower, do you recommend non-armored fiber or armored with the metal shield? If there a way to have armored fiber without metal inside? I'm wondering how some of you run fiber up to the top now and if having metal in the fiber is alright or if it's a bad idea because of lightning or grounding issues. Looking for best practices here. Thanks -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com http://www.mnwifi.com/ 507-634-WiFi http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com http://www.mnwifi.com/ 507-634-WiFi http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi --
[AFMUG] Cacti POLL
For those of you using cacti.. Out of necessity I am going to be working a plugin that will do Host groups or views for the hosts displayed. For example instead of all hosts in one view you can group them by infrastructure or subscribers and set permissions on who is allowed to view infrastructure and subs or just subs. There are some other plugins that let you add them to a tab and view but I want a drop down like on the host page to display only what I need. Of course you can place a tag in the name of each host and search by this tag. I am just being lazy I guess I want a simple drop down that will give me the groups I want. Since we use nagios to watch majority of infrastructure for alerting I want cacti to only show that infrastructure. I am just taking poll to see how many use or could use something like this. --
Re: [AFMUG] Cacti POLL
It has to do with the Hosts page which is a quick snapshot of all things green or red. For ever we have always had a single cacti service running to handle both infrastructure and subs but it has gotten to large to have all that on one site. So, my idea was to have a drop down that would only show a group of defined units like servers, Back hauls, Aps, subs and so forth within the host page or devices page whatever you want to call it. The graph tree for me on sorts the graphs not the hosts. Especially when ur on your mobile and you just want to check to see whats up or down. This could be personal setting that could be set by the user to default to just a single group when they log in. On 11/5/2014 9:47 AM, Ty Featherling via Af wrote: Same here. I don't understand what you are proposing David. My graphs are manually sorted in the graph tree. What does your plugin do? -Ty On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Bill Prince via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Sort of like a manage plugin that works? We've arranged our graphs to be grouped by POP/AP/Subscriber, but it's done more-or-less manually. When a new subscriber is added, we add them to the appropriate graph tree. This way, someone not in the know can see the organization of the infrastructure. Not clear if this is significantly different by your description. bp On 11/5/2014 5:06 AM, David Milholen via Af wrote: For those of you using cacti.. Out of necessity I am going to be working a plugin that will do Host groups or views for the hosts displayed. For example instead of all hosts in one view you can group them by infrastructure or subscribers and set permissions on who is allowed to view infrastructure and subs or just subs. There are some other plugins that let you add them to a tab and view but I want a drop down like on the host page to display only what I need. Of course you can place a tag in the name of each host and search by this tag. I am just being lazy I guess I want a simple drop down that will give me the groups I want. Since we use nagios to watch majority of infrastructure for alerting I want cacti to only show that infrastructure. I am just taking poll to see how many use or could use something like this. -- --
Re: [AFMUG] Mailing List Behavior
Mail list gripe.. The other thing I dont like is the threading of the subject lines. Seems a thread is started but when replies come in they are placed on a separate thread and sometimes forked. Very messy and some mails lost in translation. my 2cents On 10/31/2014 10:15 AM, tcidan via Af wrote: Since the change to the new mailing list host, the From: header on messages shows af@afmug.com rather than the actual sender. I find this change to not be beneficial. --danp --
Re: [AFMUG] Field Paperwork
We still use a the carbon copy forms.. No hardware . The cost of printing (ink) is approx .25 - .75 cents a print or more depending on usage. The carbon prints from a professional printing company runs us about 120 bucks for a full CASE of triple copy contracts ready to sign. I say the writing is on the wall :) On 10/29/2014 11:43 AM, Ben Royer via Af wrote: Quick poll question... For those of you still using paper in the field for your technicians to have customers sign, do you use printers in the vehicles? If yes to that question, which printer do you recommend? We use a basic HP Deskjet scanner/copier/printer, so the client can sign the paperwork and then we can make a copy for them in the field. However, they are not very durable to the every day use of our field techs. I’ve even had them brought in because they are jammed and we find things like a mustard packet inside them. Now, the obvious go paperless argument is null at this point as we are putting a plan in place to get there someday, but until then, what would you all recommend for paperwork printing in the field? Thank you, Ben Royer, Operations Supervisor Royell Communications, Inc. 217-965-3699 www.royell.net
Re: [AFMUG] price range for a dedicated 100x100 service.
We do similar and if the customer doesnt have these things at the termination point we offer a lease or purchase for the extended equipment. I still cant get away from Mikrotiks CCR routers instead of the latter. On 10/29/2014 7:29 PM, Paul Stewart via Af wrote: That pricing is similar to what we charge when using PTP600 directly back to a fiber fed hub site. At the customer site, we install an APC 1500 UPS (with SNMP management) and a Juniper SRX router - fully managed and monitored from NOC. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Jenkins via Af Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:00 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] price range for a dedicated 100x100 service. Base Price: 1yr Contract: $1980/mo 2yr Contract: $1870/mo 3yr Contract: $1760/mo We negotiate discounts from those prices. Usually end up giving customers 20-30% off to make a deal. DIA services are always negotiable. Sometimes we have to add to them to deal with all the upgrades necessary to get to the customer. Install depends on required equipment. Airfiber is usually not a big deal. Licensed link could be the cost of the link spread over term of contract. You also have to consider what it takes from your backbone to deliver that. How many sites from your upstream is it? Do you need to charge enough to cover future upgrades to your backhauls, routers, etc? What about upgrades to UPSes in the path? Just some things to consider. Matthew Jenkins SmarterBroadband m...@sbbinc.net 530.272.4000 On 10/29/2014 01:25 PM, Bill Prince via Af wrote: No Comcast here. No ATT here. Others as well. Only real competition at this site would be bonded T1 lines. Qty 1 T1 in this location would be ~~ $500 per month. There might be another Wireless provider that could get through the hole in the trees, but the number would be very, very limited. bp On 10/29/2014 1:22 PM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: What are Comcast\TW\ATT\Zayo\etc. selling 100 megs for? That's where you want to sell your 100 megs, assuming you're not losing your ass at that rate. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+Intelligent ComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligen t-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL - --- *From: *Bill Prince via Af af@afmug.com *To: *Motorola III af@afmug.com *Sent: *Wednesday, October 29, 2014 1:57:39 PM *Subject: *[AFMUG] price range for a dedicated 100x100 service. We have a new subscriber we're providing dedicated 24x24 service right now. He's asked for a quote for dedicated 100x100 service. The link is ~~ 8.5 miles. Right now, I'm thinking we need to put in a licensed link. The site is active with 2 PMP450 APs, and I do not want to interfere on a site with relatively tight spectrum demands, so anything in 5.8 is out of the question. I don't really need technical advice, but I'm looking for advice on how to price this. Typically, we charge 30-50 % of the equipment cost and then price the monthly recurring to recover the remaining equipment cost over 12 months. However, I would like to entertain alternatives. -- bp --
Re: [AFMUG] what i need....mikrotik
Mikrotik are you listening... Knock knock... I also want all these style boards or at least the CCR to have a Terminal jack near the AC power port (You know the little green ones with screws in them ).. For DC input up to 30Volts or even 48volt would be great. Why is it so hard to have a little thing like that :( On 10/29/2014 5:59 PM, Bill Prince via Af wrote: RB493, RB2011, RB1100, RB1200. bp On 10/29/2014 3:40 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller via Af wrote: OK, i need a board that has more than 5 ports on it that is also powered via POE. does such a beast exist? Hook me up with a model # please thanks --
Re: [AFMUG] On ATT building
Cost money to take them down... On 10/20/2014 8:52 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af wrote: Wonder why they dont take them down? Not used any longer Jaime Solorza --
Re: [AFMUG] On ATT building
We have 2 of these sites here.. would of had 3 but we missed the boat on that one. We could of connected 3 counties. On 10/20/2014 10:17 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: The KS-15676 is about 43dBi and1.5° beamwidth at 6GHz. I want to say something like 3 to 13 or 15GHz bandwidth. Couple different revisions/upgrade kits, the latest added some sidelobe suppression in the 70's, IIRC. Nuclear blast hardening mod kits. Really cool stuff. Same design/type that discovered the cosmic microwave background, though I think that particular horn was quite a bit larger. On 10/20/2014 9:36 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af wrote: How much gain do those periscope antenna have? Jaime Solorza On Oct 20, 2014 8:21 PM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: A guy near me bought 2 mountain top sites with HUGE concrete buildings that have underground gas storage , generators, bedrooms, showers, etc for like $50,000 for 2 sites with the land and he used a bullet and wave guide adapters and is running a 802.11 link across those huge legacy horn dishes! On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:12 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I really wish no more of those will be destroyed, they are a part of communications history.. and we can put some really long links on them. :) Where they're not under Ma Bell's control anyway. On 10/20/2014 9:07 PM, Chuck Hogg via Af wrote: The cost to leave them is nothing. :) I've seen multiple buildings with them. Regards, Chuck On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Robert Bain via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: The cost to remove them is to expense On Oct 20, 2014 6:52 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Wonder why they dont take them down? Not used any longer Jaime Solorza --
Re: [AFMUG] Next article posted - Chapter 52
Its similar to how mimoA B works you are either talking 2/4 subs at once or just one. On 10/20/2014 2:53 PM, Jaime Fink via Af wrote: So I’m a Jaime as well, nothing but Jaime’s here! Mike, there absolutely is a difference between the Mimosa PTP versus the PTMP spectrum utilization as you suggested. The A5 PTMP never requires more than a single channel (20-80 MHz width) to do the Multi-User thing. The way it works, you would have 2 sets of 2x2:2 C5 clients receiving simultaneously from our 4x4:4 MU-MIMO A5 access points in the same single channel. To do this in the _same channel_, the AP calculates beamforming/spatial-multiplexing matrix compatibility of the clients to create unique phase/amplitude/power optimized patterns that isolate clients in antenna nulls that do not interfere with each other, and this is done on the fly in the silicon when we simultaneously want to transmit to 2 clients that have traffic in the downstream direction. As you suggested, the B5 PTP products can go from a single 2x2:2 channel (20-80 MHz widhts), or in “dual link” (2x20 MHz up to 2x80 MHz) adding a second 2x2:2 frequency diverse set of streams for resiliency in a different part of the band. You can pick channels anywhere from 4.9 public safety (on the connectorized B5c), up to U-NII 1, 2 and 3, including the new 5600-5650 stringent DFS band, these channels can be split, they do not have to be contiguous. Cheers, The other Jaime CPO and co-founder, Mimosa *From: *Jaime Solorza via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *Animal Farm af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, October 20, 2014 1:14:15 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Next article posted - Chapter 52 Okay...I am J A I M E(sounds like Hi me in metal) he is J A M I E ... (as in Jay me- me and you)... I had a had to use command line script to clean out DDWRT OS from several Rocket M5's so I guess it can't be any harder. Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 tel:915-861-1390 On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Well, I had meant Jamie Fink from Mimosa regarding the frequency usage in 4x4, but you're welcome too! Bitlomat has a tool to take you to and from stock firmware. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com http://www.ics-il.com/ https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Jaime Solorza via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *Animal Farm af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, October 20, 2014 1:02:57 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Next article posted - Chapter 52 Huminteresting However, now that you can put Bitlotmat firmware on Ubiquiti (and soon others) hardware, it’s more interesting. ...isn't the Bitlomat an img type file? Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 tel:915-861-1390 On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Their PtP is indeed two channels of 2x2. There's simply no way to get the needed diversity for 4x4 in any way other than frequency. Their PtMP talks 2x2 to two clients independently via beamforming. That's the premise of Mu-MIMO. I had assumed it was all on the same frequency, but I don't believe I specifically asked that. Jamie, care to comment? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com http://www.ics-il.com/ https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL *From: *Gino Villarini via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, October 20, 2014 12:41:10 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Next article posted - Chapter 52 My understanding of Mimosa ptp is that it's not 4x4 but 2 2x2 radios. Same for pmp? Gino A. Villarini @gvillarini On Oct 20, 2014, at 1:21 PM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: My comment is
Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
Its not a matter of what you use but how it was ratcheted to work. It may not have been built for what needs are for today but maybe 8 yrs ago it was a running system. If I had to use what you listed I could make it work with todays demands but it would not have the range. I have seen more than 5 wisps come and go here all using 802.11 based systems and failed but I dont think it was because of the radio type but just lack of knowledge on how to really deploy them in way that worked for them. On 10/19/2014 7:42 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: The network I bought is a prime example of using Canopy doesn't guarantee success. Omnis everywhere, Omnis feeding SMs with other omnis behind them. $12k backhauls behind a backhaul link with a -87 signal. Generic (not even Linksys) networking gear, hubs, etc. But hey, he used Cyclones, PTP400s and Redlines so it was good, right? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Ken Hohhof via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Saturday, October 18, 2014 1:15:38 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons But there’s the stages of where WISPs have historically gotten their customers: 1) People getting Internet for the first time 2) People switching from dialup 3) People switching from DSL 4) People switching from satellite 5) People switching from mobile hotspots 6) People switching from other WISPs who did things on the cheap I guess stage 7 would be deploy fiber and drink everybody’s milkshake. *From:* Josh Reynolds via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:27 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons You just hit the nail on the head why wehave never considered deploying 450 (and similar)in the past: By the time you (relative term) have the cashflow to pay for those sectors, we (another relative term, for people deploying UBNTor similar) have already thrown up 4-6 shielded sectors and at least 10 clients per. If we don't think we can hit a decent sub densityor at least make the site a valuable repeater, then we don't go there. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 10/18/2014 09:01 AM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af wrote: I prefer sectors too but math doesnt always work out. I'll put the omni in to get the site up and once the customers are there change it to sectors. The 450 platform is very easy to drop sectors in and have the existing clients link right up. I have a couple sites with existing customers i am dropping a two sector 450 system in with 120 segree KP antennas. cant afford any more sectors than that per site right now... Sent from my iPhone Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Oct 18, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I've noticed a lot of PMP operators are deploying omnis (presumably because they can't afford 4 APs. Give me TDMA Atheros with sectors over omnis on anything any day. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Kurt Fankhauser via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:38:14 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons TJ, No difference between the 3 different frequencies bands (other than NLOS range) as far as the product itself they are all the same animal. 2.4ghz NLOS is slightly better than 3.65ghhz. They all function the same and have the same expected throughputs per channel width. They all use the same firmware and i love the interface being the same across all 3. The only major difference is the 5ghz is V/H versus slant on the other two. That just translates to the 5ghz omni being ALOT smaller and lighter. There are some places that i wish the 2.4ghz woulda been V/H because of the omni size but overall I am still very happy with the 2.4ghz 450. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com http://www.wavelinc.com/ tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:57 AM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Kurt, Any pros and cons on 450 between 2ghz, 3.65 and 5? Any differences at all? Range vs throughput? Obviously 2ghz penetrates better, 3
Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
Also, Money sense is a factor. If you are determined to do it cheap then go for it. Keep in mind happy customers means faster ROI. If you are looking at a dense population IE Metro then spend the time and money to deploy a system that will scale well and grow as you add tons of subs without having to add more aps and worry about if you are interfering with your self. The 450 is the simple answer for me. 2 cents On 10/17/2014 4:21 PM, Matt Jenkins via Af wrote: Depends on customer density per AP. If you have low (25) density, I would recommend ePMP. Otherwise I would recommend 450. Matthew Jenkins SmarterBroadband m...@sbbinc.net 530.272.4000 On 10/17/2014 02:05 PM, TJ Trout via Af wrote: I haven't been keeping real up to date on current generation ptmp offerings but we have a new site going up and I need to decide pretty quickly on some equipment. For the guys who have been using both 450 and epmp do you have any pros and cons ? Any reason to spend the extra money when epmp seems to have the same if not better performance , sync, etc? My gut says 450 is going to be my best long term solution but with all of the positive epmp feedback it's hard to justify the extra money? --
Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
We get all of the above including the latter. On 10/18/2014 1:15 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote: But there’s the stages of where WISPs have historically gotten their customers: 1) People getting Internet for the first time 2) People switching from dialup 3) People switching from DSL 4) People switching from satellite 5) People switching from mobile hotspots 6) People switching from other WISPs who did things on the cheap I guess stage 7 would be deploy fiber and drink everybody’s milkshake. *From:* Josh Reynolds via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:27 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons You just hit the nail on the head why wehave never considered deploying 450 (and similar)in the past: By the time you (relative term) have the cashflow to pay for those sectors, we (another relative term, for people deploying UBNTor similar) have already thrown up 4-6 shielded sectors and at least 10 clients per. If we don't think we can hit a decent sub densityor at least make the site a valuable repeater, then we don't go there. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 10/18/2014 09:01 AM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af wrote: I prefer sectors too but math doesnt always work out. I'll put the omni in to get the site up and once the customers are there change it to sectors. The 450 platform is very easy to drop sectors in and have the existing clients link right up. I have a couple sites with existing customers i am dropping a two sector 450 system in with 120 segree KP antennas. cant afford any more sectors than that per site right now... Sent from my iPhone Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Oct 18, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Mike Hammett via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I've noticed a lot of PMP operators are deploying omnis (presumably because they can't afford 4 APs. Give me TDMA Atheros with sectors over omnis on anything any day. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Kurt Fankhauser via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent: *Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:38:14 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons TJ, No difference between the 3 different frequencies bands (other than NLOS range) as far as the product itself they are all the same animal. 2.4ghz NLOS is slightly better than 3.65ghhz. They all function the same and have the same expected throughputs per channel width. They all use the same firmware and i love the interface being the same across all 3. The only major difference is the 5ghz is V/H versus slant on the other two. That just translates to the 5ghz omni being ALOT smaller and lighter. There are some places that i wish the 2.4ghz woulda been V/H because of the omni size but overall I am still very happy with the 2.4ghz 450. Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com http://www.wavelinc.com/ tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:57 AM, TJ Trout via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Kurt, Any pros and cons on 450 between 2ghz, 3.65 and 5? Any differences at all? Range vs throughput? Obviously 2ghz penetrates better, 3 is licensed and 5 has more spectrum but anything else? All bands are open for me Thanks On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I started the spring deploying 450 in 2.4ghz, 5ghz, and 3.65ghz and then middle of the summer deciding i had totry some ePMP because the cost was so low I couldn't resist I can say now that I am fairly certain I will probably stick with the 450. There are many small reasons that when I considered them all i came to this conclusion. Here are my reasons: 1. ePMP latency starts to go up quickly once you have more than 10 clients on an AP. Once you get over 20 clients the latency is pretty much 25-30 ms. Cambium was honest about this at the road tour and they noted if you want the best latency to stick with the 450. 2. Sync between the two platforms is not there yet. If you have adjacent towers on the different platforms that can see each other you won't have sync. 3. No remote spectrum analyzer for clients. This is HUGE for when the clients fire up their wireless camera and baby monitors and trash the whole spectrum. 4.No burst bucket on CPE's 5.EPMP Interface is SLOWWW. Cambium explained at the tour they were offloading alot of processing power to the PC you
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium OEMs Ceragon for PTP
I am sure I will be going to the crash course to find out about the little tib bits. On 10/7/2014 8:19 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: So the multi-core does approximately double the throughput. What sort of antenna requirements does it have? Opposite polarity? Spatial diversity? Different frequency? The single core version has more interface flexibility than the multi-core version? What are the differences between 4x4, 2x2 and none when the speeds are just 1x and 2x? Link distance? Your 1000base-X interfaces... how are those physically presented? SFPs? LC\SC connector? So if I want two fiber interfaces, I have to choose the slower version? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Gino Villarini via Af af@afmug.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Tuesday, October 7, 2014 7:47:14 AM *Subject: *[AFMUG] Cambium OEMs Ceragon for PTP http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/products/ptp/ptp-820 NO mention of Mimo though.. Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr --
Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts
G LIST !! Why didnt this show in a thread.?? I guess I need to change my mail client after 15yrs to a microsoft bloated expensive useless software. On 10/7/2014 9:10 AM, Nate Burke via Af wrote: Pretty long thread over on the wispa list already. Looks to be widespread, no answers yet from what I saw. On 10/7/2014 9:04 AM, Darren Shea via Af wrote: Is anyone else getting inundated with a flood of customers who can't connect to the internet through their Belkin routers this morning? What's the deal with that?, Darren --
Re: [AFMUG] Problem with Sync and link speed on 310 foot run with ePMP APs
Wait for it (CMM) On 10/7/2014 3:30 PM, Paul McCall via Af wrote: Just wanted to give a heads up on our experience with our first run at trying ePMPs at this distance of cable run. We mounted 4 5 Ghz and 4 2.4 Ghz ePMP APs today (a retrofit from 100 series APs). We have an existing CMM Micro that has been at the tower for 5 or 6 years. We needed more ports with Sync so we attempted to use a Gigabit Syncinjector for the additional ports we needed. We put the 2.4 Ghz radios on the CMM and put the 5 Ghz on the SyncInjector. The CMM and the LAN facing ports on the Syncinjector, powered by the same 5 AMP/24v power supply that we use for CTM's, plugged into a 2011 Mikrotik router. The CMM works flawlessly, providing 100Mbit connections and sync . The SyncInjector... not so much. Initially, the symptoms were that 1 of the APs would only connect 10 Mbit and 1 different one would not get Sync.We tried swapping know good (successful on the CMM) cables, changing ports on the SyncInjector to make sure we didn't have cable or AP related issues etc. Eventually, we lost ability to do Sync on any of the APs, and 2 of the 4 will only do 10 Mbit. Tried it with both 100Mbit and Gbit ports on the 2011, in auto or static Speed/Duplex configs. No go. The cables being used were both Best-Tronics and Toughcable Carrier. All the toughcables were premade to the 300 feet and tested inhouse at Gigabit speeds (TIK to TIK tests) Going to have to climb again tomorrow with a second CMM to swapout for the SyncInjector. We normally have very good luck with SyncInjectors but at 300 feet distance with the Gigabit models, we couldn't make it work in this application. Cambium had advised us that there may be abnormal challenges with 300 ft. of cable on the ePMP. Paul Paul McCall, Pres. PDMNet / Florida Broadband 658 Old Dixie Highway Vero Beach, FL 32962 772-564-6800 office 772-473-0352 cell www.pdmnet.com http://www.pdmnet.com/ pa...@pdmnet.net mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net --
Re: [AFMUG] CBB coverage area has 'Town of the Living Dead
Time to get walking dead in there.. Luv me some walking dead which if your a fan its OCT 12 Sunday night new season BOOYAAA! On 10/7/2014 9:08 PM, Jay Weekley via Af wrote: One of the towns in our coverage area is being featured in Syfy at the moment. Seems some residents are making a low budget zombie movie. If you have time to kill. http://www.al.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2014/10/town_of_the_living_dead_show_o.html --
Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts
Just got my stock of RB951's in so hopefully they will work ok out of the box LOL On 10/7/2014 12:04 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: Its a matter of principle, we all know belkin is junk, today only proves it further. By fixing it on your end, your customers dont experience the junk first hand They sing the praises of their shit router because youre behind the scenes fixing belkins fuckup Now they recomend them to their friends. So yes, you are in fact training your customers to make it your problem everytime On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Mathew Howard via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: odd... when I first tried pinging it, we had a customer on the phone with the issue (as well as a few after that). I wonder if the routers needed to be rebooted after it came back up before they work. As long as the customers don't know you fixed it, there shouldn't really be much of a worry that customers will make it your problem in the future. *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Tushar Patel via Af [af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:38 AM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts We did “torch” (one of the Mikrotik tools), that allows me to see the destination address of 67.20.176.130, with protocol and the number of source address accessing that. The number of source address trying to access that was very high. Since morning we must have taken over 20 to 25 calls on the subject. So from the resource stand point it was more efficient for us to implement loopback response then to keep taking the call. We did not tell any customers what we did to fix it. How it works: it appears that those Belkin routers were just trying to ping the that ip address, so by putting loop back on our network, we are essentially responding to that ip address and that make the Belkin router happy. As you mentioned below that you were able to ping it, earlier we were not able to ping that ip address, may be they have already fix the problem. Thanks, Tushar Patel 512-257-1077 tel:512-257-1077 www.westernbroadband.com http://www.westernbroadband.com/ *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard via Af *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:18 AM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts Yeah... if I were to do something like that, I wouldn't let any customers know I did it... but I don't like messing with the network to fix things that aren't really my problem anyway, it would be nice to make those calls stop, but it doesn't seem worth it. I'm still a bit confused how that is making it work anyway though, since I can ping that IP... how does putting it on an internal router make it work? for those who have done it, is your router giving any HTTP response on that IP? *From:*Af [af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of That One Guy via Af [af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:06 AM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts that sounds alot like doing Belkins job for them, and guarantees from that point forward everytime a customer has any issue. just do that brokeback loop thing you did, this is your problem, fix it now, i pay good money for this service, i run a business, and my kids go to school and my pacemaker will stop On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Tushar Patel via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: As somebody suggested earlier to put loopback with the 67.20.176.130, on one of the internal router appears to fix the problem. Thanks, Tushar Patel 512-257-1077 tel:512-257-1077 www.westernbroadband.com http://www.westernbroadband.com -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of David via Af Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 10:42 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Belkin routers going nuts We are seeing this also.. Belkin domain is down Also be aware that the belkins use heartbeat.belkin.com http://heartbeat.belkin.com to check to see if there is internet access and if the answer comes back negative then it will not connect any lan clients to internet. Also there are a few exploits that have been exposed on 1.00 firmware which do bad things to the wan side of things. I am currently trying to spoof heartbeat.belkin.com
Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase?
Well, I would not say non-competitve but close when the local cable provider isnt the greatest at customer service and they are marketing them selves out of sales because word of mouth moves very fast even though the metro is only 60k and the county as whole is 90k population. The Cable provider says 50mbs but you may only get 3Mbs or at best 12mbs depending on where you are. Also, Fiber is not growing from trees like other places so we have to set our prices to keep head above water on overhead. So, for us it just basically boils down to who is going to offer the best customer service and so far we are winning steady and slow. On 10/5/2014 2:23 PM, Travis Johnson via Af wrote: Wow... you are in a very noncompetitve market. My surrounding area has CableOne (even into the small communities of 500 people) and they are doing 50Mbps x 10Mbps for $35/month for the first 6 months, then it goes up to $50/month. Most people claim to get 30-40Mbps any time they run a speed test. Travis On 10/4/2014 9:32 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote: We had no choice after deploying the 450 and offering up a handful of capacity for a competitive rate which basically put us at capacity in less than 6 months with out the numbers we wanted to see. So, since we had not raised rates in 10yrs we had no choice but to regroup and look at how we compare to our local cable. Really we have the upper hand because of what we do as a wireless industry. The whole hybrid solution is the key. Basically WIsps offer fiber to the home via fixed connections from a fiber carrier. Cable isnt even close due to the party line affect. Cambium gives us a scheduler that enables a VC per sub so we can imitate carrier class connections for a much lower price than what a carrier would serve while still making money doing it. So we can market a wonderful new buzz word called hybrid until it dies we will roll with it but so far the response has been very positive for the new price plans we now offer. Our 5x5 plan is a 5Mbs/5Mbs Down/Up for $75.00 monthly. We limit our basic which is 3x1 @ $50.00 to only one video stream @ 768k per one device per account. On 10/4/2014 7:27 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: i rarely have good to say about the way my boss runs things, but he is a magician at the rate plan changes. we have never directly raise prices, for the most part we have always either kept them the same price or lowered the cost to stay where you are at. usually any rate plan changes come with the option to get more for less, knowing full well that they ultimately will move up a tier in the future because they want more. since we quit directly selling the speed and moved to consumption based pricing it gives a lot more leverage to make global changes with a limited demand increase on the infrastructure. It costs us alot less to offer more consumption than to offer more speed, and everything is moving to consumption based anyway, whether you like it or not. our absolute lowest tier is marketed as an email only plan with a 5gb cap to throttled speed. but we actually moved it to 10gb because there were too many hitting 6gb that would have needed to move up a tier just to get an extra gb, easier to raise it for free, and we still get about a 50% take rate to the next tier anyway. things like that are how we are able to raise prices without actually raising prices. Because of it, even though we went through a negative customer growth (i like that buzz word) our profits increased, and now that we are on a positive customer growth trend, that profit increases quickly which is why we just dropped over 100k buying up the available 320 market at the time (yeah, we were one of the ones that helped cause that). I wish I could provide the specific details of the two major rate changes in the last five years, because they were both pretty ingenious, ultimately getting customers to thank you for raising their prices, just by giving them ownership of the decision. On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:12 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: This is what we have done.. On 10/4/2014 4:02 PM, Jon Langeler via Af wrote: Yeah I wouldn't raise prices on a 900SM customer. Get ready to overhaul the network with faster options before charging more. But definitely charge more as opposed to going cheaper. Markets may vary... Jon On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Paul McCall via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Very good input from all of you! *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af *Sent:* Saturday, October 04, 2014 4:32 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase? Everyone seems to expect our prices will go down, it’s the Internet after all, everything is supposed to get cheaper until it’s free, right? We haven’t
Re: [AFMUG] update an old ubuntu server
Take a look at this https://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/i386/ch02s01.html.en Other Os's have similar pages. I prefer debian for my DNS systems because there isnt much bloated front end apps that get auto loaded with a downloaded image. Also, I find it easier to tailor for specifics for the dns. Processor definitely will affect overall performance if it has to do more with ATPI or other automated power saving garb that may not be needed. So, by choosing a good OS to fit the hardware will make some serious impact on performance. Some of this may be over kill for a dns server because I see alot of OS's loaded onto older laptops and performance very noticeable there. I am not saying it wont work or perform so poorly is noticeable but consider processor capacity for DNS request in the 100's if it is needed. I starting seeing the hit early 2 yrs ago and we had to move to a larger processor to handle those requests. On 10/5/2014 1:06 PM, Eric Kuhnke via Af wrote: I don't see what processor has to do with it, a bare Debian 7.x CLI-only install will run just a well on an old system as an ancient version of Debian I have several virtual machines with debian and relatively restricted CPU power, only 128MB or 256MB of RAM, serving as nameservers. Runs just fine with 3.14 kernel. On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 6:53 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I would do a debian 6 bare metal install no extras just os minimal install. If its older Hardware less than 2g processor then back it down to debian 4 or use crunchbang, Knopix or something lite weight to make the Hardware sing and not try to keep up with bloated code. Then load power dns to get your dns up and running quick. On 10/2/2014 12:06 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: 8.04.3 is the version I just need to patch it, its actually a turnkey linux server so it checks tunkeys repositories, i might have to change those files that tell it where to look Most of the commands it doesnt recognize This is an old DNS server managed through webmin, its a backup so its not a big deal if it gets messed up pushing it through an update i know its better to just build a new server and all that, I dont care right now, we are replacing these soon anyway Any body know what I need to do to upgrade it? -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 -- --
Re: [AFMUG] 13.2 (Build32) Beta Software is Now Available!
any improvements is a great step forward on the existing platform which is great just FYI With 3 towers on mt tops that all face inward to the metro GPS is a must and it makes frequency planning easy and scalable to do other things with. On 10/4/2014 9:53 AM, Bill Prince via Af wrote: Depends on the load on both that SM and the other SMs. It will take time slots, so it will have an impact on aggregate throughput, but it will have no impact on how other SMs modulate. bp On 10/3/2014 10:30 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: if you have a 10mb unit running in mimo a is it going to pull 10 mb or whatever mimo a correlates to on that unit? if it has less throughput is it still consuming 10mb of ap capacity? If it still pulls 10mb, how much of the ap aggregate capacity is consumed? On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Bill Prince via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: In theory, if an SM has to do MIMO-A, the total throughput would be half of what you could do in dual payload mode. It should not cause another SM to modulate down at all. bp On 10/3/2014 9:41 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: how bad is the overall throughput hit in MIMO-A, did you notice if it cause the other SMs to modulate down? On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:34 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Yes, I have a sector loaded that needed MIMO-A. And I found some minor GUI issues and the Moto binary data GPS bug that has now been fixed in build 32. But obviously I don't have things configured like others, such as PPPoE, NAT, VLANs, etc. I just do bridge, no auth/RADIUS, very few APs doing VLAN. So I would encourage more folks to test it out and give feedback to Cambium so they can get any remaining issues ironed out and get 13.2 official out. From the improvements I've seen so far, I want it on every 450 AP and SM, right meow! On 10/3/2014 9:55 PM, Bill Prince via Af wrote: On 13.2 already George?ן¿½ I am happy to let you others get the bleeding done before I step over the edge. I think I will wait about a week before I give it a rip; and then only only low-population APs. bp On 10/3/2014 6:28 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: I was just discussing with Aaron offlist about build 32 AutoSync selecting the on-board GPS instead of timing port at boot. The deployed AP I have been testing on has a Parasitic SyncPipe, no power port sync and the iGPS on this AP usually always has a good lock. Prior to build 32, it would always boot up and use the timing port. Now build 32 wants the on-board at boot, at least every time I've had a chance to reboot the AP, which has only been the update from build 30 to 32 and one reboot afterwards so far. I would like to know if anyone else sees the same thing happening with build 32. Maybe it's just me, but I would prefer it to come up on the timing port before the on-board GPS for tracking GPS status of the attached SyncPipe. BTW, I've seen a very nice improvement in 13.2 beta for both throughput and session issues during multipath events. I think 13.2 is going to be a major leap forward for the 450. On 10/3/2014 6:19 PM, Aaron Schneider via Af wrote: Since the last Open Beta load (Build 30), this also contains: ן¿½ * Fix for negative VC count on home page * New OID to see NAT table size in use * Fix for Active FTP with NAT * PPPoE Control Message High Priority with VLAN Enabled ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ Added missing OIDs for IPv6 packet filtering configuration ן¿½ We are very close to release, so please give this load a try! ן¿½ Regards, ן¿½ -Aaron ן¿½ *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *John Mehling via Af *Sent:* Friday, October 03, 2014 6:10 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] 13.2 (Build32) Beta Software is Now Available!ן¿½ן¿½ ן¿½ Folks, Software version 13.2(Build32) has been added to the Cambium Open Beta program for PMP450, PMP430, and PTP230. Please go here:ן¿½https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/betaן¿½if you would like to test the new load and offer feedback on the Beta Forum. ן¿½Fixes in this release include: ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ Fix for Motorola Binary GPS based devices (CMM2, SyncPipe, etc) ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ן¿½ Fix for PTP450 link test with small packets causing session drop and/or invalid readings ן¿½
Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase?
This is what we have done.. On 10/4/2014 4:02 PM, Jon Langeler via Af wrote: Yeah I wouldn't raise prices on a 900SM customer. Get ready to overhaul the network with faster options before charging more. But definitely charge more as opposed to going cheaper. Markets may vary... Jon On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Paul McCall via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Very good input from all of you! *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af *Sent:* Saturday, October 04, 2014 4:32 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase? Everyone seems to expect our prices will go down, it’s the Internet after all, everything is supposed to get cheaper until it’s free, right? We haven’t raised prices in 10 years, and we are feeling some pressure to lower prices about 10%, I guess that’s from competition though and it sounds like you don’t have too much of that problem. JAB has people here expecting $40/$50/$60 for 5M/10M/15M speed. They do have an equipment fee and a support plan in the fine print though. One school of thought is you gotta have added fees, otherwise you just look more expensive in a comparison. (And people do compare prices, even if the other guys can’t get them service.) Another school of thought is, if you do a price increase, make it big enough you don’t have another one in a year. Although that never seems to stop the cable companies. Another school of thought is to make it look like you are giving them something for the price increase, that’s the game the cablecos play, more content. Not sure what you could give away though, if you are already at 5M and unlimited usage. I guess as long as you are saying “up to”, you could raise the number. *From:*Paul McCall via Af mailto:af@afmug.com *Sent:*Saturday, October 04, 2014 3:00 PM *To:*af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:*[AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase? We are thinking of raising our prices on our residential basic plan. Some of our customers have been on the same priced plan for 7 years (or more). Around $ 45 / month for “up to 5Mbit/1Mbit”. Probably 25% of those customers, we are the only “good” source for Internet. The rest have varying levels of DSL or cable options. Thinking of bumping those customers to $ 49. Maybe a little more, haven’t decided. How do you handle price changes and/or on your customers on “rolling contracts” ? Paul Paul McCall, Pres. PDMNet / Florida Broadband 658 Old Dixie Highway Vero Beach, FL 32962 772-564-6800 office 772-473-0352 cell www.pdmnet.com http://www.pdmnet.com/ pa...@pdmnet.net mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net --
Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase?
We had no choice after deploying the 450 and offering up a handful of capacity for a competitive rate which basically put us at capacity in less than 6 months with out the numbers we wanted to see. So, since we had not raised rates in 10yrs we had no choice but to regroup and look at how we compare to our local cable. Really we have the upper hand because of what we do as a wireless industry. The whole hybrid solution is the key. Basically WIsps offer fiber to the home via fixed connections from a fiber carrier. Cable isnt even close due to the party line affect. Cambium gives us a scheduler that enables a VC per sub so we can imitate carrier class connections for a much lower price than what a carrier would serve while still making money doing it. So we can market a wonderful new buzz word called hybrid until it dies we will roll with it but so far the response has been very positive for the new price plans we now offer. Our 5x5 plan is a 5Mbs/5Mbs Down/Up for $75.00 monthly. We limit our basic which is 3x1 @ $50.00 to only one video stream @ 768k per one device per account. On 10/4/2014 7:27 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: i rarely have good to say about the way my boss runs things, but he is a magician at the rate plan changes. we have never directly raise prices, for the most part we have always either kept them the same price or lowered the cost to stay where you are at. usually any rate plan changes come with the option to get more for less, knowing full well that they ultimately will move up a tier in the future because they want more. since we quit directly selling the speed and moved to consumption based pricing it gives a lot more leverage to make global changes with a limited demand increase on the infrastructure. It costs us alot less to offer more consumption than to offer more speed, and everything is moving to consumption based anyway, whether you like it or not. our absolute lowest tier is marketed as an email only plan with a 5gb cap to throttled speed. but we actually moved it to 10gb because there were too many hitting 6gb that would have needed to move up a tier just to get an extra gb, easier to raise it for free, and we still get about a 50% take rate to the next tier anyway. things like that are how we are able to raise prices without actually raising prices. Because of it, even though we went through a negative customer growth (i like that buzz word) our profits increased, and now that we are on a positive customer growth trend, that profit increases quickly which is why we just dropped over 100k buying up the available 320 market at the time (yeah, we were one of the ones that helped cause that). I wish I could provide the specific details of the two major rate changes in the last five years, because they were both pretty ingenious, ultimately getting customers to thank you for raising their prices, just by giving them ownership of the decision. On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:12 PM, David Milholen via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: This is what we have done.. On 10/4/2014 4:02 PM, Jon Langeler via Af wrote: Yeah I wouldn't raise prices on a 900SM customer. Get ready to overhaul the network with faster options before charging more. But definitely charge more as opposed to going cheaper. Markets may vary... Jon On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Paul McCall via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Very good input from all of you! *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af *Sent:* Saturday, October 04, 2014 4:32 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] How frequently have you had a price increase? Everyone seems to expect our prices will go down, it’s the Internet after all, everything is supposed to get cheaper until it’s free, right? We haven’t raised prices in 10 years, and we are feeling some pressure to lower prices about 10%, I guess that’s from competition though and it sounds like you don’t have too much of that problem. JAB has people here expecting $40/$50/$60 for 5M/10M/15M speed. They do have an equipment fee and a support plan in the fine print though. One school of thought is you gotta have added fees, otherwise you just look more expensive in a comparison. (And people do compare prices, even if the other guys can’t get them service.) Another school of thought is, if you do a price increase, make it big enough you don’t have another one in a year. Although that never seems to stop the cable companies. Another school of thought is to make it look like you are giving them something for the price increase, that’s the game the cablecos play, more content. Not sure what you could give away though, if you are already at 5M and unlimited usage. I guess as long as you are saying “up to”, you could raise the number
Re: [AFMUG] update an old ubuntu server
I would do a debian 6 bare metal install no extras just os minimal install. If its older Hardware less than 2g processor then back it down to debian 4 or use crunchbang, Knopix or something lite weight to make the Hardware sing and not try to keep up with bloated code. Then load power dns to get your dns up and running quick. On 10/2/2014 12:06 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: 8.04.3 is the version I just need to patch it, its actually a turnkey linux server so it checks tunkeys repositories, i might have to change those files that tell it where to look Most of the commands it doesnt recognize This is an old DNS server managed through webmin, its a backup so its not a big deal if it gets messed up pushing it through an update i know its better to just build a new server and all that, I dont care right now, we are replacing these soon anyway Any body know what I need to do to upgrade it? -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 --
Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 in 5.1 - 5.3 ???
Why would you need this band? Power restrictions make it almost unusable in long hauls. On 10/2/2014 4:23 AM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote: Are there any plans for this? Is the HW capable? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr --
Re: [AFMUG] Gear in Tower - Grounded or Isolated?
Take a look into R56 standards but as I recall as long as Earth ground is bonded to the cabinet you should be fine. Typically the tower ground would tie back to Earth ground as well. Earth ground referring to the meter ground for the entire site. On 9/28/2014 7:38 AM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af wrote: I have a grounding question for the cabinet at the base of the tower. My electrician wired in the incoming power to the cabinet but he did not bond the cabinet ground/neutral to the actual tower itself. Tower has its own separate ground rods and cabinet ground actually is back where the meter base is, (over 150 feet away) Should I bond the tower and the cabinet together? I already have electrical conduit running out of the cabinet and then attaches to the tower itself so there is metal to metal contact just wondering if I should have something better Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com http://www.wavelinc.com/ tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Gino Villarini via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: I do think too that isolating its easier and should be the way to go… DC plant, fiber up. Problem would be mounts and tower attachments… thinking of using PVC conduit? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com http://www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Reply-To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Date: Sunday, September 28, 2014 at 7:48 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gear in Tower - Grounded or Isolated? Great question Gino. I hope we get some good input. My opinion is that you have to be completed isolated or extremely properly grounded. Both can be complicated, but the second way being the most complicated Paul *From:*Af [mailto:af-bounces+paulm=pdmnet@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini via Af *Sent:* Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:31 AM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] Gear in Tower - Grounded or Isolated? I remember the good old days that most of our network was based on Canopy Classic: The radios were isolated form the tower, minor lightning issues.. Nowadays its has turned into a big issue for us, radios and MW getting zapped! Were do I start? Should I go back to the Isolation model and have all gear in tower isolated from the tower in any way possible? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com http://www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr --
Re: [AFMUG] Power up the tower?
+ 1 billion on hybrid cable My first site used RG58 for Power and fiber for the data but when the Hybrid cable came on the scene I fell in love with it LOL Bestronics does a turn-key cable with custom length pigtail on each end and what ever type terminations. On 9/28/2014 8:50 AM, Chuck Hogg via Af wrote: We do power and fiber up the tower as our standard...ever since that standard has been used, I don't think we've lost a site yet. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Matt via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: This is what we have used for all our CMM units for years. http://www.outdoorspeakerdepot.com/14ga2inspca5.html Outdoor, UV resistant, etc. On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Gino Villarini via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Planning on hanging a DC box on the tower 30-40w total power Cat5 using multiple pairs or 2 conductor cable? We are inclined on cat 5 for standardization purposes... Sent from Marconi's and Graham Bell's fused thoughts!!! --
Re: [AFMUG] ptp650 interface - nice - and an ATPC question
ptp650 works great in my neck of the woods tower to tower without colo interference and yes there is filtering and it does not use the entire spectrum unless you want it to. I have one on a tower with a ptp500 and another ptp600 along with ptp800 and 4 sectors of pmp450 with no issue. I have also installed 2 integrated ptp600 full links right on top of each other. I guess I need to do a spec anny with our 2 way guys and do a snap shot comparison. On 9/24/2014 12:31 AM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: Fundamentally, no. But what you can end up with is a receiver front-end overload. This happens far too often on Rocket radios. Isn't the 650 a whole-band radio, like 4.9-5.9? I hope it would have some spectacular filtering for the fify brazillion $ they want for it. I would shut your stuff down for 10 minutes and see what happens. On 9/24/2014 12:00 AM, That One Guy via Af wrote: INTERFERENCE DOES NOT ALTER RECEIVED POWER!!! On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Just wait until you have people with AF5's in your neck of the woods. No overtly OOB emissions that I'm aware of, but it absolutely crushes anything on 5GHz in it's beamwidth and freq-use range. Atheros radios outside of the band also get overloaded and CCQ tanks. AF24 is amazing and firmware will only get better. AF5... kinda not a fan at this point. Same for just about every -AC radio from every manufacturer. Time will tell how Mimosa does though, I am mildly interested in those. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 09/23/2014 08:29 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote: Since I run several of these in our networks as well as the new 650 units. Ubiquity has a bunch of OOBE even that low if the power requirements are not being met. I have had ubiquity on my tower colo'd with a ptp230 5.4 unit and I set the ubiquity in the 5.2 range and it completely knocked off our ptp230 link. I had to turn the power way down below even min power levels before the 230 would come back up. If by turning your system down and levels do return to normal for them. Then I would take a closer look at your config on your AP to see if you can tweak it to meet standards and at the same time not mess with them. I tried running a ptp link colo'd on my tower using ubiquity and the Out of band noise was incredible. I had 50' sep and andrew dish with at least 120 deg out of center. The Ns5 was the one with 3' dish. Another thing to try is to get someone who make gutters and use sheet metal to make an extended shield placed between the ubiquity and the 600s On 9/23/2014 7:05 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: but i do really like the interface on the 650 On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 7:04 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: This is really beginning to irritate me, Now the guy who replaced the gear is still blaming us for the problems here, I moved the ubnt gear clear down to like 5.1 or whatever the lowest channel is, the spectrum at this and the remote site are deplorable. The Signal/Noise ratio is moving around on the ptp650 and the Vector Errors are off the chart, but he still wants to blame our equipment. I can tell you it boils down to an improper system repair post disaster. I pulled screen shots, both before and after I moved our channels, showed them the issue with their own colocated radios, turned on assymetric channels, yes, they were running symmetric in a high noise environment, nothing could go wrong there, right? Now tomorrow, my boss is going there to unplug our radio, taking our customers down. Im betting some utter nonsense like capacitant power or our antenna shape ends up being to blame here. I know ubnt is shit and bleeds noise allover, this particular radio is a rocket m5 with the 30db dish and the shield kit. The link is 90 degrees off both of theirs (ours is west, they have one north and one south) I believe we have 30 foot vertical sep between it and their closest radio. I can see how a rocket would magically destroy the whole 5ghz spectrum and not have performance issues itself.I even cycled the UBNT radios to make sure that they actually did change channels. ATPC power ranging not matching current TX output and RX doesnt make any sense to me. Interference alone will not alter RX power unless its very very notable. And then to top it off its said it would be better to move completely off the band to 3ghz since it cant interfere. Yeah, great fucking idea
Re: [AFMUG] ptp650 interface - nice - and an ATPC question
He sounds like some of our city know it all's lol If he is the captain of this ship why dont he have a channel plan in place a dictate available spectrum for you? The one thing I do not like about boastful IT guys is their ability to know everything but know nothing at the same time LOL On 9/24/2014 12:46 AM, That One Guy via Af wrote: He had the same issue when he went to the lower 5ghz bands this started IMMEDIATELY after they replaced the radios. the remote side got struck by lightning the minute they turned the radios up there were problems power levels fluctuating and not mathmatically matching up are by no means an indicator of interference. I could see if there had been an issue with the prior ptp500, but there wasnt. I change the channel on the UBNT and the ptp650 spectrum shows a drop in the noise matching exactly the channel size of the ubnt channel. The antenna they have at this site is a radiowaves 2' HP antenna, so i could just about point the UBNT directly at it. This boils down to the blame game of a guy not wanting to have to deal with the aftermath of shoddy workmanship. When a path profile says you should be at -61 with 18 db power cap and youre at -78 with a 21 db output, thats shoddy workmanship. It was still on symmetric channels for gods sake. If you cant get a link to stabilize, the last thing you want to do is to try to run both sides on the same channel. If it werent for the douchey NDA this customer (our landlord)(they actually required that when I remoted in I did it as a contractor under him to be under the NDA he has) has I would post the screenshots and it would be obvious the primary issue here is not a single colocated radio. When your H/V is way off, that alone tells you you didnt do your job. The first thing that needs done is to fix the screaming physical issues, then mitigate the ambient interference, then, if there is still an issue, look into the radio that has been there for years as a tertiary source of problems. He actually got pissed when I started investigating all the radios, he said all I was supposed to do was log in and do channelization, I dont know how the fuck he thinks you can do a channel plan without even knowing what channels the radios are on. A note, this guy is also the same intermediary who said you absolutely can only have BGP on a single router in a network On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:30 AM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Fundamentally, no. But what you can end up with is a receiver front-end overload. This happens far too often on Rocket radios. Isn't the 650 a whole-band radio, like 4.9-5.9? I hope it would have some spectacular filtering for the fify brazillion $ they want for it. I would shut your stuff down for 10 minutes and see what happens. On 9/24/2014 12:00 AM, That One Guy via Af wrote: INTERFERENCE DOES NOT ALTER RECEIVED POWER!!! On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Just wait until you have people with AF5's in your neck of the woods. No overtly OOB emissions that I'm aware of, but it absolutely crushes anything on 5GHz in it's beamwidth and freq-use range. Atheros radios outside of the band also get overloaded and CCQ tanks. AF24 is amazing and firmware will only get better. AF5... kinda not a fan at this point. Same for just about every -AC radio from every manufacturer. Time will tell how Mimosa does though, I am mildly interested in those. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 09/23/2014 08:29 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote: Since I run several of these in our networks as well as the new 650 units. Ubiquity has a bunch of OOBE even that low if the power requirements are not being met. I have had ubiquity on my tower colo'd with a ptp230 5.4 unit and I set the ubiquity in the 5.2 range and it completely knocked off our ptp230 link. I had to turn the power way down below even min power levels before the 230 would come back up. If by turning your system down and levels do return to normal for them. Then I would take a closer look at your config on your AP to see if you can tweak it to meet standards and at the same time not mess with them. I tried running a ptp link colo'd on my tower using ubiquity and the Out of band noise was incredible. I had 50' sep and andrew dish with at least 120 deg out of center. The Ns5 was the one with 3' dish. Another thing to try is to get someone who make gutters and use sheet metal to make an extended shield placed between the ubiquity and the 600s On 9/23/2014 7:05 PM, That One
Re: [AFMUG] ptp650 interface - nice - and an ATPC question
There is some power gain per Mhz in the 650 but at the same time if there is interference on even some of the channel it will show up in the waterfall spec. The issue is making sure link loss level is really close to what link planner says it suppose to have. This will ensure proper alignment of those units. Its not all about the receive levels. Does he have 45Mhz wide channel selected? Move them to a 20Mhz or at best 30Mhz. There is no reason to use 45Mhz wide unless you really want to push tons of bandwidth. If the link loss is met but receive levels are crap then is could be interference. Until the units link loss has been corrected I would not count your chickens before the hatch yet. Of all the links I have done with Cambium I always watch the Linkloss when we get very close to locking down the shot. On 9/24/2014 12:52 AM, That One Guy via Af wrote: Im pretty sure there is no atheros chipset in a ptp650 to have this issue happen and since the rocket is a backhaul, if it were deaf im pretty sure it would be hard to manage, and the fsk customers beyond it would be calling in with concerns about the lack of internet. I highly doubt that a brand new 650 would go deaf the minute it is powered on, and had it gone deaf the minute it was powered on, I doubt the spectrum would show well defined hills and valleys so clearly you can tell the channel size of the interfering systems, it would more likely either be fairly flatline or constantly in flux On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: This is exactly what I am talking about. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 09/23/2014 09:31 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) via Af wrote: Fundamentally, no. But what you can end up with is a receiver front-end overload. This happens far too often on Rocket radios. Isn't the 650 a whole-band radio, like 4.9-5.9? I hope it would have some spectacular filtering for the fify brazillion $ they want for it. I would shut your stuff down for 10 minutes and see what happens. On 9/24/2014 12:00 AM, That One Guy via Af wrote: INTERFERENCE DOES NOT ALTER RECEIVED POWER!!! On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Just wait until you have people with AF5's in your neck of the woods. No overtly OOB emissions that I'm aware of, but it absolutely crushes anything on 5GHz in it's beamwidth and freq-use range. Atheros radios outside of the band also get overloaded and CCQ tanks. AF24 is amazing and firmware will only get better. AF5... kinda not a fan at this point. Same for just about every -AC radio from every manufacturer. Time will tell how Mimosa does though, I am mildly interested in those. Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 09/23/2014 08:29 PM, David Milholen via Af wrote: Since I run several of these in our networks as well as the new 650 units. Ubiquity has a bunch of OOBE even that low if the power requirements are not being met. I have had ubiquity on my tower colo'd with a ptp230 5.4 unit and I set the ubiquity in the 5.2 range and it completely knocked off our ptp230 link. I had to turn the power way down below even min power levels before the 230 would come back up. If by turning your system down and levels do return to normal for them. Then I would take a closer look at your config on your AP to see if you can tweak it to meet standards and at the same time not mess with them. I tried running a ptp link colo'd on my tower using ubiquity and the Out of band noise was incredible. I had 50' sep and andrew dish with at least 120 deg out of center. The Ns5 was the one with 3' dish. Another thing to try is to get someone who make gutters and use sheet metal to make an extended shield placed between the ubiquity and the 600s On 9/23/2014 7:05 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: but i do really like the interface on the 650 On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 7:04 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: This is really beginning to irritate me, Now the guy who replaced the gear is still blaming us for the problems here, I moved the ubnt gear clear down to like 5.1 or whatever the lowest channel is, the spectrum at this and the remote site are deplorable. The Signal/Noise ratio is moving around on the ptp650 and the Vector Errors are off the chart, but he still wants to blame our equipment
Re: [AFMUG] Not bad for a 24 mile ptmp link
Those were the days BH20 pushing long miles lol I had a ptp600 that went 71 miles. spacial diversity crazy stuff. On 9/24/2014 8:06 PM, Craig House via Af wrote: -56 23 plus miles Been this way for 7 years. Never even touched it. --
Re: [AFMUG] ptp650 interface - nice - and an ATPC question
Since I run several of these in our networks as well as the new 650 units. Ubiquity has a bunch of OOBE even that low if the power requirements are not being met. I have had ubiquity on my tower colo'd with a ptp230 5.4 unit and I set the ubiquity in the 5.2 range and it completely knocked off our ptp230 link. I had to turn the power way down below even min power levels before the 230 would come back up. If by turning your system down and levels do return to normal for them. Then I would take a closer look at your config on your AP to see if you can tweak it to meet standards and at the same time not mess with them. I tried running a ptp link colo'd on my tower using ubiquity and the Out of band noise was incredible. I had 50' sep and andrew dish with at least 120 deg out of center. The Ns5 was the one with 3' dish. Another thing to try is to get someone who make gutters and use sheet metal to make an extended shield placed between the ubiquity and the 600s On 9/23/2014 7:05 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: but i do really like the interface on the 650 On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 7:04 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: This is really beginning to irritate me, Now the guy who replaced the gear is still blaming us for the problems here, I moved the ubnt gear clear down to like 5.1 or whatever the lowest channel is, the spectrum at this and the remote site are deplorable. The Signal/Noise ratio is moving around on the ptp650 and the Vector Errors are off the chart, but he still wants to blame our equipment. I can tell you it boils down to an improper system repair post disaster. I pulled screen shots, both before and after I moved our channels, showed them the issue with their own colocated radios, turned on assymetric channels, yes, they were running symmetric in a high noise environment, nothing could go wrong there, right? Now tomorrow, my boss is going there to unplug our radio, taking our customers down. Im betting some utter nonsense like capacitant power or our antenna shape ends up being to blame here. I know ubnt is shit and bleeds noise allover, this particular radio is a rocket m5 with the 30db dish and the shield kit. The link is 90 degrees off both of theirs (ours is west, they have one north and one south) I believe we have 30 foot vertical sep between it and their closest radio. I can see how a rocket would magically destroy the whole 5ghz spectrum and not have performance issues itself.I even cycled the UBNT radios to make sure that they actually did change channels. ATPC power ranging not matching current TX output and RX doesnt make any sense to me. Interference alone will not alter RX power unless its very very notable. And then to top it off its said it would be better to move completely off the band to 3ghz since it cant interfere. Yeah, great fucking idea, lets take the only semi clean spectrum left and burn it on a backhaul thats performing as it should because other people dont know how to troubleshoot their own damn gear. But the kicker to that would be oh, you must still be interfering, that m365 is actually a 5ghz radio downconverted how bout this, climb the damn tower and fix the fuckup fucking meh On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 5:04 PM, That One Guy via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Im not doing anything, this is a not my chair not my problem issue. This strike blew everything on the tower, if it was electronic, it cooked, the switch was sitting on back of the APC and welded to it even tripped the breaker Im just curious with these if theres any issue with the ATPC on these bas boys On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:42 PM, David via Af af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com wrote: Inspect the cables or at lease switch one or both out at one end and see if a prevalent change is made. Could be a feed horn but unlikely I would shoot for pigtails first. On 09/23/2014 02:38 PM, That One Guy via Af wrote: I just got done troubleshooting a 650 link for our landlord we are coloed with on a couple towers. I had not looked at the ptp interface since the 500. This thing is freaking beautiful, and I never compliment anybody, especially on a web gui. So much information, so easy to find. one question though, They have atpc set to -35 on these, does that basically turn atpc off, or could it cause a problem? Im pretty sure they have a loose antenna or damaged feedhorn/patch cables (this was a lighnting replacement of a ptp500, reusing the cables/feedhorn) The system statistics
Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Force 100 - Dysfunctional Rube Goldberg
OMG :) On 9/21/2014 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote: Does anyone know why the Force 100 has not been recalled for being an absolutely dreadful product? I think the designers of the Force 100 looked at the NanoBridge and said how can we make this worse. *slow clap* Give them a bonus for they succeeded. I bought 12 units because of an emergency and now I'm not sure how far I'll be able to go as I surely won't be able to get the required 10 units even assembled. 1. Why so much assembly? 2. I'm reminded of 2004 by the amount of coax that needs to be sealed. Ubiquiti got it right with IP67 connectors and those little rubber boots on the Rockets. 3. If we're sealing the coax on the radio, why the rubber boot and zip ties? Surely they aren't more at risk than the N connectors on the antenna. 4. That feedhorn assembly is the worst! Does everything look stable? Yup. Okay, screw in the set screws. Check. Everything look good? Feedhorn falls out. WTF. Oh, apparently it wasn't all the way in. Try again. No. Try again. No. Try again? Can't because by now the set screws are striped and I can't get them out. I can't blame them for they should only be fastened once. Try another unit. Nope, this feedhorn just won't go all the way in. Now I'm not certain that the first two that actually went together are together correctly. Yes, I separated the dish from the mount in an attempt to 5. I like the flexibility of the mount, but that is just a massive hunk of steel and too complex for a CPE. 6. Is the idea of a simple clip like the Rocket too easy? Did someone need a science project? 7. For the record, I have correctly assembled (on the first try) a few Jirous dishes and they're a bear. Can I drive them all up to Rolling Ghettos today and have you guys assemble them for me? I need them actually operational by the AM. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL --
Re: [AFMUG] Dear Cambium
Chris, We are rockin 3.65 450 AB channels replacing 90% of our 900 subs. Migration is taking time due to cap X. I took down our first 900AP which was our first aP900 installed last week. On 9/19/2014 4:34 PM, Christopher Tyler via Af wrote: I love the 450, 450 is awesome, but 90% of our subs are on 900 MHz, what do we do there, where is our upgrade path, what is the replacement for PMP100 in 900 MHz? We have no alternative to 900 for most of our customers where we are, too many hills and trees. We are still deploying 900 MHz radios in large quantities simply because we can't use anything else. Sure would be nice to have an easy way to configure those radios, we (Animal Farm) have only been asking for that feature for the last 8 years, not like they didn't know about it or have the time to figure it out. Now they are giving it to us, but only on a platform where we don't really need it yet. While I understand that PMP100 is somewhat antiquated, Cambium is still making money on it and will continue to make money on it, so why not give us at least some development beyond bug fixes at least until there is a 900 replacement? Why not a 450 in 900 MHz that's using the newer hardware but still only 2x modulation. We would literally buy thousands of them within the next year. --
Re: [AFMUG] Dear Cambium
Rory, +1 one on MTBF which we have pushed the limit on FSK 10yrs going and now being replaced by 450 gear. We DONT GO BACK once its deployed except for your routine checkups and site inspections. Or at least thats how we plan. We have had our share of BAD sites for sure but learning proper ground isolation and power requirements is a must and some of it is not taught in schools. My concern with cheaper products is management learning curve and how long will it sustain in the elements. I have seen what happens to stainless steel and non galvanized metals over a few years of being on a site. Whats worse is when you do have to go back and replace one of these things. UGH! ATT and Verizon has been doing deployments continuously for years and if you ever take a close look at how they do things on a tower. It make you think about how yours compares. On 9/19/2014 6:46 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: Ken, I'm going to have to disagree with your statement about Cambium screwing themselves because they built them to last forever. People are willing to pay for quality since cost of ownership is much lower. For example, if Cambium had the ePMP even 2 years ago or something 802.11 compatible (not that the ePMP is compatible), I would rather have paid 50% more for a radio that will be here in 5 years. I consider that the minimum life of the product before a new technology needs to be deployed and from an accounting standpoint, it fits the depreciation schedule. As it is, we assume Ubiquiti will last 3 years since that's been our experience. We are seeing the Nanobridges, AirRouters, and Toughswitches fail even faster than that though so our financials have to be adjusted and we have to charge more to cover it. Our hope is that the new Nanobeams have a longer average lifespan than the last 2 product series so that all is right with the world. As for 900Mhz, there are people that need something in that band. However, it's going to take a different technology than 802.11 or something along the lines of an advanced 802.11 product to work down there. Other than the WiMax products going into that band, I know of 2 other companies that have the potential to do some amazing things with the band and another technology that may be able to be used in that band. We will see how that plays out. I think short term if I was having to move into the sub-1GHz band, I'd seriously be looking at White Space as a temporary solution. You might have to be creative with the financing options but I saw Radio Shack increase sales by bringing in outside financing options for clients when computers were big in the 80's, maybe there is something that could be done there. I'm sure WISPER Ventures or one of the companies that have specialized financing might be able to come up with something. Rory -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-bounces+rory=triadwireless@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof via Af Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 3:16 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dear Cambium Are you sure Cambium is making money on PMP100? Remember, they don't get any money for a used radio. It's not like Cisco who thinks you will buy SmartNet on a router off eBay. I'm sure they do sell some new PMP100, but they really screwed themselves by making them last forever. So some new product to replace 900 FSK rather than just a free firmware upgrade for a radio built and sold long ago is probably what some Cambium product manager loses sleep over. If only LTE was cheap. If only TVWS was cheap. If only there was some more low frequency spectrum that WISPs could get access to. If only power companies would stop using 900 for smartgrid. Didn't Tesla have some method of sending signals through the ground? But I really have to wonder about you WISPs that use 900 as your bread and butter, how do you compete with stuff like Exede? Yes, I know the usage cap, but how much usage can you rack up on a connection that doesn't support video streaming anyway? We need to be either cheaper than Exede, or just as fast with higher usage caps. Or be lucky enough to be in an area where they don't have spot beams. And ATT, Verizon, Sprint and DISH don't have fixed wireless over LTE. And the ILEC doesn't get CAF money to run fiber or VDSL. -Original Message- From: Christopher Tyler via Af Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 4:34 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dear Cambium I love the 450, 450 is awesome, but 90% of our subs are on 900 MHz, what do we do there, where is our upgrade path, what is the replacement for PMP100 in 900 MHz? We have no alternative to 900 for most of our customers where we are, too many hills and trees. We are still deploying 900 MHz radios in large quantities simply because we can't use anything else. Sure would be nice to have an easy way to configure those radios, we (Animal Farm) have only been asking for that feature for the last
Re: [AFMUG] Intermapper
Lewis, what features are you using on intermapper? On 9/9/2014 8:23 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote: I know ( or I think ) Gino uses intermapper. I have gotten a price from Solarwinds which is very expensive. I have gotten a price from Intermapper as well which depending on how one looks at it is maybe not quite as expensive. Solarwinds is full of little gotchas with modules and such which make you think you are getting a price for what you want to do, then you find out that you can't do, X, Y, or Q unless you buy module Z. Intermapper has some modularity but it is pretty upfront about it. I know we just got done with this discussion but I was wondering if anyone has put Intermapper to the test and if so I would like to talk to you personally and if possible, see it in action on your network if you wouldn't mind. --
