Re: [AFMUG] Rackinjector "Cambium Style" sync over power cards available in quantity.

[Dave]

Who makes the pick and place machine?


On 02/20/2018 08:17 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
We've been shipping the RackInjector cards which do the new "Cambium 
Style" sync over power for a few weeks now. This is the style of sync 
over power which is required by the 450m and can be used by the 450i.


We've been selling them in stealth mode since we were hand-placing 
more than a few components on each injector card.  This was a time 
consuming process and we really didn't want a surge of orders until 
this was rectified. Last week the additional feeders for our Pick and 
Place machine arrived and now everything is being machine-placed, 
which is much faster.  So I guess it's time to be a bit more vocal 
about the availability of these.


In other words, if you've been waiting for me to announce that these 
are available on the list, your wait is over. Like everything else, 
they're available on the store, either as a option during a 
RackInjector purchase, or individually to add to an existing rackinjector.


--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 





--

[AFMUG] Rackinjector "Cambium Style" sync over power cards available in quantity.

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

We've been shipping the RackInjector cards which do the new "Cambium Style"
sync over power for a few weeks now.  This is the style of sync over power
which is required by the 450m and can be used by the 450i.

We've been selling them in stealth mode since we were hand-placing more
than a few components on each injector card.  This was a time consuming
process and we really didn't want a surge of orders until this was
rectified.  Last week the additional feeders for our Pick and Place machine
arrived and now everything is being machine-placed, which is much faster.
So I guess it's time to be a bit more vocal about the availability of these.

In other words, if you've been waiting for me to announce that these are
available on the list, your wait is over.  Like everything else, they're
available on the store, either as a option during a RackInjector purchase,
or individually to add to an existing rackinjector.

-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[chuck]

Internal and external photos are the same.  

From: Colin Stanners 
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 10:31 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

Fancy new ePMP...


-- Forwarded message --
From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
Date: Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 11:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for New 
Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0017 
Equipment Authorized: Force 300 Fixed Transceiver
 

[AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Colin Stanners]

Fancy new ePMP...

-- Forwarded message --
From: FCC ID Alert 
Date: Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 11:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
New Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0017

Equipment Authorized: Force 300 Fixed Transceiver

Re: [AFMUG] New cambium firmware release

[Gino A. Villarini]

Thanks!

Gino A. Villarini
@gvillarini



On Jan 20, 2018, at 2:24 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
> wrote:

I note that cambium officially released 15.1.3 on Friday.

Among other things this seems to fix a bug that some of my customers have 
encountered where the radios will lose sync and not recover without a reboot.   
A few of my customers have upgraded radios which were experiencing this issue 
on an ongoing basis to one of the Beta versions of this release, and so far 
this seems to have solve the issue.   As a result, If you're seeing this bug, 
I'd recommend that you try upgrading to 15.1.3


--
Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | 
http://www.packetflux.com
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/linkedin.png]
 [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/facebook.png] 
  
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png] 

[AFMUG] New cambium firmware release

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

I note that cambium officially released 15.1.3 on Friday.

Among other things this seems to fix a bug that some of my customers have
encountered where the radios will lose sync and not recover without a
reboot.   A few of my customers have upgraded radios which were
experiencing this issue on an ongoing basis to one of the Beta versions of
this release, and so far this seems to have solve the issue.   As a result,
If you're seeing this bug, I'd recommend that you try upgrading to 15.1.3


-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Jaime Solorza]

Damn...I need to start drinking early today...my brain just can't process
this...Tecate  Where's my wallet?  Back in a few

Jaime Solorza

On Jan 12, 2018 2:20 PM, "Steve Jones" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> yeah but finding the infants to feed to them gets kind of hairy. sure
> theyre small, but people tend to get all uppity when infants go missing.
> Sure they only eat the souls, but its so hard to extract an infants soul in
> the field
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Unicorns eat very little...
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Mitch Koep <af...@abwisp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Can just get the ring.too expensive to feed the unicorn lol
>>>
>>> On 1/12/2018 12:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, you
>>> can speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually hatches a
>>> unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 4096qam and only
>>> needs 3db cinr
>>>
>>> Also comes with a decoder ring
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What does it do?
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Colin Stanners
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for
>>>> NewEquipment
>>>>
>>>> PTP550
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>>> From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
>>>> Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
>>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>>> To: cstann...@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
>>>> for New Equipment.
>>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038
>>>> <http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>
>>>> Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Mathew Howard]

True, true...

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> yeah but finding the infants to feed to them gets kind of hairy. sure
> theyre small, but people tend to get all uppity when infants go missing.
> Sure they only eat the souls, but its so hard to extract an infants soul in
> the field
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Unicorns eat very little...
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Mitch Koep <af...@abwisp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Can just get the ring.too expensive to feed the unicorn lol
>>>
>>> On 1/12/2018 12:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, you
>>> can speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually hatches a
>>> unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 4096qam and only
>>> needs 3db cinr
>>>
>>> Also comes with a decoder ring
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What does it do?
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Colin Stanners
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
>>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for
>>>> NewEquipment
>>>>
>>>> PTP550
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>>> From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
>>>> Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
>>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>>> To: cstann...@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
>>>> for New Equipment.
>>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038
>>>> <http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>
>>>> Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Steve Jones]

yeah but finding the infants to feed to them gets kind of hairy. sure
theyre small, but people tend to get all uppity when infants go missing.
Sure they only eat the souls, but its so hard to extract an infants soul in
the field


On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Unicorns eat very little...
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Mitch Koep <af...@abwisp.com> wrote:
>
>> Can just get the ring.too expensive to feed the unicorn lol
>>
>> On 1/12/2018 12:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>
>> its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, you
>> can speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually hatches a
>> unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 4096qam and only
>> needs 3db cinr
>>
>> Also comes with a decoder ring
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What does it do?
>>>
>>> *From:* Colin Stanners
>>> *Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for
>>> NewEquipment
>>>
>>> PTP550
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
>>> Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>> To: cstann...@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
>>> New Equipment.
>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038
>>> <http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>
>>> Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Mathew Howard]

Unicorns eat very little...

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Mitch Koep <af...@abwisp.com> wrote:

> Can just get the ring.too expensive to feed the unicorn lol
>
> On 1/12/2018 12:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>
> its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, you
> can speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually hatches a
> unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 4096qam and only
> needs 3db cinr
>
> Also comes with a decoder ring
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
>> What does it do?
>>
>> *From:* Colin Stanners
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for
>> NewEquipment
>>
>> PTP550
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
>> Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>> To: cstann...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
>> New Equipment.
>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038
>> <http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>
>> Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[George Skorup]

I believe 802.11ac Wave2 based PTP

On 1/12/2018 11:45 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

What does it do?
*From:* Colin Stanners
*Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for 
NewEquipment

PTP550


-- Forwarded message --
From: *FCC ID Alert* <ale...@fccid.io>
Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. 
for New Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038 
<http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m> 


Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Mitch Koep]

Can just get the ring.too expensive to feed the unicorn lol


On 1/12/2018 12:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, 
you can speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually 
hatches a unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 
4096qam and only needs 3db cinr


Also comes with a decoder ring

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com 
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:


What does it do?
*From:* Colin Stanners
*Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application
for NewEquipment
PTP550


-- Forwarded message --
From: *FCC ID Alert* <ale...@fccid.io>
Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks
Inc. for New Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038

<http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>

Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[Steve Jones]

its like a hatchimal . you pull the key and it vibrate and wiggles, you can
speed it up by petting it and talking to it. it eventually hatches a
unicorn. said unicorn farts a brand new radio that does 4096qam and only
needs 3db cinr

Also comes with a decoder ring

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> What does it do?
>
> *From:* Colin Stanners
> *Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for
> NewEquipment
>
> PTP550
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
> Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
> To: cstann...@gmail.com
>
>
> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
> New Equipment.
> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038
> <http://email.fccid.net/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMgGF8jAkDRC_YBO3SIHN1R5VCH_r2apdMNNd1P0nLNVJRrAAIgGvQU0GnXvEsA9edcP7QDdrSEQ5jLpsqs5SmYeJ2dZHHkSQ0jiPJMTahEY1Rq91I9a4nye39rYrjHp4p-49BUeoU1PABvUEbme47blo16f9zqWRfO-_gBZJS1m>
> Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

[chuck]

What does it do?

From: Colin Stanners 
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 10:42 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for NewEquipment

PTP550




-- Forwarded message --
From: FCC ID Alert <ale...@fccid.io>
Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for New 
Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038 
Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver

[AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Colin Stanners]

PTP550


-- Forwarded message --
From: FCC ID Alert 
Date: Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: cstann...@gmail.com


A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
New Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0038

Equipment Authorized: PTP550 Fixed Transceiver

Re: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

[Josh Luthman]

Like the password to your luggage!


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

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Jay Weekley <par...@cyberbroadband.net>
wrote:

> Could have been worse...
>
> Paul McCall wrote:
>
>> Ooopss... not OFFLIST.  I hate it when that happens!
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 12:37 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Cc: PDMNet Canopy Repairs <pdmnetcanopyrepa...@pdmnet.net>
>> Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number
>>
>> Matt,
>>
>> We will replace them for $ 45 each if you have a few of them to do at
>> once and that is all this wrong.  It is indeed pretty straight forward, but
>> also its not too hard to mess up the board.
>>
>> Paul, PDMNet
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 11:22 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number
>>
>> It takes a lot of heat to remove one.  I would rather just order the
>> part.  Used to do a great deal of component level repairs years back.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Colin Stanners <cstann...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Pmp450 SM... Unless Cambium changed something, grab a Cambium surge,
>>> it is more expensive per port but that is two that you already had in
>>> stock.
>>>
>>> On Nov 1, 2017 4:37 PM, "Matt" <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anybody know the Digikey, Mouser or Jameco part number for
>>>> replacement RJ45 port on Cambium PMP450 SM?  Standard 5ghz SM that
>>>> can use reflector?  Have a few that are broke.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

[Jay Weekley]

Could have been worse...

Paul McCall wrote:

Ooopss... not OFFLIST.  I hate it when that happens!

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 12:37 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Cc: PDMNet Canopy Repairs <pdmnetcanopyrepa...@pdmnet.net>
Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

Matt,

We will replace them for $ 45 each if you have a few of them to do at once and 
that is all this wrong.  It is indeed pretty straight forward, but also its not 
too hard to mess up the board.

Paul, PDMNet

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 11:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

It takes a lot of heat to remove one.  I would rather just order the part.  
Used to do a great deal of component level repairs years back.


On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Colin Stanners <cstann...@gmail.com> wrote:

Pmp450 SM... Unless Cambium changed something, grab a Cambium surge,
it is more expensive per port but that is two that you already had in stock.

On Nov 1, 2017 4:37 PM, "Matt" <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote:

Does anybody know the Digikey, Mouser or Jameco part number for
replacement RJ45 port on Cambium PMP450 SM?  Standard 5ghz SM that
can use reflector?  Have a few that are broke.

Thanks.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Re: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

[Paul McCall]

Ooopss... not OFFLIST.  I hate it when that happens!

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul McCall
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 12:37 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Cc: PDMNet Canopy Repairs <pdmnetcanopyrepa...@pdmnet.net>
Subject: [AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

Matt,

We will replace them for $ 45 each if you have a few of them to do at once and 
that is all this wrong.  It is indeed pretty straight forward, but also its not 
too hard to mess up the board.

Paul, PDMNet

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 11:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

It takes a lot of heat to remove one.  I would rather just order the part.  
Used to do a great deal of component level repairs years back.


On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Colin Stanners <cstann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pmp450 SM... Unless Cambium changed something, grab a Cambium surge, 
> it is more expensive per port but that is two that you already had in stock.
>
> On Nov 1, 2017 4:37 PM, "Matt" <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Does anybody know the Digikey, Mouser or Jameco part number for 
>> replacement RJ45 port on Cambium PMP450 SM?  Standard 5ghz SM that 
>> can use reflector?  Have a few that are broke.
>>
>> Thanks.

[AFMUG] OFFLIST: Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

[Paul McCall]

Matt,

We will replace them for $ 45 each if you have a few of them to do at once and 
that is all this wrong.  It is indeed pretty straight forward, but also its not 
too hard to mess up the board.

Paul, PDMNet

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 11:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Ethernet Port Part Number

It takes a lot of heat to remove one.  I would rather just order the part.  
Used to do a great deal of component level repairs years back.


On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Colin Stanners <cstann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pmp450 SM... Unless Cambium changed something, grab a Cambium surge, 
> it is more expensive per port but that is two that you already had in stock.
>
> On Nov 1, 2017 4:37 PM, "Matt" <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Does anybody know the Digikey, Mouser or Jameco part number for 
>> replacement RJ45 port on Cambium PMP450 SM?  Standard 5ghz SM that 
>> can use reflector?  Have a few that are broke.
>>
>> Thanks.

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

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

FYI


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


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

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

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Steve Jones]

Um yeah, that 1 mile. That was the limit i set, but i have no
authourity to stab installer monkeys (something to do with peta and tree
huggers) the 180 is perfect for not blinding the ap when atpc isnt enough
on the 200 without spirious noise all over the locale from a downtilt (or
left right tilt cause the fucking monkeys dont listen)
But i find these cocks at 3 miles, cause they can be clipped to a fucking
downspout on december 3.
Stab stab stab, fucking stab.
I like the parabolic design, assuming they are wind light.
F% wrote:

> We'll probably never buy the 190. The 180 works fine up to maybe a mile,
> 200 for anything beyond that.
>
> On 8/31/2017 4:44 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>
> Yeah, once it's assembled it's going to look more or less like a Force
> 200, but it's a four piece dish that snaps together somehow, so it comes in
> a much smaller box.
>
> I'm not really convinced that there's that much use for a smaller dish,
> but Ubiquiti has been selling a 22dbi and a 25dbi model forever, so I guess
> there's a market for a slightly cheaper, slightly lower gain SM.
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> i was sent an image, this is a dish style, like a mini 2000?
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That's what I'm thinking?  99% of our installs are Force 200.  Too much
>>> gain?  Oh well ATPC takes care of it.
>>>
>>> Best case you're saving $30 which is assuming $0 cost of maintaining
>>> another item, room in the van, never mistakenly used it when it should have
>>> been a 200...
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340 <%28937%29%20552-2340>
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <%28937%29%20552-2343>
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:00 PM, can...@believewireless.net <
>>> p...@believewireless.net> wrote:
>>>
 I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep three radios
 on the truck? If they could have
 made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be something
 we'd use.

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard 
 wrote:

> No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we
> really don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll
> end up using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
> less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a
>> 190 (previously 180) instead of a 200?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <%28937%29%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <%28937%29%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds
>>> me, I need to order some.
>>>
>>> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size
>>> box as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time,
>>> but there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where 
>>> these
>>> should be a good fit.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this
 point?  It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap 
 between
 180 and 190, but I still suggest Force 200.


 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340 <%28937%29%20552-2340>
 Direct: 937-552-2343 <%28937%29%20552-2343>
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners <
 cstann...@gmail.com> wrote:

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Cc:
>
> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks
> Inc. for New Equipment.
> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
> 
> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>
> unsubscribe
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[George Skorup]

We'll probably never buy the 190. The 180 works fine up to maybe a mile, 
200 for anything beyond that.


On 8/31/2017 4:44 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
Yeah, once it's assembled it's going to look more or less like a Force 
200, but it's a four piece dish that snaps together somehow, so it 
comes in a much smaller box.


I'm not really convinced that there's that much use for a smaller 
dish, but Ubiquiti has been selling a 22dbi and a 25dbi model forever, 
so I guess there's a market for a slightly cheaper, slightly lower 
gain SM.


On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:


i was sent an image, this is a dish style, like a mini 2000?

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Josh Luthman
>
wrote:

That's what I'm thinking?  99% of our installs are Force 200. 
Too much gain?  Oh well ATPC takes care of it.

Best case you're saving $30 which is assuming $0 cost of
maintaining another item, room in the van, never mistakenly
used it when it should have been a 200...


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

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:00 PM, can...@believewireless.net
 > wrote:

I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep
three radios on the truck? If they could have
made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be
something we'd use.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard
> wrote:

No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short
links, but we really don't use that many as it is. I'm
not really sure how often we'll end up using the 190,
but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or
a 180.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman
> wrote:

Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what
situation would you use a 190 (previously 180)
instead of a 200?


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

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard
> wrote:

Yup... it's existence has been public for
awhile... and this reminds me, I need to order
some.

The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it
comes in the same size box as the Force 180. I
still expect to use Force 200s most of the
time, but there are a lot of cases where the
180 isn't quite enough where these should be a
good fit.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman
> wrote:

Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at
distributors at this point?  It's cheaper
and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good
gap between 180 and 190, but I still
suggest Force 200.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340

Direct: 937-552-2343

1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin
Stanners > wrote:

-- Forwarded message --
From: "FCC ID Alert" >
Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Mathew Howard]

Yeah, once it's assembled it's going to look more or less like a Force 200,
but it's a four piece dish that snaps together somehow, so it comes in a
much smaller box.

I'm not really convinced that there's that much use for a smaller dish, but
Ubiquiti has been selling a 22dbi and a 25dbi model forever, so I guess
there's a market for a slightly cheaper, slightly lower gain SM.

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> i was sent an image, this is a dish style, like a mini 2000?
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Josh Luthman  > wrote:
>
>> That's what I'm thinking?  99% of our installs are Force 200.  Too much
>> gain?  Oh well ATPC takes care of it.
>>
>> Best case you're saving $30 which is assuming $0 cost of maintaining
>> another item, room in the van, never mistakenly used it when it should have
>> been a 200...
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:00 PM, can...@believewireless.net <
>> p...@believewireless.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep three radios
>>> on the truck? If they could have
>>> made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be something
>>> we'd use.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we
 really don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll
 end up using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
 less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
 j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

> Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a
> 190 (previously 180) instead of a 200?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds
>> me, I need to order some.
>>
>> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size
>> box as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time,
>> but there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
>> should be a good fit.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this
>>> point?  It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap 
>>> between
>>> 180 and 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners >> > wrote:
>>>
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
 Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
 To: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Cc:

 A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks
 Inc. for New Equipment.
 See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
 
 Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver

 unsubscribe
 

>>>
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Steve Jones]

i was sent an image, this is a dish style, like a mini 2000?

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> That's what I'm thinking?  99% of our installs are Force 200.  Too much
> gain?  Oh well ATPC takes care of it.
>
> Best case you're saving $30 which is assuming $0 cost of maintaining
> another item, room in the van, never mistakenly used it when it should have
> been a 200...
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:00 PM, can...@believewireless.net <
> p...@believewireless.net> wrote:
>
>> I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep three radios on
>> the truck? If they could have
>> made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be something we'd
>> use.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we
>>> really don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll
>>> end up using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
>>> less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a
 190 (previously 180) instead of a 200?


 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
 Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
 wrote:

> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds
> me, I need to order some.
>
> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size
> box as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time,
> but there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
> should be a good fit.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this
>> point?  It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between
>> 180 and 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Cc:
>>>
>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
>>> for New Equipment.
>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
>>> 
>>> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>>>
>>> unsubscribe
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Josh Luthman]

That's what I'm thinking?  99% of our installs are Force 200.  Too much
gain?  Oh well ATPC takes care of it.

Best case you're saving $30 which is assuming $0 cost of maintaining
another item, room in the van, never mistakenly used it when it should have
been a 200...


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

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:00 PM, can...@believewireless.net <
p...@believewireless.net> wrote:

> I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep three radios on
> the truck? If they could have
> made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be something we'd
> use.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we
>> really don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll
>> end up using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
>> less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a 190
>>> (previously 180) instead of a 200?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds
 me, I need to order some.

 The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size
 box as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time,
 but there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
 should be a good fit.

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
 j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this
> point?  It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between
> 180 and 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
> wrote:
>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
>> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
>> Cc:
>>
>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
>> for New Equipment.
>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
>> 
>> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>>
>> unsubscribe
>> 
>>
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

I'm sorry...they are supposed to ship soon.  Should be in the US around the 
beginning of October.

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

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists  wrote:
> 
> Will ship from Asia around Oct. 1st.
> 
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 Office
> 574-220-7826 Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
> 
>> On Aug 30, 2017, at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>> 
>> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me, I 
>> need to order some.
>> 
>> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box as 
>> the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but there 
>> are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these should be a 
>> good fit.
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?  
>>> It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and 
>>> 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> 
 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners  
 wrote:
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
 Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
 To: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Cc: 
 
 A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for 
 New Equipment.
 See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031 
 Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
 unsubscribe
 
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Gino A. Villarini]

WE will try to standardize on the Force 190, if we need more, then a 200 or 
Conn. With 2ft dish

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of 
Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com<mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New 
Equipment

No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we really 
don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll end up using 
the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get less than -60 use 
a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman 
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a 190 
(previously 180) instead of a 200?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:(937)%20552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:(937)%20552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
<mhoward...@gmail.com<mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me, I need 
to order some.

The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box as the 
Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but there are a 
lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these should be a good fit.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman 
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?  It's 
cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and 190, but I 
still suggest Force 200.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340<tel:(937)%20552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343<tel:(937)%20552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
<cstann...@gmail.com<mailto:cstann...@gmail.com>> wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: "FCC ID Alert" <ale...@fccid.io<mailto:ale...@fccid.io>>
Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: "FCC ID Alert" <ale...@fccid.io<mailto:ale...@fccid.io>>
Cc:

A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for New 
Equipment.
See FCC ID 
Z8H89FT0031<http://email.fccid.io/c/eJw1jbsOwyAMAL8mjMjYJpCBoUkV9QM6daMGGqQ8qiT_r2apdMMtp0uBXMzSqRoQjANPYJAAWLceHel-IB7724BoB0a8NwxFpCZdNzWFZICYiiudaVO00VmbzTt7Sb4VLqzmMJ3n92jo1uB48W8vffmH78YnABm1BznOuK55P67BZ4l11rItP6-WLBs>
Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver

unsubscribe<http://email.fccid.io/u/eJwNy8EOgyAMANCvkSMpLUJ34KAs-4_a4kYyNVH_P9u7PyuUpenD9YIQMjBBQAKIPjFm8nOl-JqnijjWiPgcIqyq3Xw_3KcI2oLZIFJg4TaqLdSY15USJBRzZ9Hrln1v5_Wf70361-uxubsMOP0A2ikikw>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[can...@believewireless.net]

I really don't know where this fits in. Who wants to keep three radios on
the truck? If they could have
made the same design for say a 27db antenna, that would be something we'd
use.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we
> really don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll
> end up using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get
> less than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a 190
>> (previously 180) instead of a 200?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me,
>>> I need to order some.
>>>
>>> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box
>>> as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but
>>> there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
>>> should be a good fit.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?
 It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and
 190, but I still suggest Force 200.


 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
 Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
 wrote:

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Cc:
>
> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
> for New Equipment.
> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
> 
> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>
> unsubscribe
> 
>


>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Mathew Howard]

No, we'll probably keep using the 180 for really short links, but we really
don't use that many as it is. I'm not really sure how often we'll end up
using the 190, but I'm thinking it will be something like if we get less
than -60 use a Force 200, otherwise, use a 190 or a 180.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a 190
> (previously 180) instead of a 200?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me,
>> I need to order some.
>>
>> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box
>> as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but
>> there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
>> should be a good fit.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?
>>> It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and
>>> 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 -- Forwarded message --
 From: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
 Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
 To: "FCC ID Alert" 
 Cc:

 A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc.
 for New Equipment.
 See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
 
 Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver

 unsubscribe
 

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Josh Luthman]

Are you dropping 180 for the 190?  In what situation would you use a 190
(previously 180) instead of a 200?


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

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me, I
> need to order some.
>
> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box
> as the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but
> there are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these
> should be a good fit.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman <
> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>
>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?
>> It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and
>> 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Cc:
>>>
>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
>>> New Equipment.
>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
>>> 
>>> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>>>
>>> unsubscribe
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

Will ship from Asia around Oct. 1st.

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

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 1:05 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
> 
> Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me, I 
> need to order some.
> 
> The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box as 
> the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but there 
> are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these should be a 
> good fit.
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman  
>> wrote:
>> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?  It's 
>> cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and 190, 
>> but I still suggest Force 200.
>> 
>> 
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners  wrote:
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
>>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>>> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
>>> Cc: 
>>> 
>>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for 
>>> New Equipment.
>>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031 
>>> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>>> unsubscribe
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Mathew Howard]

Yup... it's existence has been public for awhile... and this reminds me, I
need to order some.

The neat thing about the Force 190 is that it comes in the same size box as
the Force 180. I still expect to use Force 200s most of the time, but there
are a lot of cases where the 180 isn't quite enough where these should be a
good fit.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?
> It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and
> 190, but I still suggest Force 200.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners 
> wrote:
>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
>> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
>> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
>> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
>> Cc:
>>
>> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
>> New Equipment.
>> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
>> 
>> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>>
>> unsubscribe
>> 
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Josh Luthman]

Uhm I think the Force 190 is showing up at distributors at this point?
It's cheaper and 3db less than the Force 200.  A good gap between 180 and
190, but I still suggest Force 200.


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

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Colin Stanners  wrote:

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
> Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
> To: "FCC ID Alert" 
> Cc:
>
> A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
> New Equipment.
> See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031
> 
> Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver
>
> unsubscribe
> 
>

[AFMUG] Fwd: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment

[Colin Stanners]

-- Forwarded message --
From: "FCC ID Alert" 
Date: Aug 30, 2017 7:30 AM
Subject: Cambium Networks Inc. FCC ID Application for New Equipment
To: "FCC ID Alert" 
Cc:

A new FCC ID application has been submitted by Cambium Networks Inc. for
New Equipment.
See FCC ID Z8H89FT0031

Equipment Authorized: ePMP Force 190 Transceiver

unsubscribe

Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

[Gino A. Villarini]

Yeah,

We don’t have use for them as micro pop because we use epmp for that

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Kurt 
Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Friday, July 28, 2017 at 12:42 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

I'm sure his AP's are being swapped with 450i AP's or 450M APs.




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Jon Langeler 
<jon-ispli...@michwave.net<mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>> wrote:
What you replacing 450 with?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Jul 28, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Gino A. Villarini 
<g...@aeronetpr.com<mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com>> wrote:

Used, working condition

5ghz 450 Aps - $999 each
5.4 and 5.7 430 Aps & Sms – make offer




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

[Gino A. Villarini]

450i’s and M’s

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Jon 
Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net<mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Friday, July 28, 2017 at 12:23 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

What you replacing 450 with?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.





Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Jul 28, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Gino A. Villarini 
<g...@aeronetpr.com<mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com>> wrote:

Used, working condition

5ghz 450 Aps - $999 each
5.4 and 5.7 430 Aps & Sms – make offer




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

[Kurt Fankhauser]

I'm sure his AP's are being swapped with 450i AP's or 450M APs.

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Jon Langeler 
wrote:

> What you replacing 450 with?
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>
> On Jul 28, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Gino A. Villarini  wrote:
>
> Used, working condition
>
> 5ghz 450 Aps - $999 each
> 5.4 and 5.7 430 Aps & Sms – make offer
>
>
>
> *Gino A. Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> 
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

[Jon Langeler]

What you replacing 450 with?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Jul 28, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Gino A. Villarini  wrote:
> 
> Used, working condition
> 
> 5ghz 450 Aps - $999 each 
> 5.4 and 5.7 430 Aps & Sms – make offer
> 
>  
> 
> Gino A. Villarini
> 
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
> 

[AFMUG] FS: Cambium Gear 430 - 450

[Gino A. Villarini]

Used, working condition

5ghz 450 Aps - $999 each
5.4 and 5.7 430 Aps & Sms – make offer




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Eric Muehleisen]

Is it cheaper than a 450 SM + 27RD?

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Gino A. Villarini <g...@aeronetpr.com>
wrote:

> Easier to assemble, looks way better (professional) 40 mbps key included,
> less pieces to stock
>
> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Bill Prince <
> part15...@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
> Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 7:11 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>
> So even though it has the same gain, and wider beam width, it performs
> better?
>
> bp
>
>
>
> *Gino A. Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Gino A. Villarini <g...@aeronetpr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We moved to 450d and never looked back…
>>
>> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Bill Prince <
>> part15...@gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>>
>> For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about
>> the same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly
>> larger beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs
>> about the same or a little better or worse?
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino A. Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall <pa...@pdmnet.net> wrote:
>>
>>> We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody
>>> needs some.
>>> hit me offlist if you have a need
>>>
>>> Paul, PDMNet
>>> --
>>> *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup [
>>> george.sko...@cbcast.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>>>
>>> I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM
>>> hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
>>>
>>> List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will
>>> be $349.  Standard discounts apply.
>>>
>>> The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.
>>>
>>> Jeff Broadwick
>>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>>> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
>>> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
>>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>>
>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the
>>> people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really
>>> interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they
>>> make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A
>>> 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it
>>> needs to be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing
>>> un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i
>>> pricing which is much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to
>>> lower the price of the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a
>>> problem because there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future
>>> SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the
>>> already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is going to
>>> have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup <george.sko...@cbcast.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>>>>
>>>> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and
>>>> all, which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>>>>
>>>> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses
>>>> the 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic
>>>> like the Force180's and 200's.
>>>>
>>>> 450b is Force180 

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Gino A. Villarini]

Easier to assemble, looks way better (professional) 40 mbps key included, less 
pieces to stock

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Bill 
Prince <part15...@gmail.com<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 7:11 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

So even though it has the same gain, and wider beam width, it performs better?

bp




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Gino A. Villarini 
<g...@aeronetpr.com<mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com>> wrote:
We moved to 450d and never looked back…

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Bill 
Prince <part15...@gmail.com<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about the 
same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly larger 
beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs about the same 
or a little better or worse?




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall 
<pa...@pdmnet.net<mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>> wrote:
We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody needs some.
hit me offlist if you have a need

Paul, PDMNet

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] on behalf of 
George Skorup [george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM 
hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz anyway.

On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will be 
$349.  Standard discounts apply.

The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519<tel:(312)%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826<tel:(574)%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com<mailto:jbroadw...@converge-tech.com>

On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
<lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the people 
that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really interesting to see 
how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they make it too cheap then 
why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP 
price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it needs to be about $300'ish, but 
that will put it cheaper than the existing un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too 
much because that's approaching 450i pricing which is much more rugged 
hardware. Sounds like they may have to lower the price of the existing product 
line, (un-likely). That would be a problem because there are a lot of WISPS 
with contract pricing for future SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM 
is cheaper than what the already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like 
someone is going to have to make some hard decisions on how they price this 
stuff.

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup 
<george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.

The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all, which 
simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.

The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the 450i 
SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic like the 
Force180's and 200's.

450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be called.

On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all the 
existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference between a 
450d and 450b?


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
<jeffl...@att.net<mailto:jeffl...@att.net>> wrote:
Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Bill Prince]

And to what distance?

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So even though it has the same gain, and wider beam width, it performs
> better?
>
> bp
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Gino A. Villarini <g...@aeronetpr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We moved to 450d and never looked back…
>>
>> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Bill Prince <
>> part15...@gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>>
>> For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about
>> the same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly
>> larger beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs
>> about the same or a little better or worse?
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino A. Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall <pa...@pdmnet.net> wrote:
>>
>>> We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody
>>> needs some.
>>> hit me offlist if you have a need
>>>
>>> Paul, PDMNet
>>> --
>>> *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup [
>>> george.sko...@cbcast.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>>>
>>> I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM
>>> hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
>>>
>>> List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will
>>> be $349.  Standard discounts apply.
>>>
>>> The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.
>>>
>>> Jeff Broadwick
>>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>>> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
>>> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
>>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>>
>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the
>>> people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really
>>> interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they
>>> make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A
>>> 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it
>>> needs to be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing
>>> un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i
>>> pricing which is much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to
>>> lower the price of the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a
>>> problem because there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future
>>> SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the
>>> already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is going to
>>> have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup <george.sko...@cbcast.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>>>>
>>>> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and
>>>> all, which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>>>>
>>>> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses
>>>> the 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic
>>>> like the Force180's and 200's.
>>>>
>>>> 450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be
>>>> called.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all
>>>> the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference
>>>> between a 450d and 450b?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <
>>>> jeffl...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>&g

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Bill Prince]

So even though it has the same gain, and wider beam width, it performs
better?

bp

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Gino A. Villarini <g...@aeronetpr.com>
wrote:

> We moved to 450d and never looked back…
>
> From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of Bill Prince <
> part15...@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
> Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>
> For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about
> the same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly
> larger beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs
> about the same or a little better or worse?
>
>
>
> *Gino A. Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall <pa...@pdmnet.net> wrote:
>
>> We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody
>> needs some.
>> hit me offlist if you have a need
>>
>> Paul, PDMNet
>> --
>> *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup [
>> george.sko...@cbcast.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>>
>> I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM
>> hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz
>> anyway.
>>
>> On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
>>
>> List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will
>> be $349.  Standard discounts apply.
>>
>> The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.
>>
>> Jeff Broadwick
>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
>> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>
>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the
>> people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really
>> interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they
>> make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A
>> 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it
>> needs to be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing
>> un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i
>> pricing which is much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to
>> lower the price of the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a
>> problem because there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future
>> SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the
>> already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is going to
>> have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup <george.sko...@cbcast.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>>>
>>> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and
>>> all, which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>>>
>>> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the
>>> 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic
>>> like the Force180's and 200's.
>>>
>>> 450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be
>>> called.
>>>
>>> On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
>>>
>>> So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all
>>> the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference
>>> between a 450d and 450b?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <
>>> jeffl...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Kurt,
>>>>
>>>> The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated
>>>> units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the
>>>> Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Broadwick
>>>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>>>> 312-205-2519 <%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
>>>> 574-220-7826 <%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
>>>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the
>>>> 450 (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down
>>>> to 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen
>>>> by end of 1st quarter this year.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> bp
> part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
>



-- 
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Gino A. Villarini]

We moved to 450d and never looked back…

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Bill 
Prince <part15...@gmail.com<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" 
<af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about the 
same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly larger 
beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs about the same 
or a little better or worse?




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall 
<pa...@pdmnet.net<mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>> wrote:
We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody needs some.
hit me offlist if you have a need

Paul, PDMNet

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] on behalf of 
George Skorup [george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM 
hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz anyway.

On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will be 
$349.  Standard discounts apply.

The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519<tel:(312)%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826<tel:(574)%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com<mailto:jbroadw...@converge-tech.com>

On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
<lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the people 
that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really interesting to see 
how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they make it too cheap then 
why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP 
price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it needs to be about $300'ish, but 
that will put it cheaper than the existing un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too 
much because that's approaching 450i pricing which is much more rugged 
hardware. Sounds like they may have to lower the price of the existing product 
line, (un-likely). That would be a problem because there are a lot of WISPS 
with contract pricing for future SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM 
is cheaper than what the already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like 
someone is going to have to make some hard decisions on how they price this 
stuff.

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup 
<george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.

The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all, which 
simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.

The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the 450i 
SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic like the 
Force180's and 200's.

450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be called.

On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all the 
existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference between a 
450d and 450b?


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
<jeffl...@att.net<mailto:jeffl...@att.net>> wrote:
Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated units 
that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the Force 200 
are supposed to be available in October.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519<tel:%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826<tel:%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com<mailto:jbroadw...@converge-tech.com>

On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
<lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450 
(5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to 
5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by end 
of 1st quarter this year.







--
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Bill Prince]

For folks that are using the PMP450d (semi-integrated dish). It has about
the same gain as a small reflector with a stock PMP450 SM, but slightly
larger beamwidth 7° versus 6° for the RD. Do you find that it performs
about the same or a little better or worse?

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Paul McCall <pa...@pdmnet.net> wrote:

> We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody needs
> some.
> hit me offlist if you have a need
>
> Paul, PDMNet
> --
> *From:* Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup [
> george.sko...@cbcast.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's
>
> I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM
> hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz
> anyway.
>
> On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
>
> List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will
> be $349.  Standard discounts apply.
>
> The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>
> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the
> people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really
> interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they
> make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A
> 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it
> needs to be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing
> un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i
> pricing which is much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to
> lower the price of the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a
> problem because there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future
> SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the
> already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is going to
> have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup <george.sko...@cbcast.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>>
>> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all,
>> which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>>
>> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the
>> 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic
>> like the Force180's and 200's.
>>
>> 450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be
>> called.
>>
>> On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
>>
>> So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all
>> the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference
>> between a 450d and 450b?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <jeffl...@att.net
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Kurt,
>>>
>>> The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated
>>> units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the
>>> Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.
>>>
>>> Jeff Broadwick
>>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>>> 312-205-2519 <%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
>>> 574-220-7826 <%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
>>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>>
>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the
>>> 450 (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down
>>> to 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen
>>> by end of 1st quarter this year.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Paul McCall]

We still have about 50 of the regular 450 SMs 20MBit NIB, if anybody needs some.
hit me offlist if you have a need

Paul, PDMNet

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of George Skorup 
[george.sko...@cbcast.com]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 6:23 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM 
hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz anyway.

On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will be 
$349.  Standard discounts apply.

The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.

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

On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
<lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the people 
that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really interesting to see 
how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they make it too cheap then 
why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP 
price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it needs to be about $300'ish, but 
that will put it cheaper than the existing un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too 
much because that's approaching 450i pricing which is much more rugged 
hardware. Sounds like they may have to lower the price of the existing product 
line, (un-likely). That would be a problem because there are a lot of WISPS 
with contract pricing for future SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM 
is cheaper than what the already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like 
someone is going to have to make some hard decisions on how they price this 
stuff.

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup 
<george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.

The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all, which 
simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.

The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the 450i 
SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic like the 
Force180's and 200's.

450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be called.

On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all the 
existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference between a 
450d and 450b?


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
<jeffl...@att.net<mailto:jeffl...@att.net>> wrote:
Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated units 
that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the Force 200 
are supposed to be available in October.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519<tel:%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826<tel:%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com<mailto:jbroadw...@converge-tech.com>

On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
<lists.wavel...@gmail.com<mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450 
(5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to 
5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by end 
of 1st quarter this year.

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[George Skorup]

I'm sure at some point they'll cease production on the original 450 SM 
hardware, like they already have with the original 450 AP. At least 5GHz 
anyway.


On 6/9/2017 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish 
will be $349.  Standard discounts apply.


The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.

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

On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser > wrote:


they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to 
the people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be 
really interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 
radio. If they make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old 
style SM's anymore? A 450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. 
Personally in my opinion it needs to be about $300'ish, but that will 
put it cheaper than the existing un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too 
much because that's approaching 450i pricing which is much more 
rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to lower the price of the 
existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a problem because 
there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future SM 
purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the 
already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is 
going to have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup 
> wrote:


Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.

The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna
and all, which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.

The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped.
Uses the 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is
polarity agnostic like the Force180's and 200's.

450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will
be called.

On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:

So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to
uncap all the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's
the difference between a 450d and 450b?


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists
> wrote:

Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the
integrated units that are built like the Force 180. The ones
that are similar to the Force 200 are supposed to be
available in October.

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


On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser
>
wrote:


Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new
CPE's for the 450 (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput
and will work all the way down to 5.1ghz at the $300-$350
price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by end of
1st quarter this year.

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

List on the integrated will be $299.  List on the one with the dish will be 
$349.  Standard discounts apply.

The integrated version won't work with a reflector dish.

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

> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:49 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
> 
> they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the 
> people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really 
> interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they 
> make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A 450 
> 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it needs to 
> be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing un-capped 
> 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i pricing which is 
> much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to lower the price of 
> the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a problem because there 
> are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future SM purchases that will be 
> pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the already committed to. I really 
> don't know, sounds like someone is going to have to make some hard decisions 
> on how they price this stuff.
> 
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup  
>> wrote:
>> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>> 
>> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all, 
>> which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>> 
>> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the 
>> 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic like 
>> the Force180's and 200's.
>> 
>> 450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be 
>> called.
>> 
>>> On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
>>> So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all the 
>>> existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference between a 
>>> 450d and 450b?
>>> 
>>> 
 On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists  
 wrote:
>>> 
 Hey Kurt,
 
 The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated 
 units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the 
 Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
 312-205-2519 Office
 574-220-7826 Cell
 jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
 
 On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  
 wrote:
 
> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450 
> (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to 
> 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen 
> by end of 1st quarter this year.
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Kurt Fankhauser]

they can't un-cap the existing SM's because that wouldn't be fair to the
people that paid for the upgrade keys it is going to be really
interesting to see how they price the new 180/200 style 450 radio. If they
make it too cheap then why would anyone buy the old style SM's anymore? A
450 5Ghz un-capped SM WISP price is $359.20. Personally in my opinion it
needs to be about $300'ish, but that will put it cheaper than the existing
un-capped 450. And $400.00 is too much because that's approaching 450i
pricing which is much more rugged hardware. Sounds like they may have to
lower the price of the existing product line, (un-likely). That would be a
problem because there are a lot of WISPS with contract pricing for future
SM purchases that will be pissed if the new SM is cheaper than what the
already committed to. I really don't know, sounds like someone is going to
have to make some hard decisions on how they price this stuff.

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, George Skorup 
wrote:

> Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.
>
> The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and all,
> which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.
>
> The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the
> 450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic
> like the Force180's and 200's.
>
> 450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be
> called.
>
> On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
>
> So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all
> the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference
> between a 450d and 450b?
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Kurt,
>>
>> The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated
>> units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the
>> Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.
>>
>> Jeff Broadwick
>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>> 312-205-2519 <%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
>> 574-220-7826 <%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
>> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>>
>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450
>> (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to
>> 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by
>> end of 1st quarter this year.
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[George Skorup]

Free license keys? Yeah, not gonna happen.

The 450d is a standard 5GHz 450 SM board, internal patch antenna and 
all, which simply feeds the horn/sub-reflector assembly.


The new wideband 5GHz SMs as noted will do 4940-5925. Uncapped. Uses the 
450i SoC architecture. GigE. 30VDC passive POE and is polarity agnostic 
like the Force180's and 200's.


450b is Force180 style. I forget what the Force200 style 450 will be called.

On 6/9/2017 1:37 PM, Ryan Ray wrote:
So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap 
all the existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the 
difference between a 450d and 450b?



On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
> wrote:


Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the
integrated units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that
are similar to the Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.

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

On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser
> wrote:


Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for
the 450 (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all
the way down to 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it
was supposed to happen by end of 1st quarter this year.

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Ryan Ray]

So does this mean Cambium is going to release license keys to uncap all the
existing expensive ridiculous costing 450d? What's the difference between a
450d and 450b?


On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
wrote:

> Hey Kurt,
>
> The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated
> units that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the
> Force 200 are supposed to be available in October.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>
> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450
> (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to
> 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by
> end of 1st quarter this year.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] new Cambium 450 CPE's

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

Hey Kurt,

The first of the 450b units will hit in July.  Those are the integrated units 
that are built like the Force 180.  The ones that are similar to the Force 200 
are supposed to be available in October.

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

> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know when cambium will be releasing the new CPE's for the 450 
> (5ghz) that have the unlimited throuput and will work all the way down to 
> 5.1ghz at the $300-$350 price range? I thought it was supposed to happen by 
> end of 1st quarter this year.

Re: [AFMUG] Do Cambium ePMP 802.11ac radios have a compatibility mode?

[Mathew Howard]

Correct, but Cambium has said they will be backwards compatible when they
do release ac radios.

On Mar 23, 2017 11:15 PM, "Colin Stanners"  wrote:

> There is no .AC ePMP yet, all released radios are based on the N standard
> AFAIK.
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Rory Conaway 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>>
>> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>>
>> *602-426-0542 <(602)%20426-0542>*
>>
>> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>>
>> *www.triadwireless.net *
>>
>>
>>
>> “An optimist will tell you the glass is half-full; the pessimist,
>> half-empty; and the engineer will tell you the glass is twice the size it
>> needs to be”
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Do Cambium ePMP 802.11ac radios have a compatibility mode?

[Colin Stanners]

There is no .AC ePMP yet, all released radios are based on the N standard
AFAIK.

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Rory Conaway 
wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>
> *602-426-0542 <(602)%20426-0542>*
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>
> *www.triadwireless.net *
>
>
>
> “An optimist will tell you the glass is half-full; the pessimist,
> half-empty; and the engineer will tell you the glass is twice the size it
> needs to be”
>
>
>

[AFMUG] Do Cambium ePMP 802.11ac radios have a compatibility mode?

[Rory Conaway]

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

"An optimist will tell you the glass is half-full; the pessimist, half-empty; 
and the engineer will tell you the glass is twice the size it needs to be"

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Jon Langeler]

It seems anti-Cambium not to have that sync work 100%. And anything less than 
100% these days and the customers will notice.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Oct 28, 2016, at 11:11 AM, Matt  wrote:

>> Not 100% impossible. It's worked for us if the master PTP450 is co-located
>> with the PMP450 APs. We set the DL % to the same (we're using 65% DL where
>> we're doing this).
>> 
>> The big problem is the auto-ranging that the PTP450 does, and there's not
>> much you can do about it. Once it's synced up, if you've set the framing
>> properly, they will sync just fine.
>> 
>> Many people on the list have asked for, like, forever to have a way to "set"
>> the framing parameters so that this would be easier.
> 
> Back with the backhaul 20's transmit frame spreading used to help a
> lot with the issue.  I would think having a setting to cap range would
> be easy for cambium to do since they are based on an AP anyway.
> 
> 
> 
>> The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is that
>> the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 miles
>> and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts the
>> timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
>> 
>> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>> 
>> that's been true since the beginning of time.
>> 
>> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame
>> calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all but
>> you could probably get it to work.
>> 
>> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
>> 
>> -Sean
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
>>> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP
>>> products. Oh well
>>> 
>>> Jon Langeler
>>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Matt]

> Not 100% impossible. It's worked for us if the master PTP450 is co-located
> with the PMP450 APs. We set the DL % to the same (we're using 65% DL where
> we're doing this).
>
> The big problem is the auto-ranging that the PTP450 does, and there's not
> much you can do about it. Once it's synced up, if you've set the framing
> properly, they will sync just fine.
>
> Many people on the list have asked for, like, forever to have a way to "set"
> the framing parameters so that this would be easier.

Back with the backhaul 20's transmit frame spreading used to help a
lot with the issue.  I would think having a setting to cap range would
be easy for cambium to do since they are based on an AP anyway.



> The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is that
> the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 miles
> and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts the
> timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
>
> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>
> that's been true since the beginning of time.
>
> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame
> calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all but
> you could probably get it to work.
>
> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
>> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP
>> products. Oh well
>>
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Bill Prince]

Not 100% impossible. It's worked for us if the master PTP450 is 
co-located with the PMP450 APs. We set the DL % to the same (we're using 
65% DL where we're doing this).


The big problem is the auto-ranging that the PTP450 does, and there's 
not much you can do about it. Once it's synced up, if you've set the 
framing properly, they will sync just fine.


Many people on the list have asked for, like, forever to have a way to 
"set" the framing parameters so that this would be easier.



bp


On 10/27/2016 1:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs 
is that the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of 
like 120 miles and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging 
and shifts the timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.


On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:

that's been true since the beginning of time.

you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the 
frame calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not 
easy at all but you could probably get it to work.


your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.

-Sean

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:


I don't think their support department understands the concept of
sync. But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100%
with PMP products. Oh well

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Jon Langeler]

We do. Just thought I would try PTP in a small instance 

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Oct 28, 2016, at 6:44 AM, Gino Villarini  wrote:
> 
> Why no use a 900 ap and sm?
> 
> Gino A. Villarini
> @gvillarini
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Gino Villarini
> 
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
> 
> 
> On Oct 27, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jon Langeler  wrote:
> 
>> Yeah. I never tried it before. It's not an awesome idea. But if the customer 
>> pays $1500 for the install, we thought we would try a PTP in their 
>> direction. 900MHz :-)
>> 
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 27, 2016, at 4:35 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>> 
>>> YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.
>>> 
>>> Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP? 
>>> 
 On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
 The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is 
 that the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 
 miles and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts 
 the timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
 
> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
> that's been true since the beginning of time.  
> 
> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame 
> calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all 
> but you could probably get it to work.
> 
> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
> 
> -Sean
>  
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
>>  wrote:
>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. 
>> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP 
>> products. Oh well
>> 
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Dennis Burgess]

Should be bumping up to the licensed radios for your backhauls anyways .. just 
a FYI. :) 


Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant 
MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant – MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE

For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net
Radio Frequiency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com 
Office: 314-735-0270
E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net 

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 5:37 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

I know it would not be a good idea to run PMP450 and PTP450 on same frequency 
but it sure would be nice if it allowed the next adjacent frequency to be used. 
 We run multiple 5ghz PTP450i synced masters's on same frequency in different 
directions on same tower all the time.
Keep them on one side of band and PMP450i's on other.


On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Jon Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
> Yeah. I never tried it before. It's not an awesome idea. But if the 
> customer pays $1500 for the install, we thought we would try a PTP in 
> their direction. 900MHz :-)
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2016, at 4:35 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.
>
> Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP?
>
>
> On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>
> The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs 
> is that the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of 
> like 120 miles and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging 
> and shifts the timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
>
> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>
> that's been true since the beginning of time.
>
> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the 
> frame calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not 
> easy at all but you could probably get it to work.
>
> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> <jon-ispli...@michwave.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
>> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP 
>> products. Oh well
>>
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Gino Villarini]

Why no use a 900 ap and sm?

Gino A. Villarini
@gvillarini






Gino Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Oct 27, 2016, at 6:21 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:

Yeah. I never tried it before. It's not an awesome idea. But if the customer 
pays $1500 for the install, we thought we would try a PTP in their direction. 
900MHz :-)

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Oct 27, 2016, at 4:35 PM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:


YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.

Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP?

On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is that 
the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 miles and 
waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts the timing. So 
yeah, it's pretty much impossible.

On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
that's been true since the beginning of time.

you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame 
calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all but 
you could probably get it to work.

your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.

-Sean


On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:
I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. But as 
of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP products. Oh well

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Matt]

I know it would not be a good idea to run PMP450 and PTP450 on same
frequency but it sure would be nice if it allowed the next adjacent
frequency to be used.  We run multiple 5ghz PTP450i synced masters's
on same frequency in different directions on same tower all the time.
Keep them on one side of band and PMP450i's on other.


On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Jon Langeler  wrote:
> Yeah. I never tried it before. It's not an awesome idea. But if the customer
> pays $1500 for the install, we thought we would try a PTP in their
> direction. 900MHz :-)
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2016, at 4:35 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>
> YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.
>
> Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP?
>
>
> On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>
> The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is that
> the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 miles
> and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts the
> timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
>
> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>
> that's been true since the beginning of time.
>
> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame
> calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all but
> you could probably get it to work.
>
> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
>> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP
>> products. Oh well
>>
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Jon Langeler]

Yeah. I never tried it before. It's not an awesome idea. But if the customer 
pays $1500 for the install, we thought we would try a PTP in their direction. 
900MHz :-)

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Oct 27, 2016, at 4:35 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
> 
> YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.
> 
> Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP? 
> 
>> On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>> The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is that 
>> the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 miles 
>> and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts the 
>> timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.
>> 
>>> On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
>>> that's been true since the beginning of time.  
>>> 
>>> you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame 
>>> calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all 
>>> but you could probably get it to work.
>>> 
>>> your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.
>>> 
>>> -Sean
>>>  
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler  
>>> wrote:
 I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. 
 But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP 
 products. Oh well
 
 Jon Langeler
 Michwave Technologies, Inc.
> 

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Adam Moffett]

YeahI'm curious who/what led you to believe otherwise.

Did Cambium sales or support ever say that a PTP could sync with a PMP?


On 10/27/2016 4:23 PM, George Skorup wrote:
The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs 
is that the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of 
like 120 miles and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging 
and shifts the timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.


On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:

that's been true since the beginning of time.

you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the 
frame calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not 
easy at all but you could probably get it to work.


your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.

-Sean

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:


I don't think their support department understands the concept of
sync. But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100%
with PMP products. Oh well

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[George Skorup]

The other problem since the beginning of time with Canopy style PTPs is 
that the master starts up in beaconing mode with a max range of like 120 
miles and waits for a BHS reg attempt then does auto-ranging and shifts 
the timing. So yeah, it's pretty much impossible.


On 10/27/2016 3:18 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:

that's been true since the beginning of time.

you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the 
frame calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not 
easy at all but you could probably get it to work.


your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.

-Sean

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
> wrote:


I don't think their support department understands the concept of
sync. But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100%
with PMP products. Oh well

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Sean Heskett]

that's been true since the beginning of time.

you can get it close with 50% downlink on the AP and then use the frame
calculator to match the air delay parameter to the BHS.  not easy at all
but you could probably get it to work.

your best bet is to use different bands for PMP and PTP tho.

-Sean


On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jon Langeler 
wrote:

> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP
> products. Oh well
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Nathan Anderson]

You want to re-use a distribution channel as a backhaul channel, too?  That 
seems like a bad idea anyway.

-- Nathan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 12:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

Nah PMP450 with PTP450
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Oct 27, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Josh Luthman 
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

I don't believe they're supposed to, assuming ptp650?

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

On Oct 27, 2016 2:37 PM, "Jon Langeler" 
<jon-ispli...@michwave.net<mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>> wrote:
I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. But as 
of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP products. Oh well

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Jon Langeler]

Nah PMP450 with PTP450

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Oct 27, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Josh Luthman  wrote:
> 
> I don't believe they're supposed to, assuming ptp650?
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
>> On Oct 27, 2016 2:37 PM, "Jon Langeler"  wrote:
>> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. But 
>> as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP products. 
>> Oh well
>> 
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Josh Luthman]

I don't believe they're supposed to, assuming ptp650?

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

On Oct 27, 2016 2:37 PM, "Jon Langeler"  wrote:

> I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync.
> But as of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP
> products. Oh well
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>

[AFMUG] FYI Cambium PTP doesn't sync with PMP

[Jon Langeler]

I don't think their support department understands the concept of sync. But as 
of now we have given up on PTP products syncing 100% with PMP products. Oh well 

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] [SPAM?] Cambium 450d

[SmarterBroadband]

We really like the 450d over reflectors or connectorized with panel.
All in one.  Easy to aim. Love them.


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 9:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [SPAM?] [AFMUG] Cambium 450d

I see several WISPs deploying the 450d, but I suspect it's because they
don't like reflector dishes, or because of the 40M license key.

Cambium has indicated the 450d has a little more antenna gain than the
regular 450 SM plus a reflector dish, but the spec sheets say 25 dBi either
way.  What are people really seeing in the field?  Is there a performance
difference in an apples-to-apples comparison?  How much?  I'm not going to
get too excited about 1 dB.

Otherwise, we're looking at the connectorized 450 SM.  Or the connectorized
450i SM, which is pretty pricey. 

[AFMUG] Join Cambium at WISPAPALOOZA

[Ray Savich]

Experience end-to-end wireless at WISPAPALOOZA 2016
Open House Mon Oct 10, 5-8 pm - register 
here

*PMP 450m cnMedusa(tm) Massive MU-MIMO

*ePMP(tm) 2000 with Smart Antenna and Beamforming

*cnPilot(tm) indoor and outdoor WiFi

*cnMaestro(tm) management system
Booth #414 at WISPAPALOOZA

*Want to meet to discuss your specific needs? - contact 
us

*Stop by the booth to register for daily drawing prizes (must be 
present to win)
Certification Training Classes

*Sat-Mon Oct 8-10 - cnPilot & ePMP - register 
here (provided by Winncom)

*Sun/Mon Oct 9-10 - PTP 820 - register 
here (provided by Winncom)

*Sun/Mon Oct 9-10 - PMP 450 - register 
here

*Fri/Sat Oct 14-15 - ePMP - register 
here


Join the Conversation
Cambium Networks Community Forum

Re: [AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Sean Heskett]

can you send a screen shot of that page?


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
wrote:

> I should say just has cir settings no bandwidth settings like a sm has.
>
> Craig Schmaderer
> Cell 402-380-1245
> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:23 PM -0500, "Craig Schmaderer" <
> cr...@skywaveconnect.com> wrote:
>
> Nope
>
> Craig Schmaderer
> Cell 402-380-1245
> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:15 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:
>
> under the left hand "configuration" menu is there a "QoS" tab??
>
> you should be able to throttle those products just like you can an SM
> (i'll freely admit i've never used any of those products tho).
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Craig Schmaderer <
> cr...@skywaveconnect.com> wrote:
>
>> 450 100 230
>>
>> Craig Schmaderer
>> Cell 402-380-1245
>> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> To which cambium PTP link are you referring?
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Craig Schmaderer <
>> cr...@skywaveconnect.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why
>>> does Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would
>>> think there are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily
>>> rate limit on the slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just
>>> dumb and I missing something but who knows.
>>>
>>> Craig Schmaderer
>>> Cell 402-380-1245
>>> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Craig Schmaderer]

I should say just has cir settings no bandwidth settings like a sm has.

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:23 PM -0500, "Craig Schmaderer" 
> wrote:

Nope

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:15 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:

under the left hand "configuration" menu is there a "QoS" tab??

you should be able to throttle those products just like you can an SM (i'll 
freely admit i've never used any of those products tho).

-Sean


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
> wrote:
450 100 230

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:

To which cambium PTP link are you referring?

-sean




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
> wrote:
Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why does 
Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would think there 
are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily rate limit on the 
slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just dumb and I missing 
something but who knows.

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Craig Schmaderer]

Nope

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 5:15 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:

under the left hand "configuration" menu is there a "QoS" tab??

you should be able to throttle those products just like you can an SM (i'll 
freely admit i've never used any of those products tho).

-Sean


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
> wrote:
450 100 230

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:

To which cambium PTP link are you referring?

-sean




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
> wrote:
Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why does 
Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would think there 
are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily rate limit on the 
slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just dumb and I missing 
something but who knows.

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Sean Heskett]

under the left hand "configuration" menu is there a "QoS" tab??

you should be able to throttle those products just like you can an SM (i'll
freely admit i've never used any of those products tho).

-Sean


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
wrote:

> 450 100 230
>
> Craig Schmaderer
> Cell 402-380-1245
> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:
>
> To which cambium PTP link are you referring?
>
> -sean
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Craig Schmaderer <
> cr...@skywaveconnect.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why does
>> Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would think
>> there are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily rate
>> limit on the slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just dumb
>> and I missing something but who knows.
>>
>> Craig Schmaderer
>> Cell 402-380-1245
>> Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Craig Schmaderer]

450 100 230

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM -0500, "Sean Heskett" 
> wrote:

To which cambium PTP link are you referring?

-sean




On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Craig Schmaderer 
> wrote:
Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why does 
Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would think there 
are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily rate limit on the 
slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just dumb and I missing 
something but who knows.

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.

[AFMUG] Ptp cambium links

[Craig Schmaderer]

Maybe I'm asking for too much or maybe I'm missing something but why does 
Cambium not allow or have? rate limiting on the slave unit. I would think there 
are a lot of use cases on a ptp link and being able to easily rate limit on the 
slave side or ap doesn't really matter.  I hope I'm just dumb and I missing 
something but who knows.

Craig Schmaderer
Cell 402-380-1245
Skywave Wireless, Inc.

Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium

[Joe Falaschi]

I wouldn't call 35Mbps, just a little more upload speed, when we're 
looking at a scale of 5M or 40M. Don't get me wrong, I wish the product 
was an AC MU-MIMO product but I have to believe we are on a path to 
getting there and at least we can take advantage of their intermediate 
milestones along the way to solve real issues we're having vs having the 
developments sit in a lab until the dream system is ready.  I have no 
knowledge of said dream system, just hoping.


From a marketing perspective, I'm not sure why they didn't run this 
test on a 40MHz channel because the numbers would have looked more 
impressive.  I don't know about you but we don't run many 40MHz links 
though.  If the uplink is slammed and can't send tcp acks back, then it 
will affect downlink performance.  Plus this will help us deliver 
symmetrical service to businesses without having to install 2' dishes on 
the tower to each business which will allow us to save on tower rent.


Is this everything to everyone, obviously not.  Right now it's still 
tough to compete with residential cable.  All said it's an exciting time 
to be in the WISP industry because so much is happening from all of the 
vendors even if it's not at the pace we'd all wish for.  In full 
disclosure, we were a beta tester of E2k and are very happy with it's 
performance so far.


Joe Falaschi
e-vergent


On 6/7/16 10:51 AM, Keefe John wrote:


That doesn't seem like that great of an improvement.� Just a little 
more upload speed?



On 6/7/2016 10:32 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

�
I see this a lot on my stream
�
�
�
welcome beam forming?�� I'll watch the whole thing later tonight
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium

[George Skorup]

Yeah, I don't think they could get away with the PTP rule on the 
downlink in 5.7. Talking to two SMs at the same time though, that will 
help with overall capacity.


On 6/7/2016 12:21 PM, Daniel White wrote:


Filtering and beamforming don’t really help in clean RF environments. 
But there is very little virgin 5GHz spectrum… so it should be a 
marked improvement.


The beta testers I’ve spoken with have seen dramatic improvements.

Daniel White

Managing Director – Hardware Distribution Sales

ConVergence Technologies__

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

dwh...@converge-tech.com <mailto:dwh...@converge-tech.com>

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 7, 2016 10:06 AM
*To:* af <af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium

I wouldn't say that's just a *little* more upload speed... but yeah, 
this is supposed to deal with a specific problem (noise at the AP).


On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:53 AM, can...@believewireless.net 
<mailto:can...@believewireless.net> <p...@believewireless.net 
<mailto:p...@believewireless.net>> wrote:


The beam forming only helps the upload speed.

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Keefe John <keefe...@ethoplex.com
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com>> wrote:

That doesn't seem like that great of an improvement.� Just a
little more upload speed?

On 6/7/2016 10:32 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

�

I see this a lot on my stream

�

�

�

welcome beam forming?�� I'll watch the whole thing
later tonight

�

�


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=oa-2322-a> 
	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=oa-2322-a> 

Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium

[Daniel White]

Filtering and beamforming don’t really help in clean RF environments.  But 
there is very little virgin 5GHz spectrum… so it should be a marked improvement.



The beta testers I’ve spoken with have seen dramatic improvements.



Daniel White

Managing Director – Hardware Distribution Sales

ConVergence Technologies

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

 <mailto:dwh...@converge-tech.com> dwh...@converge-tech.com



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 10:06 AM
To: af <af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium



I wouldn't say that's just a *little* more upload speed... but yeah, this is 
supposed to deal with a specific problem (noise at the AP).



On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:53 AM, can...@believewireless.net 
<mailto:can...@believewireless.net>  <p...@believewireless.net 
<mailto:p...@believewireless.net> > wrote:

The beam forming only helps the upload speed.



On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Keefe John <keefe...@ethoplex.com 
<mailto:keefe...@ethoplex.com> > wrote:

That doesn't seem like that great of an improvement.� Just a little more 
upload speed?



On 6/7/2016 10:32 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:

�

I see this a lot on my stream

�



�

�

welcome beam forming?�� I'll watch the whole thing later tonight

�

�









---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [AFMUG] hello cambium

[Mathew Howard]

I wouldn't say that's just a *little* more upload speed... but yeah, this
is supposed to deal with a specific problem (noise at the AP).

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:53 AM, can...@believewireless.net <
p...@believewireless.net> wrote:

> The beam forming only helps the upload speed.
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Keefe John  wrote:
>
>> That doesn't seem like that great of an improvement.� Just a little
>> more upload speed?
>>
>> On 6/7/2016 10:32 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote:
>>
>> �
>> I see this a lot on my stream
>> �
>> �
>> �
>> welcome beam forming?�� I'll watch the whole thing later tonight
>> �
>> �
>>
>>
>>
>

[AFMUG] hello cambium

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

I see this a lot on my stream




welcome beam forming?   I'll watch the whole thing later tonight

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Andy Trimmell]

So I did some testing today by freezing the AP in the freezer. Heater warm up 
varied between 1 minute and 3 minutes. The amps per unit during the heat up 
time is .45 amps per AP. We were finding that even if its warmed up and you 
unplug it 10 seconds later it will warm up again and again.  After the warm up 
the AP drops its amps to .2 amps.  We are using 2.1amp psu to feed several APs 
because we never use more than that but I think when these heaters get turned 
on during the bootup process we exceed it and overload the psu. 

 

This was all ran into Packetflux gear with a SOLA power supply 2.1Amp. We’re 
going to split the load so if there’s a power blip where the backup doesn’t 
catch it in time all 3 aren’t starting up heaters at the same time.

 

Hope this information helps.

 

-Andy

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 12:03 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

 

Or automotive grade.  

 

From: Ken Hohhof <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>  

Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 9:15 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

 

Or here’s a thought:  pay the money for industrial temperature range parts!

 

From: Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>  

Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:08 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

 

They have said there's a resistive heater.  I heard it in ePMP training in 
Albany and I've seen it stated on this list.

If I remember correctly (I might not), they wanted the CPU to hit a certain 
temp before starting up.  If it was too cold you'd see a delay in startup of up 
to 2 minutes while waiting for this heater to bring the CPU up to temp.  I've 
never actually observed the delay, so I guess they're talking about Alaska 
cold, not NY cold.



On 1/21/2016 10:47 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't see 
anything obvious.  Now I've got the one I have on the bench out of the case, I 
still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but again I'm not going to pop 
the shields off the board (requiring desoldering), to be 100% sure...   

 

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com> wrote:

Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater 
in them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I 
recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first boot 
but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not. 

 

-Steve D

 

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

I do want to clarify one item:

This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't 
want to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of 
an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related issues. 
  If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the issue I 
describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher voltage doesn't 
fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your issue.  Regardless, it 
is my intent to recommend that my customers move to 48V as soon as I confirm 
that this seems to fix at least a decent number of the problems without causing 
others.

Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two 
separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased current 
consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to operate 
correctly).

-forrest

 

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.

Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these 
issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on an 
ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening investigating 
this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.  It's a bit 
long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can understand my current 
working theory and help me figure out if this is the case.

WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a 
single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely the 
best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.

The setup is as follows:

ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a 
Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of 
each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so 
I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to th

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Bill Prince]

What voltage was this at?

IOW, if it was drawing .45 amps at 24 volts, we're talking about almost 
11 watts.


If it is drawing .45 amps at 48 volts, we're talking about almost 22 watts.

bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 1/22/2016 12:22 PM, Andy Trimmell wrote:


So I did some testing today by freezing the AP in the freezer. Heater 
warm up varied between 1 minute and 3 minutes. The amps per unit 
during the heat up time is .45 amps per AP. We were finding that even 
if its warmed up and you unplug it 10 seconds later it will warm up 
again and again.  After the warm up the AP drops its amps to .2 amps.  
We are using 2.1amp psu to feed several APs because we never use more 
than that but I think when these heaters get turned on during the 
bootup process we exceed it and overload the psu.


This was all ran into Packetflux gear with a SOLA power supply 2.1Amp. 
We’re going to split the load so if there’s a power blip where the 
backup doesn’t catch it in time all 3 aren’t starting up heaters at 
the same time.


Hope this information helps.

-Andy

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Thursday, January 21, 2016 12:03 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

Or automotive grade.

*From:*Ken Hohhof <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>

*Sent:*Thursday, January 21, 2016 9:15 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

Or here’s a thought:  pay the money for industrial temperature range 
parts!


*From:*Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>

*Sent:*Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:08 AM

*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

They have said there's a resistive heater.  I heard it in ePMP 
training in Albany and I've seen it stated on this list.


If I remember correctly (I might not), they wanted the CPU to hit a 
certain temp before starting up.  If it was too cold you'd see a delay 
in startup of up to 2 minutes while waiting for this heater to bring 
the CPU up to temp.  I've never actually observed the delay, so I 
guess they're talking about Alaska cold, not NY cold.


On 1/21/2016 10:47 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't
see anything obvious. Now I've got the one I have on the bench out
of the case, I still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but
again I'm not going to pop the shields off the board (requiring
desoldering), to be 100% sure...

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com
<mailto:bigd...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small
heater in them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing
additional power?  I recall it was supposed to pre-heat components
to avoid freezeup on first boot but I can't recall if that's the
only time they run or not.

-Steve D

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account)
<li...@packetflux.com <mailto:li...@packetflux.com>> wrote:

I do want to clarify one item:

This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I
don't want to claim that problem, since this isn't the same
thing.   This is more of an issue where you have ePMP's which seem
to start having power-related issues.   If moving to a 30V brick
makes your problem go away, then the issue I describe below
probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher voltage doesn't fix
the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your issue.
Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent
number of the problems without causing others.

Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating
two separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing
increased current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a
higher voltage to operate correctly).

-forrest

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account)
<li...@packetflux.com <mailto:li...@packetflux.com>> wrote:

A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.

Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to
these issues. In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector
dropping off on an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of
time this evening investigating this issue. The following is a
summary of what I found.  It's a bit long-winded so that those
experiencing the problems can understand my current working theory
and help me figure out if this is the case.

WARNING: The following is based on a limited amount of testing
with a single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Josh Baird]

Nice, thank you for doing the test and posting the results!  I think this
sort of confirms what we were all thinking.



On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Andy Trimmell <atrimm...@precisionds.com>
wrote:

> So I did some testing today by freezing the AP in the freezer. Heater warm
> up varied between 1 minute and 3 minutes. The amps per unit during the heat
> up time is .45 amps per AP. We were finding that even if its warmed up and
> you unplug it 10 seconds later it will warm up again and again.  After the
> warm up the AP drops its amps to .2 amps.  We are using 2.1amp psu to feed
> several APs because we never use more than that but I think when these
> heaters get turned on during the bootup process we exceed it and overload
> the psu.
>
>
>
> This was all ran into Packetflux gear with a SOLA power supply 2.1Amp.
> We’re going to split the load so if there’s a power blip where the backup
> doesn’t catch it in time all 3 aren’t starting up heaters at the same time.
>
>
>
> Hope this information helps.
>
>
>
> -Andy
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 21, 2016 12:03 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.
>
>
>
> Or automotive grade.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com>
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 21, 2016 9:15 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.
>
>
>
> Or here’s a thought:  pay the money for industrial temperature range parts!
>
>
>
> *From:* Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:08 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.
>
>
>
> They have said there's a resistive heater.  I heard it in ePMP training in
> Albany and I've seen it stated on this list.
>
> If I remember correctly (I might not), they wanted the CPU to hit a
> certain temp before starting up.  If it was too cold you'd see a delay in
> startup of up to 2 minutes while waiting for this heater to bring the CPU
> up to temp.  I've never actually observed the delay, so I guess they're
> talking about Alaska cold, not NY cold.
>
> On 1/21/2016 10:47 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>
> I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't see
> anything obvious.  Now I've got the one I have on the bench out of the
> case, I still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but again I'm not
> going to pop the shields off the board (requiring desoldering), to be 100%
> sure...
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in
> them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I
> recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first
> boot but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not.
>
>
>
> -Steve D
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
> I do want to clarify one item:
>
> This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want
> to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of
> an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
> issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
> issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
> voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
> issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
> 48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
> the problems without causing others.
>
> Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
> separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
> current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
> operate correctly).
>
> -forrest
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>
> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
> understand m

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Josh Baird]

Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V DC-DC
converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too snowy at the
moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you determining voltage at the AP?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>
> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
> case.
>
> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>
> The setup is as follows:
>
> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a Gigabit
> Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of each
> 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so
> I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector with ~100m
> of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on them, the AP is
> in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there are no clients.
>
> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>
> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is consistent
> on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it works,
> sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage
> inputs for the ePMP.
>
> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It won't
> turn back on until around 22V.
>
> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
> 24V.
>
> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>
> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the
> voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle
> up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are
> either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly
> acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>
> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
> happens.
>
> -forrest
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications
> Inc  wrote:
>
>> Hello Cambium,
>>
>>
>>
>> At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
>> compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  It
>> was very interesting to learn we are experience identical problems across
>> the spectrum.
>>
>> We all understand this is a DRAM issue with certain units you have
>> identified.  We also understand the firmware RC that has been made
>> available to fix this short term.
>>
>> The bottom line is we are very frustrated and grow tired of dealing with
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Our concern is simple.  If your software fix ‘degrades’ the performance
>> of the product or triggers other issues, as it has been suggested, we would
>> prefer a full recall and replacement program immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>> If the suggestion that the fix will degrade the product performance is
>> inaccurate and not cause other issues, I would like for this to be made
>> public.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>>
>> *Tyson Burris, President*
>> *Internet Communications Inc.*
>> *739 Commerce Dr.*
>> *Franklin, IN 46131*
>>
>> *317-738-0320 <317-738-0320> Daytime #*
>> *317-412-1540 <317-412-1540> Cell/Direct #*
>> *Online: **www.surfici.net* 
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: ICI]
>>
>> *What can ICI do for you?*
>>
>>
>> *Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - WiMax - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones -
>> IP Security - Fiber - Tower - Infrastructure.*
>>
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

With a 8P8C modular banjo and a 5 1/2 digit bench DMM  just part of the
standard test equipment in the lab.

-forrest



On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:

> Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V DC-DC
> converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too snowy at the
> moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you determining voltage at the AP?
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>
>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>> case.
>>
>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>
>> The setup is as follows:
>>
>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>> are no clients.
>>
>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
>> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>
>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
>> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>>
>> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
>> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>>
>> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
>> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
>> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
>> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
>> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
>> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
>> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
>> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
>> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
>> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
>> 24V.
>>
>> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>>
>> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the
>> voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle
>> up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are
>> either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly
>> acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>>
>> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
>> happens.
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications
>> Inc  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Cambium,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
>>> compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  It
>>> was very interesting to learn we are experience identical problems across
>>> the spectrum.
>>>
>>> We all understand this is a DRAM issue with certain units you have
>>> identified.  We also understand the firmware RC that has been made
>>> available to fix this short term.
>>>
>>> The bottom line is we are very frustrated and grow tired of dealing with
>>> it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our concern is simple.  If your software fix ‘degrades’ the performance
>>> of the product or triggers other issues, as it has been suggested, we would
>>> prefer a full recall and replacement program immediately.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the suggestion that the fix will degrade the product performance is
>>> inaccurate and not cause other issues, I would like for this to be made
>>> public.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Tyson Burris, President*
>>> *Internet Communications Inc.*
>>> *739 Commerce Dr.*
>>> *Franklin, IN 46131*
>>>
>>> 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

I do want to clarify one item:

This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want
to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of
an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
the problems without causing others.

Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
operate correctly).

-forrest

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>
> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
> case.
>
> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>
> The setup is as follows:
>
> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a Gigabit
> Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of each
> 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so
> I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector with ~100m
> of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on them, the AP is
> in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there are no clients.
>
> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>
> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is consistent
> on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it works,
> sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage
> inputs for the ePMP.
>
> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It won't
> turn back on until around 22V.
>
> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
> 24V.
>
> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>
> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the
> voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle
> up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are
> either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly
> acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>
> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
> happens.
>
> -forrest
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications
> Inc  wrote:
>
>> Hello Cambium,
>>
>>
>>
>> At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
>> compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  It
>> was very interesting to learn we are experience identical problems across
>> the spectrum.
>>
>> We all understand this is a DRAM issue with certain units you have
>> identified.  We also understand the firmware RC that has been made
>> available to fix this short term.
>>
>> The bottom line is we are very frustrated and grow tired of dealing with
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Our concern is simple.  If your software fix ‘degrades’ the performance
>> of the product or triggers other issues, as it has been suggested, we would
>> prefer a full recall 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Steve D]

Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in
them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I
recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first
boot but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not.

-Steve D

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> I do want to clarify one item:
>
> This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want
> to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of
> an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
> issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
> issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
> voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
> issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
> 48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
> the problems without causing others.
>
> Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
> separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
> current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
> operate correctly).
>
> -forrest
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>
>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>> case.
>>
>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>
>> The setup is as follows:
>>
>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>> are no clients.
>>
>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
>> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>
>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
>> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>>
>> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
>> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>>
>> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
>> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
>> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
>> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
>> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
>> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
>> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
>> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
>> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
>> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
>> 24V.
>>
>> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>>
>> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the
>> voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle
>> up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are
>> either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly
>> acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>>
>> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
>> happens.
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications
>> Inc  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Cambium,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
>>> compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  It
>>> was very interesting to 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Jaime Solorza]

Most quality industrial DC power supplies are adjustable and designed for
wide range of temps.  Just saying
On Jan 21, 2016 8:30 AM, "Steve D"  wrote:

> Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in
> them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I
> recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first
> boot but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not.
>
> -Steve D
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> I do want to clarify one item:
>>
>> This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want
>> to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of
>> an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
>> issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
>> issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
>> voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
>> issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
>> 48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
>> the problems without causing others.
>>
>> Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
>> separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
>> current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
>> operate correctly).
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>>
>>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>>> case.
>>>
>>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>>
>>> The setup is as follows:
>>>
>>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>>> are no clients.
>>>
>>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
>>> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>>
>>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
>>> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>>>
>>> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
>>> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>>>
>>> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
>>> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
>>> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
>>> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
>>> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
>>> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
>>> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
>>> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
>>> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
>>> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
>>> 24V.
>>>
>>> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>>>
>>> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing
>>> the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely
>>> handle up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector
>>> are either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
>>> perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>>>
>>> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> -forrest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Josh Luthman]

Don't think you can.  I destroyed a busted one.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jan 21, 2016 9:58 AM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> That is correct.   See pic:
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> Now if I could figure out how to get that case open without destroying it
> in the process  (note the broken edge on the left of the radio)
>
> -forrest
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Bill Prince  wrote:
>
>> I think he puts the banjo on the AP (on the bench).
>>
>> bp
>> 
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/2016 6:28 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> So other end of the wire, not the AP...
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Jan 21, 2016 8:54 AM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> With a 8P8C modular banjo and a 5 1/2 digit bench DMM  just part of
>>> the standard test equipment in the lab.
>>>
>>> -forrest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:
>>>
 Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V DC-DC
 converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too snowy at the
 moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you determining voltage at the AP?

 On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
 li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>
> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to
> these issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping
> off on an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
> case.
>
> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is 
> likely
> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>
> The setup is as follows:
>
> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port 
> of
> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since 
> there
> are no clients.
>
> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This
> is pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>
> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>
> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>
> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double 
> the
> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts 
> you
> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird 
> things
> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
> 24V.
>
> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>
> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing
> the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely
> handle up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector
> are either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
> perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>
> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see
> what happens.
>
> -forrest
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't see
anything obvious.  Now I've got the one I have on the bench out of the
case, I still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but again I'm not
going to pop the shields off the board (requiring desoldering), to be 100%
sure...

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D  wrote:

> Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in
> them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I
> recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first
> boot but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not.
>
> -Steve D
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> I do want to clarify one item:
>>
>> This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want
>> to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of
>> an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
>> issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
>> issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
>> voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
>> issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
>> 48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
>> the problems without causing others.
>>
>> Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
>> separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
>> current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
>> operate correctly).
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>>
>>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>>> case.
>>>
>>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>>
>>> The setup is as follows:
>>>
>>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>>> are no clients.
>>>
>>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
>>> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>>
>>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
>>> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>>>
>>> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
>>> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>>>
>>> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
>>> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
>>> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
>>> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
>>> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
>>> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
>>> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
>>> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
>>> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
>>> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
>>> 24V.
>>>
>>> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>>>
>>> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing
>>> the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely
>>> handle up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector
>>> are either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
>>> perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>>>
>>> So 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Josh Luthman]

So other end of the wire, not the AP...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jan 21, 2016 8:54 AM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> With a 8P8C modular banjo and a 5 1/2 digit bench DMM  just part of
> the standard test equipment in the lab.
>
> -forrest
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V DC-DC
>> converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too snowy at the
>> moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you determining voltage at the AP?
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>>
>>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>>> case.
>>>
>>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>>
>>> The setup is as follows:
>>>
>>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>>> are no clients.
>>>
>>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is
>>> pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>>
>>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
>>> voltage inputs for the ePMP.
>>>
>>> At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
>>> won't turn back on until around 22V.
>>>
>>> Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
>>> this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
>>> temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
>>> current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
>>> at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
>>> this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
>>> a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
>>> if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
>>> enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
>>> seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
>>> 24V.
>>>
>>> This explains why things work well at 30V.
>>>
>>> For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing
>>> the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely
>>> handle up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector
>>> are either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
>>> perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.
>>>
>>> So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> -forrest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications
>>> Inc  wrote:
>>>
 Hello Cambium,



 At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
 compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  It
 was very interesting to learn we are experience identical problems across
 the spectrum.

 We all understand this is a DRAM issue with certain units you have
 identified.  We also understand the firmware RC that has been made
 available to fix this short term.

 The bottom line is we are very frustrated and grow tired of dealing
 with it.



 Our concern is simple.  If your software fix ‘degrades’ the performance
 of the product or triggers other issues, as it has been suggested, we would
 prefer a full recall and replacement program immediately.

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Bill Prince]

I think he puts the banjo on the AP (on the bench).

bp


On 1/21/2016 6:28 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


So other end of the wire, not the AP...

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

On Jan 21, 2016 8:54 AM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> wrote:


With a 8P8C modular banjo and a 5 1/2 digit bench DMM  just
part of the standard test equipment in the lab.

-forrest



On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Josh Baird > wrote:

Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V
DC-DC converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too
snowy at the moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you
determining voltage at the AP?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List
Account) >
wrote:

A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.

Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in
relation to these issues.  In particular, sync from a
PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on an ePMP when it's
cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of
what I found.  It's a bit long-winded so that those
experiencing the problems can understand my current
working theory and help me figure out if this is the case.

WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of
testing with a single ePMP with no traffic and no clients
and on a bench. This is likely the best case scenario. 
The field is only going to be worse.


The setup is as follows:

ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached,
connected to a Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I
have a special one with a port of each 'type' ;-) ).   I
am powering the injector with a variable power supply so I
can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the
Injector with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna
connectors have terminators on them, the AP is in transmit
mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there are no
clients.

When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the
AP.   This is pretty consistent with what I would expect
in this situation.   The AP seems to work fine, at least
on the bench and without doing any real work.   However,
as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:

At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky. 
This is consistent on both H and I version ports on the

injector. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note
that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage inputs for the
ePMP.

At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns
off.   It won't turn back on until around 22V.

Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.  
On the bench, this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's

assume that under load, and when temperatures are cold,
this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V
in, this puts you at around 20V in at the AP, which is
about the turnoff point.   Remember this is on 100m of
wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of a
cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless
of the cause - if the circuit resistance when combined
with the power load causes a low enough voltage at the AP,
weird things will happen.  And since weird things seem to
start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom
at 24V.

This explains why things work well at 30V.

For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying
increasing the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The
Revision H injectors can safely handle up to around 56V or
so. Assuming all of the radios on an injector are either
ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as
well.

So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of
24V and see what happens.

-forrest












On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet
Communications Inc > wrote:

Hello Cambium,

   

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

That is correct.   See pic:

[image: Inline image 1]

Now if I could figure out how to get that case open without destroying it
in the process  (note the broken edge on the left of the radio)

-forrest

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Bill Prince  wrote:

> I think he puts the banjo on the AP (on the bench).
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 1/21/2016 6:28 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> So other end of the wire, not the AP...
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Jan 21, 2016 8:54 AM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> With a 8P8C modular banjo and a 5 1/2 digit bench DMM  just part of
>> the standard test equipment in the lab.
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the info!  I'm going to see if I can crank my 24V DC-DC
>>> converter up to ~29V at this site temporarily.  It's too snowy at the
>>> moment to rewire for 48V.  How were you determining voltage at the AP?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>>
 A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.

 Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
 issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
 an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
 investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
 It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
 understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
 case.

 WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
 single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
 the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.

 The setup is as follows:

 ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
 Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
 each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
 supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
 with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
 them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
 are no clients.

 When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This
 is pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
 seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
 work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:

 At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
 consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
 works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
 voltage inputs for the ePMP.

 At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It
 won't turn back on until around 22V.

 Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench,
 this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when
 temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the
 current, and quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you
 at around 20V in at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember
 this is on 100m of wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of
 a cold, under load AP.  But the point is valid, regardless of the cause -
 if the circuit resistance when combined with the power load causes a low
 enough voltage at the AP, weird things will happen.  And since weird things
 seem to start to happen around 22V, there just isn't much headroom at
 24V.

 This explains why things work well at 30V.

 For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing
 the voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely
 handle up to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector
 are either ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is
 perfectly acceptable and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.

 So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see
 what happens.

 -forrest












 On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet
 Communications Inc  wrote:

> Hello Cambium,
>
>
>
> At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs
> compared notes on the ‘cold weather’ problems we are seeing with ePMPs.  
> It
> was very interesting to learn we are experience identical 

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[chuck]

Trangos did.

From: Steve D 
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 8:30 AM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in them 
that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I recall it 
was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first boot but I can't 
recall if that's the only time they run or not. 

-Steve D

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

  I do want to clarify one item:


  This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want to 
claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of an issue 
where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related issues.   If 
moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the issue I describe 
below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher voltage doesn't fix the 
issue then this probably doesn't relate to your issue.  Regardless, it is my 
intent to recommend that my customers move to 48V as soon as I confirm that 
this seems to fix at least a decent number of the problems without causing 
others.


  Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two 
separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased current 
consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to operate 
correctly).


  -forrest


  On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.


Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these 
issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on an 
ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening investigating 
this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.  It's a bit 
long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can understand my current 
working theory and help me figure out if this is the case.


WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a 
single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely the 
best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.


The setup is as follows:


ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a Gigabit 
Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of each 'type' 
;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so I can vary 
the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector with ~100m of CAT5 cable. 
  The Antenna connectors have terminators on them, the AP is in transmit mode, 
but isn't passing any traffic since there are no clients.


When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is 
pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP seems to 
work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real work.   However, as 
the voltage drops, things start to get weird:


At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is consistent 
on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it works, sometimes 
it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage inputs for the 
ePMP.


At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It won't 
turn back on until around 22V.   


Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench, this 
unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when temperatures 
are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the current, and 
quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you at around 20V in 
at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember this is on 100m of 
wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of a cold, under load AP.  
But the point is valid, regardless of the cause - if the circuit resistance 
when combined with the power load causes a low enough voltage at the AP, weird 
things will happen.  And since weird things seem to start to happen around 22V, 
there just isn't much headroom at 24V.   


This explains why things work well at 30V.


For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the 
voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle up 
to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are either 
ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly acceptable 
and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.


So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of 24V and see what 
happens.   


-forrest



   













On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications 
Inc <t...@franklinisp.net> wrote:

  Hello Cambium,



  At the MidWest-IX launch party last night, several of us Indiana WISPs 
compared notes on the ‘cold we

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Ken Hohhof]

Wasn’t there a post recently that the “heater” runs only during pre-boot, 
unlike the Trango heater which ran “as needed”?

The Trango heater was very problematic.


From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:06 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

Trangos did.

From: Steve D 
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 8:30 AM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in them 
that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I recall it 
was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first boot but I can't 
recall if that's the only time they run or not. 

-Steve D

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

  I do want to clarify one item:


  This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't want to 
claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of an issue 
where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related issues.   If 
moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the issue I describe 
below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher voltage doesn't fix the 
issue then this probably doesn't relate to your issue.  Regardless, it is my 
intent to recommend that my customers move to 48V as soon as I confirm that 
this seems to fix at least a decent number of the problems without causing 
others.


  Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two 
separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased current 
consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to operate 
correctly).


  -forrest


  On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.


Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these 
issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on an 
ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening investigating 
this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.  It's a bit 
long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can understand my current 
working theory and help me figure out if this is the case.


WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a 
single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely the 
best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.


The setup is as follows:


ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a Gigabit 
Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of each 'type' 
;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so I can vary 
the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector with ~100m of CAT5 cable. 
  The Antenna connectors have terminators on them, the AP is in transmit mode, 
but isn't passing any traffic since there are no clients.


When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This is 
pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP seems to 
work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real work.   However, as 
the voltage drops, things start to get weird:


At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is consistent 
on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it works, sometimes 
it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage inputs for the 
ePMP.


At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It won't 
turn back on until around 22V.   


Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the bench, this 
unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when temperatures 
are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the current, and 
quadruple the voltage drop.  Now, assume 24V in, this puts you at around 20V in 
at the AP, which is about the turnoff point.   Remember this is on 100m of 
wire, and a total speculation about a the power draw of a cold, under load AP.  
But the point is valid, regardless of the cause - if the circuit resistance 
when combined with the power load causes a low enough voltage at the AP, weird 
things will happen.  And since weird things seem to start to happen around 22V, 
there just isn't much headroom at 24V.   


This explains why things work well at 30V.


For those who are having this problem I'd recommend trying increasing the 
voltage into the SyncInjector.   The Revision H injectors can safely handle up 
to around 56V or so.   Assuming all of the radios on an injector are either 
ePMP or the newer 450i's, using 56V into a SyncInjector is perfectly acceptable 
and the ePMP's are rated up to 56V as well.


So the summary:   Try a 48VDC voltage source instead of

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Ken Hohhof]

Mebbs!  Mebbs!  Unacceptable!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YUE7LAFrOM


From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:11 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

I think 4 minutes if it was Alaska cold :P

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

On Jan 21, 2016 11:08 AM, "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:

  They have said there's a resistive heater.  I heard it in ePMP training in 
Albany and I've seen it stated on this list.

  If I remember correctly (I might not), they wanted the CPU to hit a certain 
temp before starting up.  If it was too cold you'd see a delay in startup of up 
to 2 minutes while waiting for this heater to bring the CPU up to temp.  I've 
never actually observed the delay, so I guess they're talking about Alaska 
cold, not NY cold.



  On 1/21/2016 10:47 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't see 
anything obvious.  Now I've got the one I have on the bench out of the case, I 
still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but again I'm not going to pop 
the shields off the board (requiring desoldering), to be 100% sure...   


On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com> wrote:

  Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in 
them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I 
recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first boot 
but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not. 

  -Steve D

  On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

I do want to clarify one item:


This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't 
want to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more of 
an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related issues. 
  If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the issue I 
describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher voltage doesn't 
fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your issue.  Regardless, it 
is my intent to recommend that my customers move to 48V as soon as I confirm 
that this seems to fix at least a decent number of the problems without causing 
others.


Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two 
separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased current 
consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to operate 
correctly).


-forrest


On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

  A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.


  Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to 
these issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off 
on an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening 
investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.  It's a 
bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can understand my 
current working theory and help me figure out if this is the case.


  WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with 
a single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely 
the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.


  The setup is as follows:


  ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a 
Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of 
each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power supply so 
I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector with ~100m of 
CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on them, the AP is in 
transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there are no clients.


  When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This 
is pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP seems 
to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real work.   However, 
as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:


  At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is 
consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it 
works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated voltage 
inputs for the ePMP.


  At around 20.5V in (19.5V at the AP), the radio just turns off.   It 
won't turn back on until around 22V.   


  Now here's where some total speculation comes to play.   On the 
bench, this unit is drawing around 3W.  Let's assume that under load, and when 
temperatures are cold, this unit draws closer to 6W.  This would double the 
curre

Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.

[Jaime Solorza]

Ha.. make you have a can of ether
On Jan 21, 2016 9:03 AM, "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:

> I’d look for a bunch of SMD resistors connected in parallel or series, in
> the vicinity of the chip in question ... was it the DRAM?
>
> Remember to pull out the choke lever and push the priming button 3 times
> in cold weather.
>
> *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) <li...@packetflux.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 21, 2016 9:47 AM
> *To:* af <af@afmug.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] To Cambium With Love - Replace the bad ePMP units.
>
> I looked at the high resolution photos on the FCC site and didn't see
> anything obvious.  Now I've got the one I have on the bench out of the
> case, I still don't see anything obvious heater-wise, but again I'm not
> going to pop the shields off the board (requiring desoldering), to be 100%
> sure...
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Steve D <bigd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just throwing this out there, but don't the epmp's have a small heater in
>> them that could be turning on when it's cold, drawing additional power?  I
>> recall it was supposed to pre-heat components to avoid freezeup on first
>> boot but I can't recall if that's the only time they run or not.
>>
>> -Steve D
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I do want to clarify one item:
>>>
>>> This is not necessarily related to the cambium DRAM issue.   I don't
>>> want to claim that problem, since this isn't the same thing.   This is more
>>> of an issue where you have ePMP's which seem to start having power-related
>>> issues.   If moving to a 30V brick makes your problem go away, then the
>>> issue I describe below probably is your issue.  If moving to a higher
>>> voltage doesn't fix the issue then this probably doesn't relate to your
>>> issue.  Regardless, it is my intent to recommend that my customers move to
>>> 48V as soon as I confirm that this seems to fix at least a decent number of
>>> the problems without causing others.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this might be a case of the cold weather aggravating two
>>> separate issues (or for that matter, the cold weather causing increased
>>> current consumption in the ePMP, which then requires a higher voltage to
>>> operate correctly).
>>>
>>> -forrest
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A bit of an update from the PacketFlux side.
>>>>
>>>> Late this afternoon I received a ticket from Tyson in relation to these
>>>> issues.  In particular, sync from a PacketFlux SyncInjector dropping off on
>>>> an ePMP when it's cold.  I have spent a bit of time this evening
>>>> investigating this issue.  The following is a summary of what I found.
>>>> It's a bit long-winded so that those experiencing the problems can
>>>> understand my current working theory and help me figure out if this is the
>>>> case.
>>>>
>>>> WARNING:  The following is based on a limited amount of testing with a
>>>> single ePMP with no traffic and no clients and on a bench.   This is likely
>>>> the best case scenario.  The field is only going to be worse.
>>>>
>>>> The setup is as follows:
>>>>
>>>> ePMP 1000 GPS AP, with no GPS hockey puck attached, connected to a
>>>> Gigabit Syncinjector (Rev H and Rev I - I have a special one with a port of
>>>> each 'type' ;-) ).   I am powering the injector with a variable power
>>>> supply so I can vary the voltages in.  The AP is connected to the Injector
>>>> with ~100m of CAT5 cable.   The Antenna connectors have terminators on
>>>> them, the AP is in transmit mode, but isn't passing any traffic since there
>>>> are no clients.
>>>>
>>>> When feeding the injector with 24V, I get about 23V at the AP.   This
>>>> is pretty consistent with what I would expect in this situation.   The AP
>>>> seems to work fine, at least on the bench and without doing any real
>>>> work.   However, as the voltage drops, things start to get weird:
>>>>
>>>> At around 22V in, (21V at the AP), Sync becomes flaky.  This is
>>>> consistent on both H and I version ports on the injector.Sometimes it
>>>> works, sometimes it doesn't.   Note that 22V is the bottom of the rated
&g