Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Mikrotik can get 200+ out of 40 MHz. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:19:29 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. From: Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
We love epmp here we may start doing away with ubnt We have 20/20 fiber at one site. And we get full throughput with no issues On Jul 21, 2015 12:52 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. From: Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
No I did not do you got a link Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:15 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.netmailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
I figured if you hadn't read it you'd never find it so you're more than welcome =) I still can't get my head wrapped around how ePMP outperforms Ubnt when they're both Atheros chipsets, but I suppose other people had the same thing when it came to 10baseT and 100baseT still using the same cat5e! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Thanks for the link :D Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:58 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-1000/Force110-ptp-success-story/m-p/38263 If you have experience with NanoBeams and are looking to improve the link, absolutely read this story. The antennas are definitely a bit better but the radios are probably always going to be at least somewhat subjective - my experience on this link should help you decide on that. Note: The force110 ptp radios/GPS stuff isn't really relevant to the link itself. The sync only fixes self-interference. You could just as easily use the $100 force110 radios with the same results. I used ptp radios there for the extra metal shielding which is probably irrelevant, but I didn't want to climb again in the middle of the winter to save pennies. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: No I did not do you got a link Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:15 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Thanks for the link :D Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:58 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-1000/Force110-ptp-success-story/m-p/38263 If you have experience with NanoBeams and are looking to improve the link, absolutely read this story. The antennas are definitely a bit better but the radios are probably always going to be at least somewhat subjective - my experience on this link should help you decide on that. Note: The force110 ptp radios/GPS stuff isn't really relevant to the link itself. The sync only fixes self-interference. You could just as easily use the $100 force110 radios with the same results. I used ptp radios there for the extra metal shielding which is probably irrelevant, but I didn't want to climb again in the middle of the winter to save pennies. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.netmailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: No I did not do you got a link Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:15 AM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.netmailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
ePMP doesn't do 10 MHz channels unless it's TDD, just a heads up. I think they are planning to do 10 Mhz wifi mode so you can replace devices on live links, but that's not coming for some time and doesn't mean that it will or will not play nice with Ubnt/MT. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Rory Conaway r...@triadwireless.net wrote: I’ve got links at 2.7 miles doing that with 40MHz channels and that’s with 50/50 rates with the B5’s and running 2 radios on the same pole, in and out. If I change it to 75/25, it’s even faster. This link is shooting to a rooftop with about 11 other Ubiquiti radios, sectors and PTP’s. I didn’t check the planetary positions. I’ve got some Cambiums I’ll also be testing today to find a lower cost backhaul that supports DFS and 10MHz channels. Rory *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:31 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Yup http://www.epmpwireless.com/pdf/Force_110_PTP.pdf Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:19 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. From: Josh Luthmanmailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.netmailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
I’ve got links at 2.7 miles doing that with 40MHz channels and that’s with 50/50 rates with the B5’s and running 2 radios on the same pole, in and out. If I change it to 75/25, it’s even faster. This link is shooting to a rooftop with about 11 other Ubiquiti radios, sectors and PTP’s. I didn’t check the planetary positions. I’ve got some Cambiums I’ll also be testing today to find a lower cost backhaul that supports DFS and 10MHz channels. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:31 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. From: Josh Luthmanmailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.commailto:af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. From: Josh Luthmanmailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.netmailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-1000/Force110-ptp-success-story/m-p/38263 If you have experience with NanoBeams and are looking to improve the link, absolutely read this story. The antennas are definitely a bit better but the radios are probably always going to be at least somewhat subjective - my experience on this link should help you decide on that. Note: The force110 ptp radios/GPS stuff isn't really relevant to the link itself. The sync only fixes self-interference. You could just as easily use the $100 force110 radios with the same results. I used ptp radios there for the extra metal shielding which is probably irrelevant, but I didn't want to climb again in the middle of the winter to save pennies. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: No I did not do you got a link Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:15 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com mailto:af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net mailto:j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
The best I've seen them do on a real link is around 110Mbps one direction testing between two Mikrotik routers... 220 aggregate may very well be possible in perfect conditions. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? From: George Skorup Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. From: Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. From: Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
I thought that I had been told both ePMP radios had the same CPU, but somebody said that the GPS radios are supposed to be able to handle more PPS, so I'm not sure... I'm pretty sure they do have more RAM, so that may make the difference. But there are really only two variants - GPS and non-GPS. The PTP 110 is exactly the same hardware as the other GPS radio, it's just limited to 10 SMs. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? *From:* George Skorup geo...@cbcast.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Software limited to 10 SMs. You can (eventually, I don't think currently) get the software limit up with a key. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Mathew Howard mhoward...@gmail.com wrote: I thought that I had been told both ePMP radios had the same CPU, but somebody said that the GPS radios are supposed to be able to handle more PPS, so I'm not sure... I'm pretty sure they do have more RAM, so that may make the difference. But there are really only two variants - GPS and non-GPS. The PTP 110 is exactly the same hardware as the other GPS radio, it's just limited to 10 SMs. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? *From:* George Skorup geo...@cbcast.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
Have they confirmed that you will be able to get a key? I assumed they would eventually, but I hadn't heard anything about it... that would be very good news. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Software limited to 10 SMs. You can (eventually, I don't think currently) get the software limit up with a key. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Mathew Howard mhoward...@gmail.com wrote: I thought that I had been told both ePMP radios had the same CPU, but somebody said that the GPS radios are supposed to be able to handle more PPS, so I'm not sure... I'm pretty sure they do have more RAM, so that may make the difference. But there are really only two variants - GPS and non-GPS. The PTP 110 is exactly the same hardware as the other GPS radio, it's just limited to 10 SMs. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? *From:* George Skorup geo...@cbcast.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
They've said they will. Don't know price. Probably a major rev down the road. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 6:21 PM, Mathew Howard mhoward...@gmail.com wrote: Have they confirmed that you will be able to get a key? I assumed they would eventually, but I hadn't heard anything about it... that would be very good news. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Software limited to 10 SMs. You can (eventually, I don't think currently) get the software limit up with a key. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Mathew Howard mhoward...@gmail.com wrote: I thought that I had been told both ePMP radios had the same CPU, but somebody said that the GPS radios are supposed to be able to handle more PPS, so I'm not sure... I'm pretty sure they do have more RAM, so that may make the difference. But there are really only two variants - GPS and non-GPS. The PTP 110 is exactly the same hardware as the other GPS radio, it's just limited to 10 SMs. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? *From:* George Skorup geo...@cbcast.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108
Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync
We've mostly been doing PTP and some small PtMP for camera networks with ePMP. We were using all UBNT for the camera stuff. So we started a new job that required an AP on a central site and 8 or 10 remote cameras spread across five remote sites. All within a mile, so low power 5.2/5.4 was the best option. Bought a bunch of the new UBNT beam things and found they only did 5.7. Ordered ePMP, because I'm not going to shit on 5.7 like everyone else does. The DVR sits behind a Force110 SM connected to the AP at the tower. Three of the remotes are also on SMs connected to the same AP and it has zero problems. Even our regular camera guys said the video feeds were never this smooth on any of the UBNT networks. Regular connectorized radio for the AP, not GPS. Nothing else special, just bridging and flexible framing. Probably pushing 30-40Mbps of video traffic. Methinks Cambium just knows how to do RF scheduling. On 7/21/2015 5:12 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: OK, ignore me, I seem to be having a bad math day. Also trying to grasp the concept of actually using a 40 MHz channel. But I was also remembering an ePMP data sheet with a 150 Mbps number. Probably because there are so many ePMP variants. I assume the lesser model is limited by CPU, not RF? *From:* George Skorup mailto:geo...@cbcast.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:02 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync ePMP is 64QAM. 256 would be nice, but there's always the PTP450 for that, which of course is limited to 20MHz though. I have a 10 mile ePMP link on 2' dishes running in the 5.1 band. 20MHz channel. I get 98Mbps aggregate. I see no reason why a 40MHz channel couldn't do 200Mbps, maybe a little more. On 7/21/2015 1:31 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: The answer you are looking for is 802.11ac? Anyway, I guess I’m mistaken and 220M may be the right number for 256QAM in 40 MHz. Assuming the planets align and every sub is at max modulation with no retries. *From:* Josh Luthman mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync And Mimosa is... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 2:19 PM, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com mailto:af...@kwisp.com wrote: Really, 220 Mbps in a 40 MHz channel? That’s a bunch for something based on an 802.11n PHY. I think the regular Force 110 spec sheet says 150M, does the GPS sync version really say 220M? I’m not disputing it, just surprised/amazed. *From:* Josh Luthman mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 1:15 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] ePMP force 110 gps sync 220 would be perfect. I've had nothing but great RF performance. Did you see my story about going from Beams to force110? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jul 21, 2015 1:51 PM, Joshua Heide j...@velociter.net wrote: Looking into these units. Wondering what kind of throughput people are getting with these. Are you getting the 220mbps real world throughput that they claim? Josh Heide Network Engineer Velociter Wireless, Inc. (209)838-1221 x108 tel:%28209%29838-1221%20x108
