Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Here was the original part of the message (that somehow got left off your reply): "For a very long time we got caught in the Canopy mentality "my Canopy is better than your <>" We finally opened our eyes, got jumped out of the gang, and are very happy we did. It seems a lot of Canopy operators have the mentality that WiFi sucks -- probably because they too started with it years ago, when it really did suck." And I am buying Canopy AP's and SM's for way less than MSRP WAY LESS. Travis Microserv Butch Evans wrote: On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:47 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote: As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and 5,000 CPE. ;) That kind of density is NOT necessary for MANY WISPs. I know that is the cry that nearly ALL Canopy Koolaid drinkers use, but it does not apply to everyone. For those that need it...Canopy offers a very nice solution that works, works well and is affordable because it is NEEDED. For those that don't...Canopy is WAY to expensive to be worth the extra $$. Don't take this as a "jab" because it isn't intended that way, but why would you post a message that indicates that someone was inviting you to switch your Canopy out for WiFi? Nobody made such a suggestion and (IMHO) reacting in the way you did is just plain rude. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Wow... are we really going to start this _again_? I started in 1997 with WaveLan 900mhz ISA cards in DOS based 386 PC routers using Novell drivers to make a router box. We have used WaveLan, Solectek, Orinoco, CM3's, 3Com, Trango, Mikrotik and lately Canopy. I have built a network from 0 customers to almost 6,000 wireless customers in Idaho of all places. We cover 30,000 square miles with over 90 towers and we own and maintain all of it ourselves... no phone companies, no cable companies. Trust me when I tell you, right now, nothing else scales like Canopy. I have used and tested everything out there... you just can NOT scale to any size on a single tower (or even in the same regional area) without GPS sync. Your AP will not handle hundreds of customers without polling. And, I can tell you now that I am buying AP's for _much_ less than you quoted and SM's as well... so, while I continue to install 250 new customers per month, you can tell me that I don't know what I am doing and I have no clue about equipment. ;) Travis Microserv Jayson Baker wrote: Yes, how childish. Don't ever talk bad about Canopy to a Canopy Operator. It'll get them all flustered and they start flaming. I find it pretty hilarious, really. I've come to surmise that the reason EVERY Canopy Operator gets so pissed off when you talk about anything non-Canopy is because they realize $2000+ for an AP and $300-$1000 for an SM is so rediculous for a maximum of... what... 14Mbps? Ooo, it has a GPS antenna, and ooo it will sync with other clusters in the area... never worked well for us, because the other Canopy provider didn't buy a CMM and so was never sync'ed. Bleh. Fine for them. Less profit for them. Makes them more likely to fail. When they do, and their subs switch to us, at least the cable is already ran and the mount already in place. :-) Oh by the way, Smokeping indicates that most subs on our busiest AP have an average latency of around 4-8ms. And all those subs are limited to 6 up, 12 down. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Butch Evans wrote: On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:47 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote: As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and 5,000 CPE. ;) That kind of density is NOT necessary for MANY WISPs. I know that is the cry that nearly ALL Canopy Koolaid drinkers use, but it does not apply to everyone. For those that need it...Canopy offers a very nice solution that works, works well and is affordable because it is NEEDED. For those that don't...Canopy is WAY to expensive to be worth the extra $$. Don't take this as a "jab" because it isn't intended that way, but why would you post a message that indicates that someone was inviting you to switch your Canopy out for WiFi? Nobody made such a suggestion and (IMHO) reacting in the way you did is just plain rude. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Tom, Which OS? On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Tom Sharples wrote: > You'll see a dramatic improvement by upgrading from Wrap to Alix. Our net > throughput easily doubled when we did that. > > Tom S. > > - Original Message - > From: "RickG" > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 6:41 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) > > > We've been running B mode since 2004. I dont lock the rates down but > always shoot for 11Mbps. I like the idea of G mode but every time I > try it, performance drops on the customer side. It may be because > we're still on WRAP's running StarOS v2. I just started updating to > v3, and it seems to be better. I plan on testing out small channels > soon. I'm also debating between Routerboards w/Mikrotik versus > Ubiquiti. > -RickG > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or >> G? >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? >> >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the >> extra >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined >> with >> a higher useage AP? >> >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched >> two >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to >> be >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so >> we >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going >> bad and still no luck. >> >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we >> raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the >> test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get >> around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still >> barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. >> >> Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db >> antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they >> are identical as far as equipment goes. >> >> So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with >> G-only mode in the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.2/2408 - Release Date: 10/01/09 > 18:23:00 > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I agree. We first started as a Canopy 900 Mhz WISP. We have lots and I mean lots of hills around here. You normally can not go over 3 hundred feet without hitting a hill in your way. We started by using 900Mhz Canopy equipment. I will hear disputes from my partnerbut it is still the same. When we first started it was 900MHZ Canopy even in the small town we covered, even LOS! I have been trading out Canopy 900 MHZ equipment for "SHEESH" Tik AP and UBIQUITY cpe AND HAVE HAD ) 0 (ZERO) PROBLEMS! SCOTTIE -- Original Message -- From: Butch Evans Reply-To: WISPA General List Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:39:26 -0500 >On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:47 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote: >> As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP >> using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and >> 5,000 CPE. ;) > >That kind of density is NOT necessary for MANY WISPs. I know that is >the cry that nearly ALL Canopy Koolaid drinkers use, but it does not >apply to everyone. For those that need it...Canopy offers a very nice >solution that works, works well and is affordable because it is NEEDED. >For those that don't...Canopy is WAY to expensive to be worth the extra >$$. > >Don't take this as a "jab" because it isn't intended that way, but why >would you post a message that indicates that someone was inviting you to >switch your Canopy out for WiFi? Nobody made such a suggestion and >(IMHO) reacting in the way you did is just plain rude. > >-- > >* Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* >* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * >* http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * >* http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * > > > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >--- >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Yes, how childish. Don't ever talk bad about Canopy to a Canopy Operator. It'll get them all flustered and they start flaming. I find it pretty hilarious, really. I've come to surmise that the reason EVERY Canopy Operator gets so pissed off when you talk about anything non-Canopy is because they realize $2000+ for an AP and $300-$1000 for an SM is so rediculous for a maximum of... what... 14Mbps? Ooo, it has a GPS antenna, and ooo it will sync with other clusters in the area... never worked well for us, because the other Canopy provider didn't buy a CMM and so was never sync'ed. Bleh. Fine for them. Less profit for them. Makes them more likely to fail. When they do, and their subs switch to us, at least the cable is already ran and the mount already in place. :-) Oh by the way, Smokeping indicates that most subs on our busiest AP have an average latency of around 4-8ms. And all those subs are limited to 6 up, 12 down. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Butch Evans wrote: > On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:47 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote: > > As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP > > using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and > > 5,000 CPE. ;) > > That kind of density is NOT necessary for MANY WISPs. I know that is > the cry that nearly ALL Canopy Koolaid drinkers use, but it does not > apply to everyone. For those that need it...Canopy offers a very nice > solution that works, works well and is affordable because it is NEEDED. > For those that don't...Canopy is WAY to expensive to be worth the extra > $$. > > Don't take this as a "jab" because it isn't intended that way, but why > would you post a message that indicates that someone was inviting you to > switch your Canopy out for WiFi? Nobody made such a suggestion and > (IMHO) reacting in the way you did is just plain rude. > > -- > > * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* > * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * > * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * > * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I've had much better success with B in a hostile rf environment. Walmart put in wireless scanners just to the south of a sector where we have been running a Mikrotik AP and CPE's on G for a couple of years. I couldn't change channels or channel sizes but moved to B and while slower we were able to move customers to 5.7 more gracefully. We've left the 2.4 at B and still have 15 low usage subs on it doing very well. I have used 411 AP's with XR5 cards and NS5L's with good success in small subdivision projects. 1/2 to 1 mile using 5M channels running G, mostly horizontal. We lock the rates lower than 54 if we see any CCQ numbers consistently below 66%. We've had our best success at 36MB. Lowering not raising the power in most cases improves our CCQ. But again, we're mostly within a half mile. We don't have a sector broader than 90 deg, run mostly 5.4 on the AP and 5.7 on our backhauls. One site has grown to over 25 moderate usage clients and I can see a slowdown in the evenings from time to time. We do rate limit at the Mktik to 5 down and 3 up. I've got several between 10 and 20 subs and have no issues. It's hard to argue against a sub 25 client system of NS5L's verses anything else out there when its paid for day 1. I'm not looking to start a product flame just trying to get a ROI. Dave Hulsebus RickG wrote: > We've been running B mode since 2004. I dont lock the rates down but > always shoot for 11Mbps. I like the idea of G mode but every time I > try it, performance drops on the customer side. It may be because > we're still on WRAP's running StarOS v2. I just started updating to > v3, and it seems to be better. I plan on testing out small channels > soon. I'm also debating between Routerboards w/Mikrotik versus > Ubiquiti. > -RickG > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: > >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? >> >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with >> a higher useage AP? >> >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched two >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to be >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going >> bad and still no luck. >> >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we >> raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the >> test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get >> around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still >> barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. >> >> Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db >> antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they >> are identical as far as equipment goes. >> >> So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with >> G-only mode in the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ >
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
You'll see a dramatic improvement by upgrading from Wrap to Alix. Our net throughput easily doubled when we did that. Tom S. - Original Message - From: "RickG" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 6:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) We've been running B mode since 2004. I dont lock the rates down but always shoot for 11Mbps. I like the idea of G mode but every time I try it, performance drops on the customer side. It may be because we're still on WRAP's running StarOS v2. I just started updating to v3, and it seems to be better. I plan on testing out small channels soon. I'm also debating between Routerboards w/Mikrotik versus Ubiquiti. -RickG On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or > G? > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > extra > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined > with > a higher useage AP? > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched > two > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to > be > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so > we > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going > bad and still no luck. > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.2/2408 - Release Date: 10/01/09 18:23:00 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:47 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote: > As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP > using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and > 5,000 CPE. ;) That kind of density is NOT necessary for MANY WISPs. I know that is the cry that nearly ALL Canopy Koolaid drinkers use, but it does not apply to everyone. For those that need it...Canopy offers a very nice solution that works, works well and is affordable because it is NEEDED. For those that don't...Canopy is WAY to expensive to be worth the extra $$. Don't take this as a "jab" because it isn't intended that way, but why would you post a message that indicates that someone was inviting you to switch your Canopy out for WiFi? Nobody made such a suggestion and (IMHO) reacting in the way you did is just plain rude. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] fcc article
This reminds me of my competitors claiming 5M downloads with 120 people per AP. http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/151865/fcc-asks-why-broadband-isnt-measuring-up-to-claims/ -- Marco C. Coelho Argon Technologies Inc. POB 875 Greenville, TX 75403-0875 903-455-5036 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
As soon as you can offer 7ms latency to 100 people off the same AP using WiFi based radios, please let me know. I will buy 200 AP's and 5,000 CPE. ;) Oh, and they need to operate on the same channels within a 5 mile radius. ;) Travis Microserv Jayson Baker wrote: Standard 20MHz channels. I, too, thought it was impossible. We started with Orinoco back in the day (2002), it worked well up until 30 subs -- then it was like dailup. Back then, we offered 256Kbps service. Turns out the big differences is not only much better radios, much better software, but also the difference on B and G. For a very long time we got caught in the Canopy mentality "my Canopy is better than your <>" We finally opened our eyes, got jumped out of the gang, and are very happy we did. It seems a lot of Canopy operators have the mentality that WiFi sucks -- probably because they too started with it years ago, when it really did suck. Canopy is good, but slow, and very expensive. We have a 1 Day ROI. Compared to when we were deploying Canopy, 8-10 MONTHS. This network is small, and we don't push it much. Like I said, we have a 1 Day ROI. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Mike wrote: You don't say if you are using 5Mhz or 10MHz channels. I assume 10 with 40 customers. With the smaller bandwidth and slower speeds I think fractional channels limit the number of subscribers you can put on an AP. Does anybody have any empirical data on the number of users that can use a 5MHz and 10MHz Ap? I am not doing it, but think 40 is too many for a 5MHz channel, and has to be approaching the limit for a 10MHz channel. Thoughts? At 06:13 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote: I dunno? Not a ton. Maybe 40 at the most. This segment of our network is very small. We mainly focus on big businesses. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Spott wrote: "-- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list." LOL! :) How many users per AP? ryan On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jayson Baker wrote: I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the next month -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. Horizontal polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up (our rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for 1.5Mbps. We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with a higher useage AP? I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
We've been running B mode since 2004. I dont lock the rates down but always shoot for 11Mbps. I like the idea of G mode but every time I try it, performance drops on the customer side. It may be because we're still on WRAP's running StarOS v2. I just started updating to v3, and it seems to be better. I plan on testing out small channels soon. I'm also debating between Routerboards w/Mikrotik versus Ubiquiti. -RickG On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with > a higher useage AP? > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched two > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to be > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going > bad and still no luck. > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
We get a capital fee up front that covers most of the equipment charges. It was harder a few years ago with $380.00 radios, but like most electronic stuff they keep getting better and cheaper. Soon they will just be giving them to us. :-) At 06:49 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > Like I said, we have a 1 Day ROI. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Standard 20MHz channels. I, too, thought it was impossible. We started with Orinoco back in the day (2002), it worked well up until 30 subs -- then it was like dailup. Back then, we offered 256Kbps service. Turns out the big differences is not only much better radios, much better software, but also the difference on B and G. For a very long time we got caught in the Canopy mentality "my Canopy is better than your <>" We finally opened our eyes, got jumped out of the gang, and are very happy we did. It seems a lot of Canopy operators have the mentality that WiFi sucks -- probably because they too started with it years ago, when it really did suck. Canopy is good, but slow, and very expensive. We have a 1 Day ROI. Compared to when we were deploying Canopy, 8-10 MONTHS. This network is small, and we don't push it much. Like I said, we have a 1 Day ROI. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Mike wrote: > You don't say if you are using 5Mhz or 10MHz channels. I assume 10 > with 40 customers. > > With the smaller bandwidth and slower speeds I think fractional > channels limit the number of subscribers you can put on an AP. Does > anybody have any empirical data on the number of users that can use a > 5MHz and 10MHz Ap? > > I am not doing it, but think 40 is too many for a 5MHz channel, and > has to be approaching the limit for a 10MHz channel. Thoughts? > > At 06:13 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > >I dunno? Not a ton. Maybe 40 at the most. This segment of our network > is > >very small. We mainly focus on big businesses. > > > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Spott wrote: > > > > > "-- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list." LOL! :) > > > > > > How many users per AP? > > > > > > ryan > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jayson Baker > > > wrote: > > > > I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the > next > > > month > > > > -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... > > > > > > > > Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. > > > > > > > > We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. > Horizontal > > > > polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. > > > > > > > > Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto > ACK. > > > No > > > > RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. > > > > > > > > On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up > (our > > > > rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. > > > > > > > > Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for > > > 1.5Mbps. > > > > We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. > > > > > > > > Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - > B or > > > G? > > > >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do > a > > > mix? > > > >> > > > >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about > the > > > extra > > > >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > > stable? > > > >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > > less > > > >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, > combined > > > with > > > >> a higher useage AP? > > > >> > > > >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > started > > > >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to > 200k > > > and > > > >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc > and > > > >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes > we > > > put > > > >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. > Switched > > > >> two > > > >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > seem > > > to > > > >> be > > > >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This > is > > > on > > > >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - > we > > > can > > > >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > have > > > >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this > one so > > > we > > > >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > > tower. > > > >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and > it > > > did > > > >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > > > started > > > >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have > one > > > going > > > >> bad and still no luck. > > > >> > > > >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but > we've > > > been > > > >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other > AP's > > > in > > > >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thoug
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
You don't say if you are using 5Mhz or 10MHz channels. I assume 10 with 40 customers. With the smaller bandwidth and slower speeds I think fractional channels limit the number of subscribers you can put on an AP. Does anybody have any empirical data on the number of users that can use a 5MHz and 10MHz Ap? I am not doing it, but think 40 is too many for a 5MHz channel, and has to be approaching the limit for a 10MHz channel. Thoughts? At 06:13 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >I dunno? Not a ton. Maybe 40 at the most. This segment of our network is >very small. We mainly focus on big businesses. > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Spott wrote: > > > "-- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list." LOL! :) > > > > How many users per AP? > > > > ryan > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jayson Baker > > wrote: > > > I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the next > > month > > > -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... > > > > > > Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. > > > > > > We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. Horizontal > > > polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. > > > > > > Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto ACK. > > No > > > RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. > > > > > > On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up (our > > > rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. > > > > > > Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for > > 1.5Mbps. > > > We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. > > > > > > Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley > > wrote: > > > > > >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or > > G? > > >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a > > mix? > > >> > > >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > > extra > > >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > stable? > > >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > less > > >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined > > with > > >> a higher useage AP? > > >> > > >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > > >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > > and > > >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > > >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we > > put > > >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched > > >> two > > >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem > > to > > >> be > > >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is > > on > > >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we > > can > > >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > > >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so > > we > > >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > tower. > > >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > > did > > >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > > started > > >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > > going > > >> bad and still no luck. > > >> > > >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've > > been > > >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's > > in > > >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > > >> raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > > the > > >> test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > > get > > >> around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > > still > > >> barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > >> > > >> Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a > > 9db > > >> antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, > > they > > >> are identical as far as equipment goes. > > >> > > >> So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience > > with > > >> G-only mode in the field? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > >> http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > >> > > >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > >> > > >> Archives: http://lists
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I dunno? Not a ton. Maybe 40 at the most. This segment of our network is very small. We mainly focus on big businesses. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Spott wrote: > "-- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list." LOL! :) > > How many users per AP? > > ryan > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jayson Baker > wrote: > > I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the next > month > > -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... > > > > Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. > > > > We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. Horizontal > > polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. > > > > Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto ACK. > No > > RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. > > > > On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up (our > > rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. > > > > Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for > 1.5Mbps. > > We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. > > > > Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley > wrote: > > > >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or > G? > >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a > mix? > >> > >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > extra > >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > stable? > >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > less > >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined > with > >> a higher useage AP? > >> > >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > and > >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we > put > >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched > >> two > >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem > to > >> be > >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is > on > >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we > can > >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so > we > >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > tower. > >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > did > >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > started > >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > going > >> bad and still no luck. > >> > >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've > been > >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's > in > >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > >> raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > the > >> test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > get > >> around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > still > >> barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > >> > >> Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a > 9db > >> antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, > they > >> are identical as far as equipment goes. > >> > >> So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience > with > >> G-only mode in the field? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! > >> http://signup.wispa.org/ > >> > >> > > >> > >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >> > >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >> > >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > >> > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless L
Re: [WISPA] Multipath
In a related story - don't believe the polarity markings on an antenna unless you've verified them back at the shop. We've had batches of same-model antennas come in with some (but not all) of them marked incorrectly. Tom S. - Original Message - From: "Steve Barnes" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multipath > This is going way out there what happens if you turn your radio 90 > degrees. Last month I had a client who was installed wrong. Tower was > Horizontal and guys setup the radio vertical but it worked and they did > not know any better. I got checking the tower later and saw the client > was -79 at the tower. I called them in Chewed them out for installing > wrong and sent them back. They followed my orders and the signal at the > tower dropped to -59 I turned down the radio and stabilized it at -69. I > was happy. Next day the customer called and said could we come back and > fixed what we had changed. I started them doing pings and they were > terrible. So I drove out to the house. Messed with it for 1/2 hour. > Climbed to the radio turned it back to the Wrong Polarity and set the > power back and the speed and pings were perfect. I came back to the > office walked in the door and there was my installers standing there > waiting for an apology. I smiled, shrugged my shoulders and yelled "G > et back to work" Moral to the story if it's a very close install > sometimes it is too close and you need to make the radio work harder on a > wrong polarity. > > Steve Barnes > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience > of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, > ambition inspired, and success achieved. > - Helen Keller > > > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Mike > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:30 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multipath > > Multipath and/or scintillation. It looks like the sun is shining and > 65 degrees in Salem. Sun beating on that metal surface can cause > heat waves to rise in front of the antenna causing > scintillation. Sometimes this stuff is black magic and moving a CPE > a couple feet one way or another can make a world of difference. > > No trees or branches in the Fresnel zone waving in the breeze? I'd > try adjusting the tilt as suggested, them putting a pipe section in > the J mount and moving it up 2.5' or so. > > Hope you figure it out. Let the list know. > > At 01:39 PM 9/29/2009, you wrote: >>I am curious if anyone thinks this is multipath and has a suggestion on >>how to fix. >> >> >> >>This just happens to be my dads house, radio mounted to a j-mount on eve >>of house, clear LOS to tower <1 mile away, -56 signal. This eve is over >>the porch roof to the east and signal shoots over the south plane of the >>roof which is an approx 30deg angle. I was over this morning and he is >>complaining the Internet is not working and I go in to do some >>troubleshooting. I setup a constant ping to the AP and I am getting >><1ms, I start to browse and the pings jump to >300ms and random lost >>packets. >> >>Configure a new radio in the house and have a -75 signal in the house, >>try the ping thing again and all seems fine. I replace he radio on the >>roof and I am back to the poor ping times again. >> >> >> >>Now I don't understand multipath as well I should but it seems to make >>sense in this case. Is it possible to reduce or remedy without moving >>the radio to a totally different location? >> >> >> >>Mark McElvy >>AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >>Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --
Re: [WISPA] Multipath
Marlon, Those experiences - what band and product? On 10/1/09, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > First, your signal is much too high. Multipath is a reflected signal. The > newer radios hear quite nicely down to -94 or lower. The AVERAGE reflected > signal is about 30dB. > > So if you have a signal any greater than -65 you'll be MORE likely to get > multipath. It can't always be helped but I try > > If you think it might be multipath move the radio up or DOWN by a foot or so > at a time. Sometimes I've had to put a radio very close to the ground or > something in order to get it to work right. > > Up is the direction you want to go if you can, but sometimes down will > actually work better. I've doubled people's speeds by moving the antennas > down by as little as 2 feet. > > marlon > > - Original Message - > From: "Mark McElvy" > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:39 AM > Subject: [WISPA] Multipath > > >>I am curious if anyone thinks this is multipath and has a suggestion on >> how to fix. >> >> >> >> This just happens to be my dads house, radio mounted to a j-mount on eve >> of house, clear LOS to tower <1 mile away, -56 signal. This eve is over >> the porch roof to the east and signal shoots over the south plane of the >> roof which is an approx 30deg angle. I was over this morning and he is >> complaining the Internet is not working and I go in to do some >> troubleshooting. I setup a constant ping to the AP and I am getting >> <1ms, I start to browse and the pings jump to >300ms and random lost >> packets. >> >> Configure a new radio in the house and have a -75 signal in the house, >> try the ping thing again and all seems fine. I replace he radio on the >> roof and I am back to the poor ping times again. >> >> >> >> Now I don't understand multipath as well I should but it seems to make >> sense in this case. Is it possible to reduce or remedy without moving >> the radio to a totally different location? >> >> >> >> Mark McElvy >> AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth." --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multipath
First, your signal is much too high. Multipath is a reflected signal. The newer radios hear quite nicely down to -94 or lower. The AVERAGE reflected signal is about 30dB. So if you have a signal any greater than -65 you'll be MORE likely to get multipath. It can't always be helped but I try If you think it might be multipath move the radio up or DOWN by a foot or so at a time. Sometimes I've had to put a radio very close to the ground or something in order to get it to work right. Up is the direction you want to go if you can, but sometimes down will actually work better. I've doubled people's speeds by moving the antennas down by as little as 2 feet. marlon - Original Message - From: "Mark McElvy" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:39 AM Subject: [WISPA] Multipath >I am curious if anyone thinks this is multipath and has a suggestion on > how to fix. > > > > This just happens to be my dads house, radio mounted to a j-mount on eve > of house, clear LOS to tower <1 mile away, -56 signal. This eve is over > the porch roof to the east and signal shoots over the south plane of the > roof which is an approx 30deg angle. I was over this morning and he is > complaining the Internet is not working and I go in to do some > troubleshooting. I setup a constant ping to the AP and I am getting > <1ms, I start to browse and the pings jump to >300ms and random lost > packets. > > Configure a new radio in the house and have a -75 signal in the house, > try the ping thing again and all seems fine. I replace he radio on the > roof and I am back to the poor ping times again. > > > > Now I don't understand multipath as well I should but it seems to make > sense in this case. Is it possible to reduce or remedy without moving > the radio to a totally different location? > > > > Mark McElvy > AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
"-- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list." LOL! :) How many users per AP? ryan On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jayson Baker wrote: > I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the next month > -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... > > Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. > > We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. Horizontal > polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. > > Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto ACK. No > RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. > > On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up (our > rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. > > Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for 1.5Mbps. > We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. > > Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: > >> In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? >> Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? >> >> Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra >> speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? >> I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less >> bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the >> real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with >> a higher useage AP? >> >> I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started >> having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and >> fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and >> nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put >> up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched >> two >> of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to >> be >> doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on >> Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can >> pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have >> other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we >> know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. >> Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did >> not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started >> acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going >> bad and still no luck. >> >> 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been >> through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in >> the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we >> raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the >> test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get >> around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still >> barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. >> >> Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db >> antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they >> are identical as far as equipment goes. >> >> So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with >> G-only mode in the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I'll tell you what we do, but won't get into defending it for the next month -- oh, wait, this is not the Canopy list... Our 2.4GHz spectrum is completely filled with vertical Canopy. We run UBNT AP's. Fixed at 2mi ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-only. Horizontal polarity. Max data rate of 54Mbps. Sectors. Customers are all within 2 miles, use Loco2's. Customers are Auto ACK. No RTS. Fixed G-Only. Horizontal. Max 54Mbps. On almost every single install we get at least 12Mbps down, 6Mbps up (our rate limit). Without limit, we usually see up to 18. Funny... those lusers on the other guys Canopy pay like $40/mo for 1.5Mbps. We give 12Mbps for $24.95/mo. Don't use B. It's DSSS. G is OFDM. Performs much better. On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jason Hensley wrote: > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with > a higher useage AP? > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched > two > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to > be > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going > bad and still no luck. > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multipath
This is going way out there what happens if you turn your radio 90 degrees. Last month I had a client who was installed wrong. Tower was Horizontal and guys setup the radio vertical but it worked and they did not know any better. I got checking the tower later and saw the client was -79 at the tower. I called them in Chewed them out for installing wrong and sent them back. They followed my orders and the signal at the tower dropped to -59 I turned down the radio and stabilized it at -69. I was happy. Next day the customer called and said could we come back and fixed what we had changed. I started them doing pings and they were terrible. So I drove out to the house. Messed with it for 1/2 hour. Climbed to the radio turned it back to the Wrong Polarity and set the power back and the speed and pings were perfect. I came back to the office walked in the door and there was my installers standing there waiting for an apology. I smiled, shrugged my shoulders and yelled "G et back to work" Moral to the story if it's a very close install sometimes it is too close and you need to make the radio work harder on a wrong polarity. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved. - Helen Keller -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multipath Multipath and/or scintillation. It looks like the sun is shining and 65 degrees in Salem. Sun beating on that metal surface can cause heat waves to rise in front of the antenna causing scintillation. Sometimes this stuff is black magic and moving a CPE a couple feet one way or another can make a world of difference. No trees or branches in the Fresnel zone waving in the breeze? I'd try adjusting the tilt as suggested, them putting a pipe section in the J mount and moving it up 2.5' or so. Hope you figure it out. Let the list know. At 01:39 PM 9/29/2009, you wrote: >I am curious if anyone thinks this is multipath and has a suggestion on >how to fix. > > > >This just happens to be my dads house, radio mounted to a j-mount on eve >of house, clear LOS to tower <1 mile away, -56 signal. This eve is over >the porch roof to the east and signal shoots over the south plane of the >roof which is an approx 30deg angle. I was over this morning and he is >complaining the Internet is not working and I go in to do some >troubleshooting. I setup a constant ping to the AP and I am getting ><1ms, I start to browse and the pings jump to >300ms and random lost >packets. > >Configure a new radio in the house and have a -75 signal in the house, >try the ping thing again and all seems fine. I replace he radio on the >roof and I am back to the poor ping times again. > > > >Now I don't understand multipath as well I should but it seems to make >sense in this case. Is it possible to reduce or remedy without moving >the radio to a totally different location? > > > >Mark McElvy >AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. > > > > > > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I have almost 100% Tranzeo CPEs and almost any CPQ and SL2 can do 20 10 or 5Mhz channels with the new 4.0.5 Firm. 5 and 10Mhz has really helped in some noisy areas. I had one tower I was about to take the sectors down and once going to 5mhz I have 15 new clients. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved. - Helen Keller -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hensley Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 1:26 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Smaller channel sizes is one thing we haven't done yet, but we can'd do it permanently unless we swap out a few CPE's. Have a couple of older Tranzeo's and an older Deliberant or two that don't support smaller channel sizes. Appreciate the info and help. We are going to try it on the Test AP we have up to see if it makes a difference on the couple of clients we have on there right now. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) I have a lot of Deliberant CPE in my network, just a few of their APS. But the newer generation stock with Atheros cards supports 20/10/5 MHz channels. From their site, concerning the Duos: Product contains: * Dual-Radio with adjustable RF Output Power * Rugged cast aluminum hinged enclosure * Full, half, and quarter bandwidth channels * Multi-BSSID support (VSSID) with VLAN tags * PoE built-in for single cable installation * Configurable Multi-mode AP * AP mode/AP client mode * WDS * AP router/AP client router * AP repeater * Redundant PtP bridge with STP At 11:37 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >Yeah, I think they use the same cards -- Willi Atheros. Goota set >IEEE mode to G first, then half/quarter channels are available. > >At 11:04 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > >Mike - you mean 5mhz and 10mhz channels? > > > >Josh Luthman > >Office: 937-552-2340 > >Direct: 937-552-2343 > >1100 Wayne St > >Suite 1337 > >Troy, OH 45373 > > > >"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however > >improbable, must be the truth." > >--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Mike wrote: > > > > > The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. > > > > > > > > > At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > > > >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > > > > > > > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > > > > > > > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that > > > >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on > > > >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > > > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B > > > or G? > > > > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > > > > do a mix? > > > > > > > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > > > extra > > > > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > > stable? > > > > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > > less > > > > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise > environment, combined > > > with > > > > > a higher useage AP? > > > > > > > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > > > started > > > > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > > > and > > > > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, > etc etc and > > > > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing > purposes we > > > put > > > > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > > > > with. Switched two > > > > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > > > > seem to be > > > > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could > be. This is > > > on > > > > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the > issue - we > > > can > > > > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > > > have > > > > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one > > > so we > > > > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > > tower. > > > > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > > > did > > > > > not reveal anything significant. With just one cus
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Smaller channel sizes is one thing we haven't done yet, but we can'd do it permanently unless we swap out a few CPE's. Have a couple of older Tranzeo's and an older Deliberant or two that don't support smaller channel sizes. Appreciate the info and help. We are going to try it on the Test AP we have up to see if it makes a difference on the couple of clients we have on there right now. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) I have a lot of Deliberant CPE in my network, just a few of their APS. But the newer generation stock with Atheros cards supports 20/10/5 MHz channels. From their site, concerning the Duos: Product contains: * Dual-Radio with adjustable RF Output Power * Rugged cast aluminum hinged enclosure * Full, half, and quarter bandwidth channels * Multi-BSSID support (VSSID) with VLAN tags * PoE built-in for single cable installation * Configurable Multi-mode AP * AP mode/AP client mode * WDS * AP router/AP client router * AP repeater * Redundant PtP bridge with STP At 11:37 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >Yeah, I think they use the same cards -- Willi Atheros. Goota set >IEEE mode to G first, then half/quarter channels are available. > >At 11:04 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > >Mike - you mean 5mhz and 10mhz channels? > > > >Josh Luthman > >Office: 937-552-2340 > >Direct: 937-552-2343 > >1100 Wayne St > >Suite 1337 > >Troy, OH 45373 > > > >"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however > >improbable, must be the truth." > >--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Mike wrote: > > > > > The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. > > > > > > > > > At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > > > >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > > > > > > > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > > > > > > > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that > > > >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on > > > >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > > > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B > > > or G? > > > > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > > > > do a mix? > > > > > > > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > > > extra > > > > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > > stable? > > > > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > > less > > > > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise > environment, combined > > > with > > > > > a higher useage AP? > > > > > > > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > > > started > > > > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > > > and > > > > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, > etc etc and > > > > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing > purposes we > > > put > > > > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > > > > with. Switched two > > > > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > > > > seem to be > > > > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could > be. This is > > > on > > > > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the > issue - we > > > can > > > > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > > > have > > > > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one > > > so we > > > > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > > tower. > > > > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > > > did > > > > > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > > > started > > > > > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > > > going > > > > > bad and still no luck. > > > > > > > > > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the > area, but we've > > > been > > > > > through basically every channel and it did not help > either. Other AP's > > > in > > > > > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath > issue so we > > > > > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > > > the > > > > > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > > > get > > > > > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > > > still > > > > > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > > >
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I have a lot of Deliberant CPE in my network, just a few of their APS. But the newer generation stock with Atheros cards supports 20/10/5 MHz channels. From their site, concerning the Duos: Product contains: * Dual-Radio with adjustable RF Output Power * Rugged cast aluminum hinged enclosure * Full, half, and quarter bandwidth channels * Multi-BSSID support (VSSID) with VLAN tags * PoE built-in for single cable installation * Configurable Multi-mode AP * AP mode/AP client mode * WDS * AP router/AP client router * AP repeater * Redundant PtP bridge with STP At 11:37 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >Yeah, I think they use the same cards -- Willi Atheros. Goota set >IEEE mode to G first, then half/quarter channels are available. > >At 11:04 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > >Mike - you mean 5mhz and 10mhz channels? > > > >Josh Luthman > >Office: 937-552-2340 > >Direct: 937-552-2343 > >1100 Wayne St > >Suite 1337 > >Troy, OH 45373 > > > >"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however > >improbable, must be the truth." > >--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Mike wrote: > > > > > The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. > > > > > > > > > At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > > > >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > > > > > > > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > > > > > > > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that > > > >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on > > > >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > > > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B > > > or G? > > > > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > > > > do a mix? > > > > > > > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > > > extra > > > > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > > stable? > > > > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > > less > > > > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise > environment, combined > > > with > > > > > a higher useage AP? > > > > > > > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > > > started > > > > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > > > and > > > > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, > etc etc and > > > > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing > purposes we > > > put > > > > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > > > > with. Switched two > > > > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > > > > seem to be > > > > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could > be. This is > > > on > > > > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the > issue - we > > > can > > > > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > > > have > > > > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one > > > so we > > > > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > > tower. > > > > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > > > did > > > > > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > > > started > > > > > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > > > going > > > > > bad and still no luck. > > > > > > > > > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the > area, but we've > > > been > > > > > through basically every channel and it did not help > either. Other AP's > > > in > > > > > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath > issue so we > > > > > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > > > the > > > > > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > > > get > > > > > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > > > still > > > > > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a > > > 9db > > > > > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other > than that, > > > they > > > > > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > > > > > > > > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience > > > with > > > > > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > > > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > >
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Yeah, I think they use the same cards -- Willi Atheros. Goota set IEEE mode to G first, then half/quarter channels are available. At 11:04 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >Mike - you mean 5mhz and 10mhz channels? > >Josh Luthman >Office: 937-552-2340 >Direct: 937-552-2343 >1100 Wayne St >Suite 1337 >Troy, OH 45373 > >"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however >improbable, must be the truth." >--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > > >On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Mike wrote: > > > The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. > > > > > > At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > > >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > > > > > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > > > > > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that > > >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on > > >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B > > or G? > > > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > > > do a mix? > > > > > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > > extra > > > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > > stable? > > > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > > less > > > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined > > with > > > > a higher useage AP? > > > > > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > > started > > > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > > and > > > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > > > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we > > put > > > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > > > with. Switched two > > > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > > > seem to be > > > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is > > on > > > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we > > can > > > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > > have > > > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one > > so we > > > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > > tower. > > > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > > did > > > > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > > started > > > > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > > going > > > > bad and still no luck. > > > > > > > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've > > been > > > > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's > > in > > > > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > > > > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > > the > > > > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > > get > > > > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > > still > > > > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a > > 9db > > > > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, > > they > > > > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > > > > > > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience > > with > > > > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > >-- > > >/* > > >Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL > > > KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting > > > http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ > > >*/ > > > > > > > > > > >- > --- > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > >- > --- > > > > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > >h
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Mike - you mean 5mhz and 10mhz channels? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth." --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Mike wrote: > The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. > > > At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: > >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > > > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > > > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that > >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on > >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B > or G? > > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > > do a mix? > > > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the > extra > > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more > stable? > > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided > less > > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined > with > > > a higher useage AP? > > > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've > started > > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k > and > > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we > put > > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > > with. Switched two > > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > > seem to be > > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is > on > > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we > can > > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We > have > > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one > so we > > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water > tower. > > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it > did > > > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP > started > > > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one > going > > > bad and still no luck. > > > > > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've > been > > > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's > in > > > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > > > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, > the > > > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can > get > > > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're > still > > > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > > > > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a > 9db > > > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, > they > > > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > > > > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience > with > > > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > >-- > >/* > >Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL > > KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting > > http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ > >*/ > > > > > > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! > >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
The Atheros Deliberant cards will do half and quarter channels on G. At 10:42 AM 10/1/2009, you wrote: >If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. > >Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. > >I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that >support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on >20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? > > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to > do a mix? > > > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra > > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? > > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less > > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with > > a higher useage AP? > > > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and > > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put > > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble > with. Switched two > > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they > seem to be > > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on > > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can > > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we > > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. > > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did > > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started > > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going > > bad and still no luck. > > > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been > > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in > > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the > > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get > > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still > > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db > > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they > > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with > > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > >-- >/* >Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL > KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting > http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ >*/ > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
If you aren't sectorized, you should do that first. Neither normal b or g or b/g are ideal in high noise. I don't mix. I like a little better g-mode on 10mhz channels using radio cards that support listening on 5/10 mhz channels like the xr2. (Many listen on 20mhz) You're more than twice as likely to find a clearer channel. On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:58:30AM -0500, Jason Hensley wrote: > In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? > Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? > > Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra > speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? > I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less > bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the > real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with > a higher useage AP? > > I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started > having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and > fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and > nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put > up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched two > of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to be > doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on > Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can > pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have > other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we > know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. > Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did > not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started > acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going > bad and still no luck. > > 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been > through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in > the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we > raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the > test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get > around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still > barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. > > Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db > antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they > are identical as far as equipment goes. > > So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with > G-only mode in the field? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- /* Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ */ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with a higher useage AP? I've got an AP that we've run in B mode only for a while. We've started having problems with it - speeds go from 3meg at the customer to 200k and fluctuate constantly. We've worked with RTS, ACK timeouts, etc etc and nothing seems to have improved the stability. For testing purposes we put up another AP right next to the one we're having trouble with. Switched two of our gaming clients to that one (setup as G mode only) and they seem to be doing better, but not quite as good as we feel they could be. This is on Deliberant AP's (Duos). The backhaul part of it is not the issue - we can pull close to 15meg back to our office when cabled into the AP. We have other Deliberant APs that are running MANY more clients than this one so we know it's not limitations of the equipment. AP is on top of a water tower. Have taken all clients off and brought them back on one by one and it did not reveal anything significant. With just one customer on the AP started acting up again. Swapped radios in the AP thinking we could have one going bad and still no luck. 2.4 antennas are H-pol. We have a ton of noise in the area, but we've been through basically every channel and it did not help either. Other AP's in the vicinity are performing fine. Thought of the multipath issue so we raised our test AP up a little higher than the other one. As I said, the test AP seems to be better, but next to it on top of the tower we can get around 8 or 9 meg down (locked into G mode), but at the CPE's we're still barely getting 2.5-2.8meg. Any thoughts? We changed everything we can. The new "test" AP has a 9db antenna compared to the 13db on the "production" AP. Other than that, they are identical as far as equipment goes. So, back to the subject question though, what's real-world experience with G-only mode in the field? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] update Macintosh traffic issues?
Update Then problem was FireFox. As soon as it loaded it immediately was loading some add-ons that killed the traffic on the IP. Steve Barnes Manager PCS-WIN RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved. - Helen Keller -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:21 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Macintosh traffic issues? e...@wisp-router.com wrote: > Someone at one point told me that they seen some versions of Safari that is > doing a lot of heavy preloading and opens up tons of sessions. Safari has a couple wonderful (from the user's point of view) features like that. See attached screenshot. By default, the "Top Sites" page (their name for the fancy homepage shown) is only one click away from anywhere, and you can either use it as a bookmark system, or just let it auto-learn the pages you visit the most (I use the latter because it lets me maximize my laziness). On that screenshot, you'll see that a few of the sites' preview images have little stars in one corner. That means Safari thinks the content of the page has changed significantly since your last visit (if it's a blog or news site, for instance, that probably means new content has been posted). The screenshot was right after I booted my MacBook - I just started it up, opened Safari, and clicked the Top Sites button, and that's it - see how it already has several sites with the star? Safari did in fact preload all twelve of those sites, to check their content. And while Safari is running, I'm pretty sure it also periodically checks those pages again, so that the next time you open a new tab (which defaults to the Top Sites window) you'll know if anything was updated in the last few minutes. From the user's perspective, this is pretty darn nifty. From the bandwidth provider's perspective, maybe not so much. David Smith MVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
