Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Forrest Christian > (List Account) > *Sent:* Friday, March 11, 2016 7:48 PM > *To:* af > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux > product design. > > > > So, what I'm hearing you say is that you just

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

:48 PM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design. So, what I'm hearing you say is that you just want to buy a whole bunch of 12 port injectors and standardize on that? On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.co

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

More ports is *never* bad. And if I don't use them all, so what. Something always comes up, like that micro-POP you never thought would grow. I have about a dozen sites which started out with 900 and 2.4 FSK omnis. They've grown to needing a full 4x90 cluster of both. Then I need a backhaul

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I think sticking with 4 port and 12 port for the DIN rail version makes the most sense. If we only need 8 ports, we can just use two 4 ports, since it doesn't sound like an 8 port version would save much in the way of space or cost over two 4 ports anyway. On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Forrest

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I really wanted the ears to be able to do this My desire was a 17" wide box, with removable ears which could mount either way to wall mount. After a dozen or so scary quotes and not finding any standard manufacturer which would do this, I gave up. The new enclosure has fixed ears...

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

So, what I'm hearing you say is that you just want to buy a whole bunch of 12 port injectors and standardize on that? On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: > I'd rather but a dozen 12 ports than 6 of one and 6 of another. > > Josh Luthman > Office:

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

If you've got racks ... just buy one or two of the new rackmount injectors when they start shipping. The daisy chain thing for power, I've looked at a few times. There are issues with doing this that would take way too long to explain. The biggest issue is how quickly you run over the current

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I'd rather but a dozen 12 ports than 6 of one and 6 of another. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 11, 2016 8:38 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" < li...@packetflux.com> wrote: > Based on current plans, the rackmount

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

Based on current plans, the rackmount version is going to be available in either 4, 8, 12 or 16 port versions or 6, 12 or 18 port versions, depending on whether I end up with 4 or 6 ports per 'chunk'.all of these will be upwardly expandable. So I think that handles pretty much anyone who

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I have started using small wall mount racks at many locations. Outdoor cabinets with racks at others. Mikrotik Switches mount in racks neatly. At one location I am working on cleaning up I have: 1 SAF Licensed link 6 Canopy FSK 2.4 AP's 1 Canopy FSK 900 AP 4 Canopy 450 3.6 AP's 5 Canopy

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I have a site w/ 13 radios right now. 4x90 5GHz 450 cluster. 4x90 900 FSK cluster. Various other stuff, mostly PTP. So I'd say +1 to whoever said to make the rack-mount version shallow enough and ears allowed to be rotated 90 degrees for wall/panel mounting. But that would really only work if

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

In spite of the handful of those that might want a 16 or 18 port injector, I think you & packetflux would do better with a 12 port; or maybe even an 8 port. We have only one POP that would need the higher count. If you made a 16 or 18 port version, I would think rackmount only. bp

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

+1 to what Josh said... we don't do rackmount. It's going to be pretty rare for us to ever care about sync on more than 8 radios at a site, but it's not at all uncommon for us to have 10-12 radios total, and I do like the idea of just having one POE box for everything. That said, I don't know

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

a!!! buy ONE unit for ALL towers, one model spare for all the things People can already buy a DIN product and put it in a rack. You can't go the other way. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Forrest

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

Ah, but you're putting the DIN on a panel inside an enclosure I assume. With a lot of rackmount items, you can rotate the angle brackets 90 degrees to panel mount them. OR you get one of those 4U patch panel racks that mounts on a wall and screw that to your panel. What I'm saying is, as

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

What's the most you have radio-wise at these sites? My thought is something along the lines of.. If I have up to 4 radios at a site, I'd buy 1 syncinjector-sized din power injectors with 4 ports each for 1X the cost and 1X the space requirement If I have 5 - 8 radios at a site, I'd buy 2

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I don't use Cambium, but we only have two sites with a rack, and 23 sites with DIN rail in smaller boxes. On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: > I don't do racks at many locations. Certainly not looking forward to it > in the future. > > I have an 8

Re: [AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

I don't do racks at many locations. Certainly not looking forward to it in the future. I have an 8 port that does my APs - that's NSEW in two bands. I don't see us ever being able to utilize all of that bandwidth in this area. 12 would include my backhauls, but I don't care about sync'ing

[AFMUG] One more quick question in re: new packetflux product design.

So, I have in the fairly immediate future the new "universal" 4 port injector (in the same form factor as the existing syncinjectors) And the rackmount unit is progressing well, so that's coming as well - up to 16 or 18 ports per 1U And then we have the item the question is about. I