Maybe the FCC moved offices to Motorola too? :P
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Clay Stewart <
cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com> wrote:
> Easy, FCC has moved lots of certification department funds to netnutrality
> department. Not UBNT's fault
>
>
> On Sunday, January 11, 2015, Eric Willia
You read my mind :P
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Kameron Blomquist <
kame...@sightlinewireless.com> wrote:
> Could always go ePMP [image: š]
> On Jan 10, 2015 8:37 PM, "RickG" wrote:
>
>> +1! Tired of waiting too! I'm looking at alternatives!
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Eric Will
Easy, FCC has moved lots of certification department funds to netnutrality
department. Not UBNT's fault
On Sunday, January 11, 2015, Eric Williams {WISP}
wrote:
> Mike, you called it. I have Rocket M5 as AP and Nano Station/Nano
> Bridge for SU. Full US band 5160 to 5825. Adding the Nano/power
;>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>>
>> --------------
s Group"
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 9:11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please...
No, these were 2.4, and there is an issue when NanoBeam is downstream connected
to upstream NanoBridge. All traffic downstream from NanoBeam drops.
On Sunday, Ja
gt;
>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>>
>> --------------
>> *From: *"Clay Stewart"
>&
tps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>
> --
> *From: *"Clay Stewart" >
> *To: *"Ubiquiti Users Group
Why will it drop the traffic down stream?
Clay Stewart wrote:
> Eric, you did not fully explain the issue other then "one NanoBeam
> mixed in with older NanoBridges" costing you time due to freq change.
> Wanted to make sure you are aware that you cannot connect a NanoBeam
> to a NanoBridge. It
> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Jerry Richardson (airCloud)"
>> To: "Ubiquiti Users Group"
>> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 4:28:00 PM
>> Subject: Re
To: "Ubiquiti Users Group"
> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 4:28:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please... Part 2
>
> You can thank jackasses running non-compliant gear that interfered with FAA
> traffic radars for slowing the process.
>
Thank you, jackasses.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson (airCloud)"
To: "Ubiquiti Users Group"
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 4:28:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 515
You can thank jackasses running non-compliant gear that interfered with FAA
traffic radars for slowing the process.
Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 11, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
>
> Well. Unless the hardware fails the DFS test?
>
>
>
>> On Jan 11, 2015, at 13:49, Eric Williams {WISP}
Well. Unless the hardware fails the DFS test?
> On Jan 11, 2015, at 13:49, Eric Williams {WISP}
> wrote:
>
> Mike, you called it. I have Rocket M5 as AP and Nano Station/Nano Bridge for
> SU. Full US band 5160 to 5825. Adding the Nano/power beam for SU, I only have
> 5700-5800 where all the
-
> *From: *"Eric Williams {WISP}"
> *To: *"ubnt users"
> *Sent: *Sunday, January 11, 2015 12:49:14 PM
> *Subject: *[Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please... Part
> 2
>
>
> Mike, you called it. I have Rocket M5 as
ubject: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please... Part 2
Mike, you called it. I have Rocket M5 as AP and Nano Station/Nano Bridge for
SU. Full US band 5160 to 5825. Adding the Nano/power beam for SU, I only have
5700-5800 where all the RF noise is. Iām hoping for some words
Mike, you called it. I have Rocket M5 as AP and Nano Station/Nano Bridge for
SU. Full US band 5160 to 5825. Adding the Nano/power beam for SU, I only
have 5700-5800 where all the RF noise is. I'm hoping for some words of
wisdom from Ubiquiti like, "Hey, we can do that for you guys and why did we
no
- Original Message -
From: "Clay Stewart"
To: "Ubiquiti Users Group"
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 7:31:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please...
Eric, you did not fully explain the issue other then "one NanoBeam mixed in
Eric, you did not fully explain the issue other then "one NanoBeam mixed in
with older NanoBridges" costing you time due to freq change. Wanted to make
sure you are aware that you cannot connect a NanoBeam to a NanoBridge. It
will drop traffic down stream eventually.
On Saturday, January 10, 201
27;
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please...
And of course the Mikrotik route
From: ubnt_users-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:ubnt_users-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Kameron Blomquist
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 11:19 PM
To: Ubiquiti Users Group
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 51
Not in 5 gig.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: "Joe Miller"
To: "Ubiquiti Users Group"
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 11:35:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Pow
And of course the Mikrotik route
From: ubnt_users-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:ubnt_users-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Kameron Blomquist
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 11:19 PM
To: Ubiquiti Users Group
Subject: Re: [Ubnt_users] 5150 - 5250 in US Power/Nano beams Please...
Could always
Could always go ePMP š
On Jan 10, 2015 8:37 PM, "RickG" wrote:
> +1! Tired of waiting too! I'm looking at alternatives!
>
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Eric Williams {WISP} <
> w...@williamsteldata.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Attn Ben and Matt @ Ubiquiti
>>
>> So we are all patiently waiting for
+1! Tired of waiting too! I'm looking at alternatives!
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Eric Williams {WISP} <
w...@williamsteldata.com> wrote:
>
>
> Attn Ben and Matt @ Ubiquiti
>
> So we are all patiently waiting for the new stuff to get DFS compliant. My
> understanding is that the new 100 MHz
Attn Ben and Matt @ Ubiquiti
So we are all patiently waiting for the new stuff to get DFS compliant. My
understanding is that the new 100 MHz, that became available last year, 5150
- 5250 is not a DFS frequency and it would be great if Ubiquiti could give
us access to the new 100 MHz as I jus
24 matches
Mail list logo
