Very cool troubleshooting trick, but I've never heard of the problem. Is that wide spread John?
Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 8:50 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 Mhz Mikrotik SR9 Clients Many outside radios suffer from RF radiation over the Ethernet. I have personally seen this on the YDI Etherant and the Trango FOX. This problem is not specific to any one manufacturer. The cable acts as a transmit antenna, carrying the clock signals from internally to the outside. This can be largely corrected with the use of ferrite beads at the radio and POE injector on these radios. This is a low cost fix in many cases and I have personally seen a 16 db improvement in noise elimination using this approach. Just Google "ferrite beads" and I am sure you will find suppliers. I do not remember where we got ours but they were very inexpensive. I think we paid less than a dollar a piece for these. They are literally a snap to install. They snap together over the Ethernet wire. It takes seconds to install. Scriv Rick Smith wrote: >I had the same problem with some canopy access points - had to do with >Ethernet. > >I put an AP up on a tower, and it interfered with a HAM radio guy. Once I >moved it down on the tower 20 feet, the problem went away. I put a 532 >right next to that HAM'r and nothing happened, I've got a nice 5.8 gig feed >and a 2.4 repeater there now... > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Travis Johnson >Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 10:30 AM >To: WISPA General List >Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 Mhz Mikrotik SR9 Clients > >There is a HUGE problem with Mikrotik and FCC certification. The Mikrotik >532 puts out over 30db of constant "noise" in an area they should not be >(150MHz and 400MHz). It's still an issue, and has not been fixed or even >addressed by MT. > >Travis >Microserv > >Butch Evans wrote: > > >>On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Patrick Leary wrote: >> >> >> >>>Why do you have to have the router? The DSL and cable guys don't >>>provide routers (not without extra fees). I provide my own in my >>>home. At work we have our own router. >>> >>> >>I provide a router because that is the best network design and it >>offers ME an upgrade path that is beyond just being a provider of a >>COMMODITY service (transport). You don't have to agree with it, >>others don't have to do it, but "them's the facts". >> >> >> >>>VL also can do VLAN, all the way to QinQ 802.3ad VLANs. It does >>> >>> >><SNIPPED LOTA OF "NON MARKETING GOOP"> >> >> >>>that's not marketing goop, it's been tested by a tier 1 operator and >>>it blew them away.) >>> >>> >>Wow. As I said in the first post, I have nothing bad to say about >>Alvarion gear...(please read the last paragraph) >> >> >> >>>Plus, in the end the thing that I admit really gets me is that some >>>of these products simply are not legal at all and are illegally >>>shipped in from overseas. If we just blatantly flauted the laws we >>>could save tons in R&D and legal too. It has always been >>>disappointing that some WISPs simply don't care about that. >>>Especially when at the same time the same WISP might complain that >>>another WISP is over driving a system. >>> >>> >>This is a problem, but not so much of a problem as you make it out to >>be. I realize the law is "black and white", but the reality is a >>little more like "shades of grey". I'm not supporting anyone breaking >>the law, but the truth of the matter is that there IS a difference >>between operating a system that is not certified within legal limits >>and operating a system that operates outside legal power limits. The >>primary difference is that one of these (you get to pick) will cause >>more harm to the usability of the spectrum than the other. >> >>On another subject, take another look at the subject line...It's not >>about Alvarion gear, but you seem to have stepped into the middle of >>it (once again). I really just wish you'd at least have the courtesy >>to change the subject line if you are going to change the subject. >> >> >> >-- >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ************************************************************************ ************ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(190). ************************************************************************ ************ ************************************************************************ ************ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(43). ************************************************************************ ************ ************************************************************************************ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. ************************************************************************************ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
