Long time, Charles!
All my 802.11bg problems are client talking to AP. In all cases, the
client can hear the AP just fine.
Charles Wu wrote:
Hi Blair,
A TR-CPQ-x has the following specifications
CPQ-N: $165
CPZ-19: $175 (integrated 19 dBi antenna)
+23 dBm Output Power Max
23dbm into a 19db antenna = 42dbm out (cpe to AP)
-85 dBm @ 11 Mbps
-72 dBm @ 54 Mbps
Features:
Client NAT with QoS (probably Wmm)
Not an issue as I bridge to users router
The Ubiquiti NS2 has the following specifications
NS2: $79.95 (integrated 10 dBi antenna with connector)
+26 dBm Output Power Max
26dbm into a 10db antenna = 36dbm out (cpe to AP)
-92 dBm @ 11 Mbps
-74 dBm @ 54 Mbps
Features:
>From a manual review perspective, AirOS seems to do miles more than what a Trango CPQ can do
Not an issue as I bridge to users router
Sometimes, I really need that extra 6db!
So...there's not way you're going to spend $100 on a 19 dBi patch and a pigtail...so, assuming availability wasn't an issue or you weren't sitting on stock...why would you even buy a Tranzeo?
Because, as I have aged, I find that I LOVE all-in-one radio/antenna
with NO connections exposed to the weather! And no coax to kink... Or
fill with water... And no more Coax Seal or mastic!! And from a
troubleshooting/repair standpoint it makes things so simple. Swap the
radio, load the settings and you are out of there!
But, I still use Hyperlink 24db grids with the tranzeo CPQ-N as
needed. I plan to use the NS 2 with them now, as needed, but it is
rare. Most of the time, when I need that much extra, I put the user on
turbocell. Soon to be netstream...
-Charles
-------------------------------------------
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 9:32 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostations - question
Charles,
I use tranzeo for my 802.11b/g clients since about 2 years ago or so. I
am now deploying the NS 2 as I can.get units and where approiate. I
will still use the tranzeo cpq-15, (think it replaced by the sl2 now),
and the cpq-19 as needed.
Charles Wu wrote:
So, seeing the activity on this latest thread regarding Nanostations has peaked my interest...so, to satisfy my own curiosity, I decided to do some research on Nanostations
(I'm making a lot of assumptions here, so please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm a relative newbie to this segment of the market)
Now, it seems to me that the Nanostation, although cheaper in price, due to being limited to running CSMA/CA, does not do a good job in competing with the Motorola Canopy / Trango / Alvarions of the world...people who buy those products are paying for the extra R&D effort put into developing a more "WISP-focused" solution than just "plain-ol" Wi-Fi
I'd agree with this. I don't use that gear because an ap of mine might
only have 6 clients and I can not justify the high AP costs and high CPE
costs.
That said, getting into the world of Wi-Fi CPE - for anyone who is not running a proprietary protocol, it seems that the current market leader is Tranzeo, however, looking at their site, it seems that their "value-line" (SL2) product still goes for about $130 and doesn't even have ½ the features of the Nanostation and AirOS
IMHO, correct. But for light duty residental users, they work well and
allow us to keep the install costs down.
If you're running Mikrotik in 802.11x (WiFi) mode, by the time you factor in the cost of the card, antenna, enclosure, power supply, you're back at that $150 / CPE level
I agree, and because of that, the crossroads has no appeal for me, yet.
I am considering them as a path to netstream on 2.4GHz to replace my
turbocell stuff, as most all of my turbocell gear was assembled by me.
With the Nanostation at $89.95, why would anyone deploying a 802.11x-based WISP buy anything else?
Where its antenna gain is enought, I won't. Where I need more gain,
I'll use tranzeo
-Charles
-------------------------------------------
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 8:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostations
You know,
It doesn't need to be a full port of mikrotik either...
It needs to be a client. 802.11abg, netstream, bridging, basic NAT, dhcp client/server, ppp client, and interface queues would be enough for most of us.
A lot of things could be removed to maybe get it down to the flash size needed.
Just a thought.
Travis Johnson wrote:
Mikrotik would make MORE money by porting ROS to the Nanostation than they currently make on the Crossroads or RB411 (which we are buying hundreds per month of now).
If it's a business decision, MT would be smart to port the software ASAP.
Travis
Matt Ferre wrote:
One more note. Mikrotik has long history of introducing 'their'
version of hardware that was previously sold by UBNT and made the
momentum.
First there was SR5. Then there came Mikrotik R52H, which is far worse
in terms of performance and quality (though 50% cheaper) but just at
that time became the high power card of choice for all MT based
applications. Just at that time you could see MT support posts on
their forum starting to suggest swapping SR5 to R52H if you only had
any problems and that move alone was magicaly supposed to cure all
your problems.
Then there came RB133 - a cheap CPE replacement for LS5 and/or LS2. At
that time LS2/LS5 became a no-no for MT use too.
Then again, there is a Crossroads which is brand new and strangely
similiar to LS2. That's obviously a coincidence too.
And no, I am not saying Mikrotik is evil. They are just a profit
oriented company with clear idea how to explore their market share and
having a really solid businessplan. And just as you will never see
Microsoft supporting Linux type software, you will never see Mikrotik
supporting NS2/5. Though it's likely you may see Mikrotik version of
hardware pretty much the same as NS2/5 sometime soon.
On 7/21/08, Sam Tetherow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While you may be right on their focus being RB+ROS. I don't understand
why they would not want to sell a $40 license on a piece of hardware
giving them a theoretical profit of close to $40. Hardware has to be
manufactured and shipped and warrantied to some extent. If they are
already writing the software to go with their hardware, why not pick up
the extra sale on someone elses hardware at next to no addtional cost.
People buying the NS2/5 are doing it from a cost standpoint. Even with
an additional $40 for a software license it would be 110 for a compact
unit with integrated antenna, dual polarity and a POE. That is $10 less
than just the crossroads board with no POE, antenna or enclosure. It
would cost another 50% for a rootenna and POE.
If they worked with Ubiquiti they would have a chance to own the lowend
market and finally have certified gear out there. The upgrade path
would be perfect for their hardware. They would sell the AP hardware as
well as higher end CPEs for business and backhauls and still make
$40/CPE on the cheap end. And the operator has a 100% end to end ROS
network. I wonder if they are making $40 on a crossroads after
manufacture and shipping. I really don't see the downside to this,
especially if the hardware is similar to the crossroads and ubiquiti
really expressed and interest in working with them.
Well, if MT doesn't want the business, I wonder if Lonnie is interested...
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Matt Ferre wrote:
Looking at the posts on the Mikrotik forum I'd say Mikrotik doesn't
exactly like Ubiquiti. And from business point of view I can clearly
see why.
Who exactly would benefit from porting Mikrotik to NS5? Mikrotik? No,
their Routerboard sales would drop and as we see during last two years
they are more into selling Routerboard + Routeros package than the
software alone. Ubiquiti would be the main beneficiary of that
situation and that's why you're not going to see it happen. Never
ever.
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Jeromie Reeves wrote:
Oswave says there is no NS2/5 support and will not be. DD-WRT has
support. That is a shame since ros/sos seam not to have plans to
support them. I wonder how much effort/money it would be to get
Ubiquity to solicit a firmware from someone?
My understanding (this is "friend of a friend" quality info) is that
MT and Ubiquity DID have discussions about the NS platform. It is
not something that is going to happen "out of the box", however with
a 16M flash that Travis mentioned, perhaps it is something that
could be done. I mean, the cost would be just $45 for the nLevel4
license and only about $23 or so (I can't recall the available
pricing) for nLevel3 plus the hardware cost.
-- ********************************************************************
*Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation * *Network Engineering
*MikroTik RouterOS * *573-276-2879 *ImageStream *
*http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE *
*http://blog.butchevans.com/ *Wired or wireless Networks * *Mikrotik
Certified Consultant *Professional Technical Trainer *
********************************************************************
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
|
