>>I have a problem with your FUD misrepresenting facts. *What facts am I misrepresenting?*
>>They are not even close to accurate. You can't fairly compare apples to oranges either. *Did you not just state my information was factual? How can facts not be accurate? How could you possibly argue this? What in the world could possibly give you the right or capability to call me a liar? I also have to ask what are apples and oranges as I believe I am comparing two 5.8 point to multipoint products.* >>Trango CPEs are $250-$300 per CPE *Where are you getting this price? Here is what I am looking at: http://www.trangobroadband.com/store/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=M5830S-SU http://www.google.com/products?q=trango+m5830s&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title * >>Trango is 22db consistent, and Mikrotik is LUCKY to get their stated full 23db of a Atheros HP card in LOW modulations (not capable of 26mbps), and I've rarely seen it actually deliver it consistently, after all the various potential places for loss (UFl, pigtail, out of spec cards, lower grade filtering, etc). If your Mikrotiks are getting higher RSSI, then you are illegallly over powering your Mikrotiks. *I didn't do much of the wireless configuration - Butch made a template for me. I have a really hard time believing that the cause of the disagreement here is "illegally over powering [my] Mikrotiks".* >> You can't compare Trango's oldest product line to MIkrotik's newest. If you are concerned about price you shouldn't be buying 5830s. There is a reason that they made the FOX. *I deployed around a dozen FOX units. The last set were used to replace the first set that had gone bad. **In the last year only one remains not defective. **This one loses association at least once throughout the month and will be replaced if the customer complains about it.* >>I'd agree with this. But from looking at his post, it looked more like he was telling his own experience. Certainly he knows more about his own experience than you. Perhaps he is misreading the data, but that's not the assumption it looks like you are making. * Everything I have stated is based on facts. Key word being "experience". My purpose of my post was to report my success story and my past experiences.* Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Butch Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 21:35 -0500, Tom DeReggi wrote: > > > I don't have a problem with you finding a reason or jsutification to use > > Mikrotik. Mikrotik has a powerful unique product to save WISPs money. > > However, I have a problem with your FUD misrepresenting facts. They are > not > > even close to accurate. You can't fairly compare apples to oranges > either. > > Which is the apple and which the orange. > > > Trango CPEs are $250-$300 per CPE and go for 12 miles, and never once in > my > > life had a Trango with a RSSI as low as -87. Under no shape or form will > a > > Mikrotik ever get a higher RSSI than a DSSS Trango radio of equivellent > > This is not necessarily true, either. The truth is that it depends on > MANY factors. The radio itself is one of them. Mikrotik is not a > "CPE", but an operating system (hence the name "RouterOS"). Just > because you have not seen the lower RSSI values doesn't mean that it > doesn't happen. > > > Mikrotik is LUCKY to get their stated full 23db of a Atheros HP card in > > LOW modulations (not capable of 26mbps), and I've rarely seen it actually > > deliver it consistently, after all the various potential places for loss > > (UFl, pigtail, out of spec cards, lower grade filtering, etc). > > Hmm. Looks like you NAILED it! Using a superior operating system with > quality components (good radio card and quality antennas/pigtails) CAN > work as well as Trango or any other product on the market. > > > If your Mikrotiks are getting higher RSSI, then you are illegallly > > over powering your Mikrotiks. > > This is a really broad statement and unfair accusation. You have no > real idea if he is doing that or not. I don't know if he is or isn't, > but the point is that neither do you. > > > You can't compare Trango's oldest product line to MIkrotik's newest. If > you > > are concerned about price you shouldn't be buying 5830s. There is a > reason > > that they made the FOX. You need to select the right product and buy > savy > > for Trango, just like you do for Mikrotik. You will also find that > > Mikrotik doesn't do anywhere near 26mbps consistent throughput in a > > scaled PtMP environment, expecially with the slightest amount of noise, > > after combating all the congestion issues of a Wifi protocol (no > > Nstreme polling does not perform as well as Trango polling). > > First, you are missing several realities of how MT works. Mikrotik's > Nstreme is MUCH more than just polling. Nstreme offers 3 specific > benefits, one of which is configurable for specific types of network > traffic while the other 2 are simply a "switch". With Nstreme you now > have the option to turn off CSMA. This fixes a LOT of the problem that > outdoor wifi had in the first place. Then, you have polling. The > polling mechanism has gotten a LOT of work recently. Versions after > 3.15 (currently only in the test package) have a MUCH better polling > mechanism and can scale very well. Perhaps not the the hundreds that a > Canopy system can do, but then you don't need it to do that since you > can build out more APs for the same $$. Finally, you have the other > MAIN benefit of Nstreme, which is the packet aggregation feature. This > feature is where the real benefit to Nstreme resides. You and I both > know that typical IP traffic for most users is not even CLOSE to the > 1500 byte MTU of Ethernet. The average packet size is MUCH smaller. > Let's just say it's 200 bytes (this will vary a LOT, depending on the > network). What the packet aggregation does is put multiple IP packets > inside a single protocol frame. The policy that is used to determine if > an IP packet goes into a frame that is being sent is configurable with 4 > options. I won't go into detail on those options, as they are > documented and you can go read about them. This aggregation technique > can reduce the wireless network's overhead (thereby increasing timeslots > available for real data) and can make a significant improvement in > network throughput. It was back in 2004 that I upgraded a single point > to point link and was amazed at the increase. This was a link that was > running about 12Mbit throughput before Nstreme and simply turning > Nstreme on for that link, it jumped to 18Mbit! That's a 50% increase > (or 33, depending on how you calculate it). And that was WAY before the > recent improvements in the protocol. The point here is this: You are > comparing MT's polling to Trango's polling and the real benefit to MT's > Nstreme isn't even in the polling mechanism. > > > There are many WISPs migrating to Mikrotik for some areas and > applications. > > But lets keep it real. Mikrotik has plenty of value, it is not necessary > to > > distort Trango's capability. > > I'd agree with this. But from looking at his post, it looked more like > he was telling his own experience. Certainly he knows more about his > own experience than you. Perhaps he is misreading the data, but that's > not the assumption it looks like you are making. > > -- > ******************************************************************** > * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* > * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering * > * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * > * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * > ******************************************************************** > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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/
