I wouldn't put up a AC EPMP/PTP550 and expect it to be trouble free yet...
the firmware is still being ironed out. Tried and true would probably be
PTP650/PTP450 like Colin said.

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Sam Lambie <[email protected]> wrote:

> If bandwidth isn't an issue, I have a whole bunch of PTP 100's laying
> around. Cheap....
>
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 9:55 AM Lewis Bergman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Huh. So the only real difference I need isn't available. Figures.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 10:22 AM [email protected] <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> The PTP550 has two radios in it that you can bond together. The DSO
>>> ability hasn't been released in firmware.
>>> When the DSO is operational, it will only change one channel at a time
>>> so the link never goes down. You can also set
>>> the channel width separately for each radio. Another note is that these
>>> radios have not yet been approved for DFS
>>> frequencies, so that will be another firmware upgrade to enable that.
>>> About 5ms latency. Another feature in future
>>> firmware will be GPS sync from a CMM5. (Or Packetflux I'm sure)
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Lewis Bergman <[email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> So I have a customer with a private PTP network built long ago,
>>>> obviously, with PTP400 links. For years this has worked great and they have
>>>> been happy. Recently, due to either lightening or another contractor issue,
>>>> one of the three sites (2 of the the total 6 backhauls) are now dead. I
>>>> could probably find some ancient stuff and maybe replace these two but I
>>>> thought now would be a good time to get them into some supportable
>>>> equipment.
>>>>
>>>> I would like something as trouble free as the PTP400. Throughput is a
>>>> non issue as they only need about 2Mbs. The main deal is reliability and my
>>>> desire to not have to jack with the thing due to outside influences be they
>>>> weather or interference. Basically as close to the 400's trouble free
>>>> operation as possible. Cost is a factor but not the primary one, yet
>>>> something above $1000 each side is a non starter.
>>>>
>>>> I have looked at the PTP550 which is based on an AC chipset but says it
>>>> has:
>>>> Dynamic Spectrum Optimization (DSO)* With Dynamic Spectrum
>>>> Optimization, PTP 550 systems are constantly optimizing the channel of
>>>> operation to maximize link reliability and performance. Based on
>>>> environment the PTP 550 can be set to move or search better spectrum. As a
>>>> result, customer can get more throughput with limited spectrum in even the
>>>> most challenging environments
>>>> I also looked at the ePMP Force series, based on the same chipset. I
>>>> have used a bunch of these before but not in this demanding (reliability
>>>> wise) environment. All the Force stuff seem to have a sentence like these:
>>>> Configurable modes of operation ensure robust adaptivity to both
>>>> symmetrical and asymmetrical traffic while providing high performance and
>>>> round-trip latency as low as 3-5 ms.
>>>> Configurable Modes of operation ensure robust adaptivity to both
>>>> symmetrical and asymmetrical traffic while providing high performance and
>>>> round-trip latency as low as 2 - 3 ms.
>>>>
>>>> So I guess my question is, for those using these products, is there
>>>> really a big difference between the PTP550 line and the Force line? They
>>>> are both based on the AC chipset so while there is maybe quite a bit they
>>>> can do to enhance that I can't imagine it would be earth shattering.
>>>>
>>>> Any recommendations?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> AF mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> AF mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> *Sam Lambie*
> Taosnet Wireless Tech.
> 575-758-7598 Office
> www.Taosnet.com <http://www.newmex.com>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
>
-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to