Go with the PTP670. Similar interface to PTP400,500 and 600. Erich Kaiser North Central Tower [email protected] Office: 815-570-3101
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 10:53 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 > >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
