I used to have a boss who described his personality as “Tigger” and mine as “Eeyore”.
From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Adam Moffett Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 1:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber Ken, you can't just come back and dethrone me as the eternal pessimist just because you were on vacation since 2016. As far as performance on a noisy channel, I don't think anybody should assume anything. With 50 eNB in service, we've inflicted interference on ourselves a few times. In my experience when we've done that the customers felt a lot of pain. Low data rates, disconnects, etc. It wasn't always reflected in the reported SNR either. Sometimes the symptom was just disconnects and low data rates so it wasn't always obvious. I don't know that any other equipment would have done better, but nor do I have reason to think there was any magic that made LTE better than other equipment in that regard. If someone has a reference to controlled tests then I could be convinced that it's better, but if it's better it's only incrementally better. LTE does two things that other technologies can't. One is it will give you decent performance through foliage. Obviously the attenuation is still there, and in 3.65ghz it's going to be about 15db per 100m of foliage regardless of whether it's LTE or something else. If you put a couple of trees in front of most equipment then you'll have disconnects, jitter, and packet loss. It may "work" to one degree or another, but that connection will always be a problem child. LTE with a couple of trees in the way will work just fine. That's a useful enough quality that we have well over a thousand customers on it, and most of them were not going to get line of sight. The other thing LTE can do is hang on to a garbage signal. It'll function at some number of kilobits per second all the way down to low negative SNR's. That's not a useful trait for WISP's, but it's a thing LTE does and it must be useful for somebody. Wimax kind of sucked regardless of whether you had line of sight. LTE with line of sight performs about as well anything else. If you *had* LOS obviously you wouldn't burden yourself with LTE, but my point is that it's definitely better than Wimax. When you get a good signal it works good and you don't have to say "no" to the potential customer just because of a few trees. All that said, I still hate it. Hate. Hate. Hate. LTE has higher hardware cost. LTE brings complexity that I don't want. Complexity = labor cost. Everybody's documentation is bad. Everybody's support is bad. For some reason everybody selling LTE pisses on SNMP. They are all committed to TR-69. I hate TR-69. SNMP is trivially easy. I get that TR-69 is lighter on the network, and I appreciate that there's a certain convenience in the devices seeking out the server rather than the server having to be primed with data on all the devices. However it always requires one monolithic server, and generally you pay a lot of money for this server, and it's always a piece of shit. If I wanted to change passwords, or collect one signal level value from 1000 devices with SNMP I can write a script for that in 15 minutes. If I want to do it with TR-69 I have to do it through this obtuse server, and it always ends up being a pain in the ass. I've also been thwarted multiple times by bugs in the TR-69 implementation of CPE. Anyway, welcome back Ken. You have an uncommon clarity of thought which has been missed. -Adam On 9/24/2018 11:42 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: But WiMax was supposed to be great with interference because of the magical “HARQ”. HARQ my ass. So you started with around 100 ms latency, and with HARQ retries, it could go to double or triple that. But they tried to convince us that latency didn’t matter, it was jitter that mattered, and WiMax had nice constant latency. NOT! So I had a system I couldn’t sell to gamers and couldn’t sell with our VoIP service. From: AF <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 9:32 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber 80 Mbps at 80 miles? From: Jason McKemie Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 6:21 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber LTE does a whole lot better than WiMax in the face of interference, for whatever that is worth (not much). On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 6:59 PM Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I’m not sure a 5 GHz LTE product makes sense, unless you’re talking carrier aggregation and LAA. Otherwise I question the “magic” of “LTE modulation”, once you try to use it in dirty spectrum. Oooooh, 256QAM. Like we haven’t been doing that for years. I put it in the same category as “3.65 GHz goes through trees”. Only if the noise floor is really low, and then it’s not the “S” part of SNR, it’s the “N” part that’s magic. Maybe I’m missing something, but I’m not wanting to spend big bucks (and a big power budget) to use LTE in 5 GHz. Maybe if there’s some killer antenna technology, but I think that’s what Medusa does too. Not that it is any better on price or power consumption. From: AF <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of Ryan Ray Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 6:44 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber This would be better on the price front then if that is possible. On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Jon Langeler <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Baicells just announced 5Ghz LTE, might be others. The brains of the Cambium 3G Medusa is apparently supposed to be capable of LTE modulation is what I thought I heard at the roadshow. It would be a future software option. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Sep 24, 2018, at 6:12 PM, <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I really have not been paying any attention to this, but is there an unlicensed LTE radio? Meaning an unlicensed radio that uses LTE modulation methods. From: Adam Moffett Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 4:09 PM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber What's nice LTE? Baicells? A Telrad eNB might be "only" $7k, but you'll be north of $9k by the time you figure out all the licenses you need. I'd be curious about a 3.65 Medusa, but I wonder if I can set TDD parameters that will line up with our existing LTE frames. -Adam On 9/24/2018 3:45 PM, Ryan Ray wrote: It's gonna be on display in Vegas. I'm not even in USA so the CBRS stuff isn't really affecting us right now, but when you start looking at 9k per ap you could get some nice LTE instead. It's just surprising being 2k more than the 5ghz pmp450m. Especially with the cost of the SM being higher as well, but maybe the 450b 3.65 will solve that? Time will tell I guess. On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: That’s not surprising, if it includes the MU-MIMO activation key. I guess nutty is in the eye of the beholder. But if it’s really available “soon”, I’m a little surprised, I was afraid they would wait to see what the FCC did with the PAL auction rules. Also whether the industry decided that CBRS is only for LTE devices, even for fixed. And I thought Ubiquiti had trademarked the term SOON™. Anyway, I think something like LTE or cnMedusa is going to be necessary for CBRS, especially with the cost of paying a SAS vendor for each location and the cost of acquiring PAL licenses, and then only getting 10 MHz channels. You don’t get much capacity from 10 MHz of spectrum unless you have all the fancy tricks like beam steering and bidirectional MU-MIMO, and of course at least 256QAM. From: AF <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of Ryan Ray Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 1:31 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber It's available very soon, but the pricing is nutty. $9k usd.... On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 6:47 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Wait, 3.65 Medusa is available now? I thought it was some undetermined date in the future. Or did I misunderstand you? From: AF <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of Dave Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 8:09 AM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber We have a few towers with TOWER TOP control and management. The ones I designed are 24v and 48v. We have only CMM4 boxes with the Planet switches which I use LC the hybrid cable comes from Besttronics. We have a #12 stranded pair in each of these. I have to have transtector Part#1101-626 at top and bottom to meet our surge protection compliance. Since those sites have been installed I have had zero issues. Seems that 3.65Medusa has made us change to a more direct connection so my box design will have to be modified. All of the Orange tag cables will have to be removed since the packet flux will not support the new power requirements Here is one design we have plans to deploy next week. <image003.jpg> On 09/22/2018 05:05 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Are most people using SC or LC at the top of the tower? I want to use LC most everywhere I can, but I understand the advantage in SC on a tower where it's easier to work with larger things. What's the next bigger enclosure? Could you put something like this on a swinging panel where I could run a trunk cable into it and then plug individual patch cables going to each radio? Maybe easier on you if you just make it work with something else on the market, like these panels from FiberStore where someone can just get whatever panel they want (LC\SC\whatever)? https://www.fs.com/products/68962.html The goal is to emulate one of these: https://www.raycap.com/wp-content/uploads/DC6-48-60-0-8C-EV_320-1318.pdf https://www.raycap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/DC6-48-60-18-8C-EV_320-1315-1.pdf Power and fiber in one box, transition from trunk to the ground to the radios. I'm sure they'd sell well. ----- Mike Hammett <http://www.ics-il.com/> Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> Midwest Internet Exchange <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> The Brothers WISP <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> _____ From: "Chuck McCown" mailto:[email protected] To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" mailto:[email protected] Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2018 4:51:48 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber Can put in a patch panel. Just a mechanical thing to solve. But patch panels have cutouts for couplers. And different couplers need different size holes in the part that holds them in. So if someone could tell me which coupler will always be needed, then this is easy. Otherwise I have to offer a variety of coupler options and that multiplies my part numbers etc etc. Happy to do that but not if I only sell 1 per month. From: Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2018 10:46 AM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group Subject: [AFMUG] DC+ Fiber When do we see a 48v one of these? Also, more density? http://store.packetflux.com/sitemonitor-4-channel-relay-output/ When do we see one of these with a fiber patch panel and slack storage? https://www.mccowntech.com/product/8-circuit-outdoor-dc-power-line-surge-suppressor-protector-copy/ ----- Mike Hammett <http://www.ics-il.com/> Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> Midwest Internet Exchange <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> The Brothers WISP <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> _____ -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- <wlmailhtml:%7bEC20E6CA-7165-44FF-BCF8-0ED421C96272%7dmid://00000036/%21cid:[email protected]> -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com _____ -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com _____ -- AF mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[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
