Its not a matter of what you use but how it was ratcheted to work. It
may not have been built for what needs are for today but maybe 8 yrs ago
it was a running system.
If I had to use what you listed I could make it work with todays
demands but it would not have the range.
I have seen more than 5 wisps come and go here all using 802.11 based
systems and failed but I dont think it was because of the radio type but
just lack of knowledge on how to
really deploy them in way that worked for them.
On 10/19/2014 7:42 AM, Mike Hammett via Af wrote:
The network I bought is a prime example of "using Canopy doesn't
guarantee success". Omnis everywhere, Omnis feeding SMs with other
omnis behind them. $12k backhauls behind a backhaul link with a -87
signal. Generic (not even Linksys) networking gear, hubs, etc.
But hey, he used Cyclones, PTP400s and Redlines so it was good, right?
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Ken Hohhof via Af" <[email protected]>
*To: *[email protected]
*Sent: *Saturday, October 18, 2014 1:15:38 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
But there’s the stages of where WISPs have historically gotten their
customers:
1) People getting Internet for the first time
2) People switching from dialup
3) People switching from DSL
4) People switching from satellite
5) People switching from mobile hotspots
6) People switching from other WISPs who did things on the cheap
I guess stage 7 would be deploy fiber and drink everybody’s milkshake.
*From:* Josh Reynolds via Af <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:27 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
You just hit the nail on the head why wehave never considered
deploying 450 (and similar)in the past:
By the time "you" (relative term) have the cashflow to pay for those
sectors, "we" (another relative term, for people deploying UBNTor
similar) have already thrown up 4-6 shielded sectors and at least 10
clients per. If we don't think we can hit a decent sub densityor at
least make the site a valuable repeater, then we don't go there.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 10/18/2014 09:01 AM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af wrote:
I prefer sectors too but math doesnt always work out. I'll put the
omni in to get the site up and once the customers are there change
it to sectors. The 450 platform is very easy to drop sectors in
and have the existing clients link right up. I have a couple sites
with existing customers i am dropping a two sector 450 system in
with 120 segree KP antennas. cant afford any more sectors than
that per site right now...
Sent from my iPhone
Kurt Fankhauser
Wavelinc Communications
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
http://www.wavelinc.com
tel. 419-562-6405
fax. 419-617-0110
On Oct 18, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Mike Hammett via Af <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I've noticed a lot of PMP operators are deploying omnis
(presumably because they can't afford 4 APs. Give me TDMA
Atheros with sectors over omnis on anything any day.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Kurt Fankhauser via Af" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:38:14 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
TJ,
No difference between the 3 different frequencies bands (other
than NLOS range) as far as the product itself they are all the
same animal. 2.4ghz NLOS is slightly better than 3.65ghhz.
They all function the same and have the same expected
throughputs per channel width. They all use the same firmware
and i love the interface being the same across all 3. The only
major difference is the 5ghz is V/H versus slant on the other
two. That just translates to the 5ghz omni being ALOT smaller
and lighter. There are some places that i wish the 2.4ghz
woulda been V/H because of the omni size but overall I am
still very happy with the 2.4ghz 450.
Kurt Fankhauser
Wavelinc Communications
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
http://www.wavelinc.com <http://www.wavelinc.com/>
tel. 419-562-6405
fax. 419-617-0110
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:57 AM, TJ Trout via Af <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Kurt,
Any pros and cons on 450 between 2ghz, 3.65 and 5? Any
differences at all? Range vs throughput? Obviously 2ghz
penetrates better, 3 is licensed and 5 has more spectrum
but anything else? All bands are open for me
Thanks
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I started the spring deploying 450 in 2.4ghz, 5ghz,
and 3.65ghz and then middle of the summer deciding i
had to"try" some ePMP because the cost was so low I
couldn't resist.... I can say now that I am fairly
certain I will probably stick with the 450. There are
many small reasons that when I considered them all i
came to this conclusion. Here are my reasons:
1. ePMP latency starts to go up quickly once you have
more than 10 clients on an AP. Once you get over 20
clients the latency is pretty much 25-30 ms. Cambium
was honest about this at the road tour and they noted
if you want the best latency to stick with the 450.
2. Sync between the two platforms is not there yet. If
you have adjacent towers on the different platforms
that can see each other you won't have sync.
3. No remote spectrum analyzer for clients. This is
HUGE for when the clients fire up their wireless
camera and baby monitors and trash the whole spectrum.
4.No burst bucket on CPE's
5.EPMP Interface is SLOWWW. Cambium explained at the
tour they were offloading alot of processing power to
the PC you are viewing the interface with and i can't
be taking a quad core machine up a tower to work on
these radios and do site surveys. I am working with a
Panasonic Toughbook and takes FOREVER to log into the
EPMP radios.
6. Fore some reason site surveys are a PITA with ePMP.
Think its a combination of many factors here... slow
interface one of them...
7. EPMP in 5ghz DFS band has really low power output.
Something like 13-14db. When using an omni antenna you
can't get maximum legal EIRP out of the ePMP.
8. 450 link tests and SM modulation is pretty stable
and predictable. EPMP seems like its all over the
place. I don't think I have yet seen EPMP linktest get
full up or down outside of a lab environment.
There might be other reasons but I'm pretty tired and
was heading for bed.
Kurt Fankhauser
Wavelinc Communications
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
http://www.wavelinc.com <http://www.wavelinc.com/>
tel. 419-562-6405 <tel:419-562-6405>
fax. 419-617-0110 <tel:419-617-0110>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:05 PM, TJ Trout via Af
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I haven't been keeping real up to date on current
generation ptmp offerings but we have a new site
going up and I need to decide pretty quickly on
some equipment. For the guys who have been using
both 450 and epmp do you have any pros and cons ?
Any reason to spend the extra money when epmp
seems to have the same if not better performance ,
sync, etc?
My gut says 450 is going to be my best long term
solution but with all of the positive epmp
feedback it's hard to justify the extra money?
--
