The website describes it pretty well Rory.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 10/19/2014 08:07 AM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote:
Yea, didn’t know if that information violated the old NDA thing
Rory
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett via Af
*Sent:* Sunday, October 19, 2014 5:35 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
It "eliminates" the need for sectors... by having four sectors in one
enclosure.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Rory Conaway via Af" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Sunday, October 19, 2014 12:48:06 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
We keep our residential home deployments down to about ½ mile or
less. We figure that’s good for about 50 users with 20MHz channels
with on Rocket 5Ms and about 60-70Mbps capacity. I might change to
Ubiquiti Rocket AC radios when they get a stable PTMP firmware
assuming it’s done by early next year. If it’s delayed further than
1^st quarter, I will probably wait to evaluate Mimosa’s A5-360 . That
bad boy can support up to 1Gbps with 802.11ac clients which pretty
much eliminates the need for sectors unless you have a down-tilt or
range issue. Even the gain on that antenna is 18dBi which is more
than sufficient for DFS channels.
Rory
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds
via Af
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 10:08 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pmp450 vs epmp pros vs cons
If we lived in an area where things were flat, you might be right.
We're full of hills and valleys, mountains and glaciers.
... but we're not flat, and Rory is doing similar things in his
environment by using low-to-the-ground microcells and using the
residential structures to create an urban canyon effect.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 10/18/2014 01:52 PM, Mark Radabaugh via Af wrote:
And now your completely out of spectrum and can't deploy anything
new. I suppose the good part for you is nobody else can do
anything given the amount of noise your making.
Mark
On 10/18/14, 1:27 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af wrote:
You just hit the nail on the head why we have 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 UBNT or 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?
--
Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 419.837.5015 x 1021
