Agreed, it's not so hard to build an 80 GHz link with 99.5% uptime/availability over one year, but the cumulative amount of time the link will be dead due to rain is huge...
if you want four nines to five nines availability, very different criteria become important. On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Rory Conaway via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > There was an 8 mile link with some Gigacom equipment that I saw but I > think if someone spit in the area, the link went down. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Eric Kuhnke via Af > *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:56 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > > > In the Seattle/Vancouver area, five miles is nuts in 80 GHz, the most we > do is about 4.0 to 5.0 km with +19 Tx power, 1000 MHz FDD channels, QPSK, > and 60cm dishes. That's with a parallel 5 GHz path for OSPF failover. > > I could see five miles in maybe... Saudi Arabia? Timbuktu, Mali? > Somewhere that would be categorized as ITU rain zone A. > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Rory Conaway via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you can align a Bridgewave at 5 miles, you can align anything. That’s > not even a science, it’s a combination of luck, careful breathing, the > patience of Jobe, extensive use of Valium and alcohol, and throat lozenges > for the hours of communication it will take. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Eric Kuhnke via Af > *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:51 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > > > I guess what I meant is that the odds of success are much greater if the > alignment is done by personnel who are accustomed to aiming $20,000 > Bridgewave, Exalt and similar radios with voltmeters. > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Ben Moore via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > While there is some truth to this, any way you look at it...it is tough to > align/ensure good performance. From a support perspective it would be very > tough... > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Eric Kuhnke via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > I know Ben as an "official" ubnt person is too diplomatic to say this, but > the problem with alignment, separation and other site engineering problems > is because anyone with a credit card can buy a ubiquiti link... The super > user friendly documentation and GUI on the http interface make it easy for > people who barely know any networking tech or RF to attempting setting up a > PTP link. > > If you sold a connectorized AF5 and treated it like a part 101 product, > for sales only to real companies through a different channel, it would be > easier to guarantee success. > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Ben Moore via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > We have looked at this, but alignment would be a real issue (and ensuring > proper separation, etc...)...We are still kicking around some different > options. Though we are getting a lot of good feedback already on long > links with AF5. > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Eric Kuhnke via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would like a pro grade AF5 connectorized, for use with a pair of the 3' > Jirous high performance antennas. Each link would need 4 dishes but you'd > be able to go a lot further than the current af5 antenna size. > > On Dec 10, 2014 10:05 PM, "Mathew Howard via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: > > PtMP based on the airfiber in 3.65ghz would seem like a good fit, with the > new rules that are (hopefully) coming... > > licensed also seems like an obvious place to go with airfiber. > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Af [[email protected]] on behalf of Josh Reynolds via Af [ > [email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:42 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > I'd be incredibly surprised if they didn't do a ptmp. > > Not sure a revamped 24GHz is in consideration when there's so many other > bands they could release equipment for. > > Maybe licensed? Hrmmmm... > > One can hope, right? > > josh reynolds :: chief information officer > > spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com > > On 12/10/2014 08:19 PM, Colin Stanners via Af wrote: > > I'm sure they'll do a 24ghz AF 2/Duo/Super/Ultra with 1024QAM. In the > 100mhz channels both ways that'll allow around 1280mbit FD - so a 2.5gbit > backhaul... I'm assuming 3.65 will come as well. > > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Josh Reynolds via Af <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'd guess there's going to be... a least 3 AirFiber products released in > the next 12-18 months. > > If not sooner. > > Now... what would those be? > > Hrmmmmmmmmm..... > > josh reynolds :: chief information officer > > spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com > > On 12/10/2014 08:07 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: > > I don’t know what you are talking about. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds via Af > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:05 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > > > I'm sure that AirFiber team (which they seem to keep expanding) is > silently sitting in their own little corner in Chicago doing nothing. > > :P > > josh reynolds :: chief information officer > > spitwspots :: www.spitwspots.com > > On 12/10/2014 07:48 PM, Rory Conaway via Af wrote: > > I think the ePMP is going to run into the same problem all the 802.11ac > vendors are seeing with the new OOBE rules. The 450 is able to provide a > better performance within the new environment so there will still be a > differentiator. The only question if it’s worth the difference. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Stefan Englhardt via Af > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 9:45 PM > *To:* Josh Luthman via Af > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > > > .AC is an upgrade to .N. Cambium has the choice to use it or not. Others > do. epmp competes with 450 right now but helps to keep customers and > applications where 450 does not meet the price point. > > > > *Von:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2014 04:00 > *An:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> > > > > An .AC ePMP would be incredible - but the issue is whether Cambium would be > fearful of it competing too much with the 450. What does a company do when > it has 2 products that are too good, and the cheaper one starts to outshine > the more expensive one in the most often used benchmark? (mbps - even .AC > ePMP is unlikely to beat 450 in scalability / latency / etc). > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Stefan Englhardt via Af <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > The answer is to release an epmp1000-ac. > > > > > > *Von:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> > > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2014 01:39 > > *An:* Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> > > > > I hope Cambium is listing on this point. > > > > Get rid of speed license and make it as unlimited radios at 10 meg price > > point. > > > > They are about to have more competition from lot of other vendors too. > > > > Tushar > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] On Behalf > Of Peter Kranz via Af > > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:10 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RM5AC-PMP Embargo lifted.. > > > > > Yes no maybe. > > > > I think this is good news actually, as it is sure to light the > competitive > > fire under Cambium to get to feature parity and get rid of speed > licenses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
