I had the exact same issue a few months back. One of the coax jumpers was
kinked. Replaced and perfect ever since.

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Scott Vander Dussen via Af <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> Ken-
>
> Thanks again.  This link is not on our network and I don’t have access to
> SNMP it- here’s the diag plots- about what you expected?
>
>
>
> Would you concur pigtail replacement on slave side would be a good place
> to start?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof via Af
> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 15:09
>
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP500 does 2mb/s
>
>
>
> Vector error is basically signal to noise ratio, so yes 28 is good and 1.5
> is really bad.
>
>
>
> I would still use the diagnostic plotter to look at vector error over
> time.  It won’t tell you WHY it gets bad, but seeing WHEN it gets bad might
> help track it down.  Or use MRTG/Cacti/etc. to plot the following OIDs:
>
>
>
> vector error:  1.3.6.1.4.1.17713.5.12.2.0
>
> modulation:  1.3.6.1.4.1.17713.5.12.8.0
>
>
>
> Modulation will be a number from 1-15 if I remember right, where 15 is the
> highest like 64QAM3/4 or whatever and 1 is BPSK.  (why do I want to
> pronounce that “bupkis”?)
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Scott Vander Dussen via Af <[email protected]>
>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 4:59 PM
>
> *To:* [email protected]
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP500 does 2mb/s
>
>
>
> David/Ken-
>
> Thanks for the quick and helpful replies.  From the manual:
>
>
>
> Vector Error
>
> The vector error measurement compares the received signal’s In phase /
> Quadrature (IQ)
>
> modulation characteristics to an ideal signal to determine the composite
> error vector
>
> magnitude. The results are stored in an histogram and expressed in dB and
> presented as:
>
> max, mean, min and latest. The max, min and latest are true instantaneous
> measurements;
>
> the mean is the mean of a set of one second means. The expected range for
> Vector Error
>
> would be approximately -1.5 dB (NLOS link operating at sensitivity limit
> on BPSK 0.50) to –28
>
> dB (short LOS link running 64 QAM 0.83). See Section 7.3.1 “Histogram
> Data”.
>
>
>
> I interpret this paragraph that -28db is more desirable than -1.5db.  Is
> that correct?  If my min values are circa -28db and that’s bad, what would
> be an expected good value?
>
>
>
> I don’t think it’s a noise issue, I set the interference threshold to
> -63.  Here’s each side’s SA.  Remote side on bottom.  I’d favor the pigtail
> has water intrusion.
>
>
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
> Behalf Of *David via Af
> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 14:43
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTP500 does 2mb/s
>
>
>
> Scott,
> �Have a look at the slave side spectrum manager and see if there is some
> noise cropping up.
> If not then you may have some water in a pigtail or defective. Also, may
> want to do a site walk to see if the antennas may have moved due to weather
> or something in the path since it was installed.
> �More often then not the tale tale signature if a bad pig tail is the
> vector error is all over the place.
> These things usually dont have grey area when it comes to detailed
> informational tags like "Limited by WIRELESS conditions"
> Start with spectrum manager and see what it says then look at Diag plotter
> for unusual patterns in vector corrections.
>
> On 12/12/2014 03:54 PM, Scott Vander Dussen via Af wrote:
>
> I�m diagnosing a slow throughput PTP500 link remotely.� This link�s
> real-world capacity is only about 2mb/s.� Attached is screenshots of the
> status page.� Anything stick out as weird or wrong?� It was on 15mb/s
> channels, I tried 10mb/s � there�s plenty of clean spectrum.� It�s
> not making sense to me that this is only able to move 2mb/s.
>
> �
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
>
> �
>
> �
>
>
>

Reply via email to