Header compression\deduplication.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 2:13:40 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? That sounds backwards. Why would smaller packets net you greater throughput? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Jeremy < [email protected] > wrote: It's really 60. Ours does 1.4Gbps, 700Mbps full duplex (if every packet was a VoIP packet)...500Mbps FDX is a more realistic real-world TCP throughput that you can expect. On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Hardy, Tim < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> It’s really 60! 60 MHz CH N( G( 1 5960.0250 6212.0650 2 6019.3250 6271.3650 3 6078.6250 6330.6650 4 6137.9250 6389.9650 As far as XPIC on 30 MHz vs. 60 MHz it all depends on the environment. If x-pol is needed to clear a channel, it isn’t going to be available on the orthogonal polarization. From: Af [mailto: [email protected] ] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 2:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? In 6 GHz, is 60 really 60, or is it 30+30 contiguous? I’m thinking it might be easier to do XPIC on the same 30 MHz channel than to find 60 MHz of available spectrum, but I haven’t done anything in 6 GHz, mainly because of antenna size. Yes the FCC did relax the antenna rules to allow down to a 3 ft dish, but realistically that won’t give you enough gain unless it’s a short link, especially given that 6 GHz is subject to multipath fades. So bottom line I haven’t kept up with what you can do in 6 GHz, so I could easily be wrong or behind the times. From: Mike Hammett Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:24 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? 30 MHz in the 7 GHz band, 30 MHz in some 6 GHz, 60 MHz in the rest of 6 GHz... IIRC. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: "Ken Hohhof" < [email protected] > To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:18:19 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? I would first talk to your frequency coordinator about what FCC channel widths can be licensed in what bands. I’m not sure 40 MHz channels exist in 6 GHz, and I believe you’ll find an 80 MHz channel width means you need to license 2 adjacent channels. There is no benefit to having a radio that does 80 MHz channels if that’s not what you license, other than maybe having consistent equipment across your network to simplify sparing. From: TJ Trout Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 1:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? 11ghz integra doesn't exist, and when it does in april it's just 60mhz! Should I even be considering a 60mhz radio? Seems like 80 is the way to go? On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Gino Villarini < [email protected] > wrote: 11 ghz integra Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: TJ Trout < [email protected] > Reply-To: " [email protected] " < [email protected] > Date: Friday, January 16, 2015 at 2:57 PM To: " [email protected] " < [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 or 11ghz best option for higher capacity ? I guess what I'm interested in is what is the cheapest 6 or 11ghz 80mhz radio in terms of bits/hz or should I just use the lumina in 2+0? On Jan 16, 2015 10:54 AM, "TJ Trout" < [email protected] > wrote: So I have a lumina on 11ghz 56mhz that I need to upgrade, what is the most economical option for more capacity ? Saf doesn't really have much besides 2+0 right now (maybe that's my best option?) So I was thinking about trying another brand something with maybe 80mhz channels ? What are my options that won't cost an arm and a leg ? </blockquote>
