ouch.Does that mean that if you need DFS, and the application wants a nano-bxxxx, the bxxx=bridge?
That sure sucks, because I was under the impression that I'd never have to install another nanobridge.
Which I do not like.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 3/14/2015 11:32 AM, John Woodfield wrote:
No DFS for nanobeams. Doubt there ever will be. John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -----Original Message----- From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 1:56pm To: [email protected] Subject: [AFMUG] Nanobeam still no DFS?Not sure why UBNT makes it so difficult to determine which models are legalin which bands. Am I interpreting correctly that Nanobeams are still limited to 5.7 GHz?I have to do a 2000 ft link to an omni and an NBE-M5-16 or 19 seems perfect. I could use a NanoStation Loco, but that doesn't seem right for 2000 feet, even if the Loco is already hitting max EIRP. I guess my only other choice would be a NanoBridge, not sure why I can't find the 22 dBi version, and the25 dBi seems like overkill, actually they both seem like overkill.
