Attached is the screen shot of the AP that has the most customers on it. In the location where the disconnecte button is I have manually typed the SM power level that I just read from the SM
----- Original Message ----- From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 8:42:52 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz Quick question for you...... When you say the uplink is bad for cpe's with strong signals.... -50 etc... I guess the -50 is what the CPE is seeing the AP at ? What about the AP seeing the CPE at ? Is it possibly that your AP's are off in down-tilt/up-tilt ? That can also explain uplink issues.. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Craig House" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 9:31:25 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz > > AP's were set to -60 but were having uplink issues with wireless link tests > as bad as .1MB or at best .5MB uplink Once I changed them to -45 Target > recieve level the uplink throughput went up to between 2MB and 8MB now. FYI > the AP's we have customers on have no registred Subs on the sector opposite > them on the towers at this time so it cant be F/B sector receive beign too > strong and causing interference. > > Craig > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2015 8:20:40 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] EPMP 10 mhz vs 20mhz > > What do you have the APs SM Rx target level set to? If it's default at > -40, that's a problem. I set FSK to -60, ePMP and 450 get -57 (-60 per > polarity). Seems to work well. Absolutely required for frequency reuse > with close/hot SMs. Since you said you have some customers receiving at > -50, their uplinks are probably really hot, which means more than enough > to interfere with adjacent/back sectors. It's different with the 450, no > guard bands required, better filtering. Well, there's some oddities like > the 3GHz 450 that has adjacent channel support, which limits the SM's > max Tx power so that no guard band is required. > > On 6/6/2015 7:19 PM, Craig House wrote: > > We have deployed 6 towers to begin our new EPMP network and 4 of those > > towers have a full cluster of 2.4 90 degree EPMP sectors. They are > > configured with ACS turned off now because in several cases they all ended > > up on the same or very close to the same channel. I have Front back > > designations and non overlapping channels set up on all towers. I have > > tried 40 mhz 20 mhz and now 10mhz channels and while the customer > > stability has gotten better the more I play with settings I have kind of > > hit a point I dont know what else to try. I have some that the uplink > > quality will vary wildly from 100% to 0%. Most have gotten better since I > > went to a 10mhz channel. Most of the customers get 12MB -30mb down in the > > wireless link test but the uplinks are as bad as .17. What is the cause > > of this poor uplink quality? Is it interfernece? My one 5ghz AP does not > > have this problem but even with noise many of these customers have -50 > > signals and oddly enough the ones with the great signals seem to be the > > ones that have the poorest link tests on the up link side. I also have > > customes with -65 or -72 signals that get 5MB up on the same sectors? Im > > scratching my head a bit on what the fix is for this? Should I leave ACS > > on and change everything to 10mhz channels? Will a full cluster with ACS > > on work all on the same channel? > > I'm used to FSK where you pick your channel and any channels that are > > adjacent will cause problems with connected SM's. So am I just applying > > old knowledge to a technology that it doesn't apply to? > > > > Craig > > >
