Ours replaced RM5's that wouldn't even link... now running at over
100MBps on a 10MHz channel...
Josh Reynolds
CIO, SPITwSPOTS
www.spitwspots.com
On 06/11/2015 04:02 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
No it's just the Af5x...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 11, 2015 7:57 PM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
You seem to have a lot of issues with radios that won't link up. ;-)
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Josh Luthman" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, June 11, 2015 6:56:12 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Force110 PTP links
EPTP mode fills the latency fix.
My first attempt at AF5x and it won't even register. I'm trying
to replace Rockets that link up at -66. I'm told that there's a
path issue or bad radio.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 11, 2015 7:45 PM, "George Skorup" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Why exactly? Just asking. I'm wondering if we should be doing
cheap PTP with ePMP or AF5x. I have several Force110 links up
(just SMs, not PTP) operating all across the 5GHz bands. And
one 10 mile link with Laird 2' dishes using connectorized
non-GPS radios. Other than some oddities like intermittent
increases in latency, they have all been working very well.
Most are still running 2.3.3 and I don't want to touch them
because they're working just fine. I'm leaning towards the
Force110 PTP radios and whatever antennas required for new
links since it fits with all the other Canopy and ePMP stuff
(power injection, etc). But the AFs sure are nice when you can
do FDD (except the 5X!) and get very low latency like licensed.
On 6/11/2015 6:32 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Honestly I think they're better than AF5x at this point.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 11, 2015 7:25 PM, "joseph marsh"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
I got 2 links ready to deploy just sitting the office
waiting to go up on the tower
On Jun 11, 2015 5:34 PM, "Josh Luthman"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Uhm...I guess? It hears noise better than Ubnt
for sure.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 11, 2015 6:23 PM, "Lewis Bergman"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Does the force auto select a clean frequency?
On Jun 11, 2015 5:13 PM, "Mathew Howard"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
containerized... that must be when you buy
a cheap router from walmart in put it on a
tower in a rubbermaid container.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Bill
Prince <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
You mean connectorized?
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 6/11/2015 2:21 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
The containerized 5 GHz radios do
the same throughput
