It depends on where you're at and if fiber is likely to get there. That's also the attractiveness of the ePMP platform... it's paid for before the caulk dries.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 2:28:10 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450d vs. 450i > The throughput issues with both bridge mode and especially NAT mode was > resolved with 13.2. I think Aaron posted > some screenshots while they were working on it. If your linktest gets you say > 60x20Mbps, you can get very close to >that in bridge mode, NAT mode is slightly less, but it's not as bad as it used >to be (was about 10Mbps!). > > We will probably move to the 450d SM for 5GHz and do away with reflectors and > Stingers (sorry Chuck). We are also > not doing any more 2.4GHz. We have a single sector up with about 25 SMs on it > and it works fine for the most part, > but the noise is horrible. And all I want for 3GHz is an integrated panel SM. I am guessing the 450d will be priced quite a bit more then an SM with $40 - $50 reflector dish? These new products might be great but pricing and ROI are still an issue. It could all be obsolete in few years after we deploy if the iCLEC builds out fiber. Fiber just does not go obsolete after its buried even if its very expensive to put in. I just cannot see pushing ROI out very far now days with wireless. Might be time to bury fiber and invest in something future proof.
