Well, that's not a problem with AF5x... they take less than 15 watts.

On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:33 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> wrote:

> Except for the 40-50 watts per radio.
>
> On 8/9/2015 8:53 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>
> I figure we can get away with having one or two synced ePMP links, but
> when a tower is 3+ hops out, some of those are going to need to be lower
> latency links.
>
> I suppose the way to go would be to just use airFiber everywhere... almost
> no latency and sync.
>
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 8:25 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Yes, last-mile I'm not so concerned with. It's the 50+ miles of PTP links
>> that add up. Now double that if a link goes down and traffic goes the long
>> way 'round. I'm all for licensed, but the guy that writes the checks isn't.
>> :(
>>
>> On 8/9/2015 6:36 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> Oh for backhauls yes.  I thought you were talking about those last mile
>> extra bumps from the grain leg to home.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Aug 9, 2015 7:22 PM, "George Skorup" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it's a big deal to me after two or three links. And there's no
>>> reason to go licensed on these paths (yet).
>>>
>>> On 8/9/2015 4:59 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm I never had a problem getting them started.  FWIW I'm getting 1-2 ms
>>> from my desktop, through my router/eptp/switches at the tower down to our
>>> BMU.
>>>
>>> I also don't think 20ms is that big a deal for most customers.  If they
>>> get say 60ms from their machine to most anything in a datacenter they
>>> should be better off than most cable/dsl circuits, no?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 5:55 PM, George Skorup < <[email protected]>
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes. Ran out of time and had to get the link back up. Could've been
>>>> something else stupid I overlooked though. I'll mess with a pair in the
>>>> office next week.
>>>>
>>>> On 8/9/2015 4:48 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Did you set the slave to eptp slave?  They use different drivers.
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>> On Aug 9, 2015 5:41 PM, "George Skorup" < <[email protected]>
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> OK so back to ePMP PTP. I had to put up a 500' link between two grain
>>>>> legs. Used integrated radios on 2.4.3. I tried ePTP, but they wouldn't 
>>>>> link
>>>>> up. Thinking maybe too short? I don't know, so I just switched them to TDD
>>>>> PTP w/ flexible framing instead. Latency is like 15ms. I hate it. I have a
>>>>> couple other links still on 2.3.3 also doing flexible framing and latency
>>>>> is very consistently 7ms. Only thing I can think is that this new short
>>>>> link is on 5.4GHz and it's actually forcing fixed framing (even though it
>>>>> says flexible) because of DFS? Either that or something is very different
>>>>> between 2.3.3 and 2.4.3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway.. we were thinking about switching out a bunch of 5GHz Rocket
>>>>> links (because they cannot handle noise at all) with ePMP GPS. We get very
>>>>> good latency with the Rockets, typically under 3ms when the front ends
>>>>> aren't swamped, but I will NOT do 15-20ms with ePMP, that's just stupid.
>>>>> The whole idea was sync, and since ePTP doesn't sync.. not sure what to 
>>>>> do.
>>>>> Maybe 2.5ms framing and 50/50 TDD will get me 7ms, and w/ sync?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to