Opposite here...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Nov 15, 2015 10:16 AM, "Jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have not been impressed with the Nanobeam M2.  I see way better
> performance to a M2 Nanostation and reflector.  The TX rate always suffers
> (like the link you just put in).  This is in contrast to a M5 400 where I
> see better performance than a M5 Nanostation and reflector.
>
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Glen Waldrop <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I generally set them for whatever is the opposite that AP is on.
>>
>> They pretty much all come set auto out of the box and I won't find out
>> someone got a new router until they complain about the speed or latency.
>>
>> Most of them we don't have any problems, but there are always a few.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Rory Conaway <[email protected]>
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Sent:* Sunday, November 15, 2015 7:15 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>> When we were doing 2.4GHz, we set all the routers in the houses to
>> channel 6, no options.  Then we used 1 and 11 for outdoor.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop
>> *Sent:* Sunday, November 15, 2015 6:08 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>>
>>
>> I've done some playing with the routers recently. I've noticed that auto
>> almost always chooses the same channel that my customer's CPE is on.
>>
>> It appears that the router is looking for the lowest noise level,
>> ignoring the fact that the 802.11 signal is strong, but isn't registered as
>> noise.
>>
>>
>>
>> My working theory as to why *every* router on auto hits the channel that
>> feeds my customers.
>>
>> I guess one hitch is I'm running 10MHz channels now, so realistically the
>> routers shouldn't be able to see it, though I suppose the sub carriers are
>> still the same.
>>
>> If anyone has any input that'd be awesome.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> *From:* Ken Hohhof <[email protected]>
>>
>> *To:* [email protected]
>>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, November 14, 2015 4:08 PM
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>>
>>
>> Customer routers used to mostly default to WiFi channel 6, but now they
>> typically are set by default to AUTO and in many cases to use an extension
>> channel, so 6+11 or 1+6.  We try to change the customer’s router to a fixed
>> 20 MHz channel on channel 6, then we avoid using the middle of the band for
>> our APs.  If your CPE setup is such that customers can hook up a new router
>> and it just works, over time they will migrate back to AUTO 20/40 MHz.
>>
>>
>>
>> OK, actually we avoid using 2.4 GHz anymore, but that’s what we’ve done
>> on our legacy 2.4 GHz sites.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Bill Prince <[email protected]>
>>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, November 14, 2015 4:01 PM
>>
>> *To:* [email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>>
>>
>> I can't decide that for you. You really need to know what the noise is
>> like at each sector. However, when I use 10 MHz channels, I try to take
>> advantage of the fact that you're only using a 1/2 channel. You're goig to
>> get better results (most of the time) when you're at the edges.
>>
>>
>> bp
>>
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/14/2015 1:52 PM, Tim Reichhart wrote:
>>
>> Bill
>> my other sectors at the same tower is on 6,9 should I go with 1 and 11
>> with 10mhz?
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Bill Prince" mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: 11/14/15 04:41 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>> Get it off channel 7. Poke around at the sub end and see what else is on
>> what channel. Typically, there will be less noise at channel 1 or 11. Most
>> SOHO routers are going to be on channel 6, and putting your stuff on 7 will
>> get local interference most of the time.
>>
>>
>> bp
>>
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>> On 11/14/2015 1:34 PM, Tim Reichhart wrote:
>>
>>
>> Josh
>> these stats are at the CPE and I even have the rf shields on the AP's and
>> the ap's are up 150ft up the air. So it sounds like I am going have to
>> probably switch it to 5ghz.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Josh Luthman" mailto:[email protected]
>> <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: 11/14/15 04:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>> Looks like noise at the AP being my first thought. Assuming those stats
>> are from the CPE.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2015 4:27 PM, "Tim Reichhart" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> The customer is wanting 8 meg but is only getting 3-4 meg there josh
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: 11/14/15 04:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] link problems
>>
>> What's the problem..?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <http://tel:937-552-2340/>937-552-2340
>> <http://tel:937-552-2340/>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <http://tel:937-552-2343/>937-552-2343
>> <http://tel:937-552-2343/>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2015 4:20 PM, "Tim Reichhart" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Guys
>> I just installed an powerbeam m2 today at customers house and I am
>> getting:
>>
>> signal strength -61 dBm
>> noise floor -89 dBm
>> transmit CCQ 86.4%
>> tx/rx rate is around 10-39mpbs/58.5-65mbps
>> Channel width 10MHz
>> Channel/Frequency 7/2442MHz
>> Version v5.6.2 (XW)
>> from the tower to CPE is around 3.5miles
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Call
>>
>> Send SMS
>>
>> Call from mobile
>>
>> Add to Skype
>>
>> You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Call
>>
>> Send SMS
>>
>> Call from mobile
>>
>> Add to Skype
>>
>>  You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to