4 was 98; 5 was ME, 6 was Vista.

But that's software. We're talking hardware versions.

bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 12/12/2015 8:09 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

But not 4, 5, 6...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Dec 12, 2015 11:07 AM, "Bill Prince" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    But there was a Windows 1 and 2.

    bp
    <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

    On 12/12/2015 8:04 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
    There wasn't a Windows 94, 93, 92, etc...


    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 Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince
    <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

        And if there was a P7, there surely must have been P6, P5,
        P4, P3, P2, and P1...

        bp
        <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

        On 12/11/2015 8:10 PM, George Skorup wrote:
        I think the first set of radios we bought were P8 5700BHs
        running v3.something in early 2003. Obviously there was P7
        before that. Maybe late '02?

        And I believe Charles Wu put up those P8s, BTW. :) Pretty
        sure I still have those stashed in the cabinet, too.

        On 12/11/2015 9:58 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
        When did Canopy hit the shelves? 2003?  Is there a PMP
        product out there with a longer lifespan?  Even with better
        options on the market I know some WISPs have no plans to
        drop it completely because you still can't beat it for long
        range reliability.

        Right.  And Neptune was the end of the road for the
        Voyager probes.
        *From:* George Skorup <mailto:[email protected]>
        *Sent:* Friday, December 11, 2015 9:17 PM
        *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Graph 450 Airtime Utilization
        No, FSK did not get frame utilization in 13.4. I believe
        Matt or Aaron said the hardware won't support it. And
        13.4.1 is the end of the road for PMP100.

        On 12/11/2015 8:32 PM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
        Does this new OID feature work on old PMP100 serires?
        On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:55 PM, George Skorup
        <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

            It was there in 2.4.something and my graphs broke
            after going to 2.5 and 2.5.1. Not sure about 2.5.2
            yet. I thought they moved some OIDs back around that
            got changed for some reason.

            And it is/was also raw values, not percents yet, AFAIK.

            On 12/11/2015 1:52 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
            Not yet but soon (TM)

            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 Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Adam Moffett
            <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
            wrote:

                Is there a similar OID for the ePMP?


                On 12/11/2015 2:42 PM, Steve Utick wrote:
                Frame Utilization downlink:
                .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.1.12.1.1.0
                Frame Utilization uplink:
                .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.1.12.1.2.0

                We are graphing it here, requires 14.1.x
                software before the data is there though. Works
                great, quick way to tell how full your A/P's
                are, that's for sure. REALLY turns up the
                effect of crappy installs.

                On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Matt
                <[email protected]
                <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

                    If I recall there is a way to graph on 450
                    the total airtime
                    utilization? What is the SNMP string to do
                    that? Anyone doing it and
                    if so how well does it work?










Reply via email to