Thanks for clarifying. Nice to have someone on the inside set the facts straight.
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Jaime Fink <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, we’ll have the flexible Auto-TDMA (non-synced) mode out quite soon in > version 1.3, beta users are seeing under a ms in many cases. Lots of other > new features like auto transmit power control and in general link > smoothness and speed improvements. > > Jaime Fink > CPO & Co-Founder > Mimosa > > From: Af <[email protected]> on behalf of Mathew Howard < > [email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 12:59 PM > To: af <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP GPS PTP > > I think Mimosa said at one point they were adding a flexible non-synced > mode... but I don't know if that ever happened or not, and I could be > completely wrong, but as far as I can remember, when I set ours up, there > was no non-synced option. They are also supposed to be adding ptmp to the > B5c, if I remember correctly. > > There are definitely some advantages to the ePMP (being less than half the > price, for one)... but a B5c is capable of a lot higher throughput and has > some nice features. one of the best things about using ePMP for PTP links > is that we can just use the same radios for everything, so we always have > plenty on hand. > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> B5c is ptp sync (only?) and ePMP is ptp and ptmp sync or not, but I >> wanted to answer the last question at least. >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> But you can't use sync in ePTP mode... here's what I get pinging across >>> a PTP link with 2.5ms frames, with an average of around 5mbps going across >>> it. Testing between the Mikrotiks at each end, I can average around 80mbps >>> on a 20mhz channel. >>> >>> 0 10.1.27.25 56 64 10ms >>> 1 10.1.27.25 56 64 9ms >>> 2 10.1.27.25 56 64 6ms >>> 3 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms >>> 4 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms >>> 5 10.1.27.25 56 64 13ms >>> 6 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms >>> 7 10.1.27.25 56 64 7ms >>> 8 10.1.27.25 56 64 11ms >>> 9 10.1.27.25 56 64 8ms >>> 10 10.1.27.25 56 64 9ms >>> sent=11 received=11 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=6ms avg-rtt=8ms >>> max-rtt=13ms >>> >>> I wouldn't really put them in the same class as a B5c... the B5c is >>> capable of a lot more throughput and has some nice gimmicks like being able >>> to run two separate channels and make changes without taking the link >>> down... but latency isn't too much different (actually a lot better in ePTP >>> mode). >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Josh Luthman < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Latency in 2.5ms frames from router through AP to SM (16 subs) doing >>>> 7-9mbps >>>> >>>> > ping 172.16.10.178 >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=14 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=10 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=12 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=12 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=10 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms >>>> 172.16.10.178 64 byte ping: ttl=64 time=11 ms >>>> >>>> 62x15 mbps speed test in flexible mode >>>> >>>> Haven't used a B5c and that's a ptp product...if you do ePTP mode on >>>> ePMP product you get ~1ms >>>> >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Matt <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What kind of luck are people having with the ePMP PTP using GPS? >>>>> Throughput and latency? How do they compare to the Mimosa B5c? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
