Yes no unsure, I believe by summer
On Mar 17, 2016 12:16 PM, "Josh Baird" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I missed the UBNT session..  Is the form-factor of this radio the same as
> the other AirFiberX radios?  Does it have a SFP interface?  When will they
> be available?
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> There was discussion about waveguide - I pushed for it. I mentioned
>> the RF Elements adapters as well...
>>
>> In the end, it was decided that N connectors were more universal and
>> adaptable to various antennas.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Yup, I believe the B11 is ac based. The AF will do true FDD so you can
>> > license standard coordinated channel pairs. And to top it off, they
>> went the
>> > Exalt path with field replaceable diplexers. And looks like you can
>> reverse
>> > the diplexer for high or low side.
>> >
>> > The N connector thing is kinda odd. As Chuck said, they would've been
>> better
>> > off with SMA @ 11GHz. Or even better, a f'n waveguide interface! C'mon
>> UBNT!
>> >
>> > On 3/17/2016 10:40 AM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm pretty sure Mimosa actually is 802.11 based, but yeah the airFiber
>> > certainly is not.
>> >
>> > Also, do NOT compare airFiber quality with anything else UBNT makes...
>> it's
>> > on a completely different level than the airMax stuff.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Mimosa isn't 802.11 based as far as I know. UBNT is doing this on
>> >> AirFiber FPGA. Who's making 802.11 based 11G radios?
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:32 AM, TJ Trout <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > is anyone else concerned about the quality and reliability that comes
>> >> > with
>> >> > these low cost 802.11 based 11ghz radios??
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]
>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> When we bought our SAF stuff a few years back, we had to show our
>> >> >> distributor our coordination docs before they would ship gear.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lewis Bergman
>> >> >> <[email protected]>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > I don't know about turning sellers into enforcement arms of the
>> FCC.
>> >> >> > All
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > that is really the FCC's job. Has there really been a problem?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016, 10:17 AM Cassidy B. Larson <
>> [email protected]>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> That would be an awesome idea to limit random joes from lighting
>> up
>> >> >> >> un-registered/coordinated links.  But shouldnt they do that for
>> 3.65
>> >> >> >> as
>> >> >> >> well?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Brian Sullivan
>> >> >> >> > <[email protected]>
>> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Can't they force some sort of compliance with license keys you
>> get
>> >> >> >> > after
>> >> >> >> > you prove your FCC application/coordination?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

Reply via email to