:-)
MTUs are important as well. 1600+ for sure, but I'd rather have 9k+. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 3:48:17 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] I need a valium So it's more a "principle of the thing". Totally on board. Know a dude that's nucking futs about SFPs that's quite the same way. ;) On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Eric Kuhnke <[email protected]> wrote: > Both are possible scenarios, but 1480 MTU is still just wrong when a pair of > $48 ubnt nanostation m5 loco can do a cross-the-street 1600 byte MTU bridge. > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> If they're wanting a layer2 tunnel, vpls it up. If they're wanting a >> layer3 ptmp/etree/eline/elan design (which is a much better solution >> anyway), why not just VRF it? >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Eric Kuhnke <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > The small MTU immediately removes it from contention for certain >> > small/medium business last mile connections (sites that are too small >> > for >> > their own PTP link, but more valuable in $$$/mo than a residential >> > user). >> > This is because 1480 makes it impossible to do MPLS. >> > >> > There are all kinds of things that could require an EoMPLS tunnel such >> > as a >> > centralized wifi captive portal system, or branch offices of the same >> > small >> > government entity in a county (ex: Libraries, schools, whatever). >> > >> > Radio systems functioning as layer 2 bridges need to support 1600 byte >> > MTU. >> > That's pretty much standard for all equipment these days. Even ubnt got >> > their act together and fixed the MTU issue, I believe it used to be not >> > larger than 1500 on the very earliest series of AirMax/N radios. Issue >> > has >> > been fixed for a few years now. >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> RSRP is how LTE systems measure signal. I don't believe it's an >> >> intentional skewing on Telrad's part, but I'm sure it leads to plenty >> >> of >> >> misunderstandings. >> >> >> >> My experience over time has been that every vendor says their stuff >> >> works >> >> NLOS. They can say that because they all DO work NLOS depending on how >> >> strictly you define "working". I do believe that Telrad LTE works >> >> better >> >> than average at NLOS, but yeah I don't believe it would work >> >> everywhere, and >> >> I hope nobody believes that it makes extra signal power appear out of >> >> nowhere simply by being LTE. >> >> >> >> I'm actually more worried about...well...everything else. There's so >> >> much >> >> focus on their NLOS claims that I think it has drowned out other >> >> discussion >> >> on the product. For example: >> >> >> >> Is anyone else bothered that there is no documentation? >> >> Is anyone else bothered that the Gemtek CPE provides no status or >> >> control >> >> of the ethernet port? >> >> Has anyone else had the CPE lose configuration values after a firmware >> >> update (like the Wimax channel scan table and radius username, which >> >> you >> >> can't fix without a damn truckroll)? >> >> Has anyone else had to RMA BTS's that weren't particularly old? I had >> >> two with RH alarms that were each less than a year old. One with a >> >> corrupt >> >> file system after 3 days in the field. >> >> Has anyone had success using the ACS for automatic firmware updates of >> >> CPE? Ours download the firmware, then lose contact with the server >> >> until >> >> they're rebooted (through the web GUI, or power plug). After a reboot >> >> they >> >> do have the new firmware version, but it's no help if I have to touch >> >> them >> >> all. >> >> Anyone had tech support issues? They've closed our ticket about the ACS >> >> issue TWICE. Both times saying, "Oh sorry, we thought that was working >> >> now." This has been an ongoing investigation since September by the >> >> way. >> >> Is anyone else troubled by the small MTU (max is 1480 I think)? >> >> >> >> I have tons of other complaints that are specific to the wimax >> >> firmware. >> >> Are we so impressed by NLOS that we don't need to discuss whether it's >> >> good >> >> at anything else? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 3/16/2016 3:01 PM, John Woodfield wrote: >> >> >> >> If you expect LTE 3ghz to be the silver NLOS bullet it is not. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Putting speeds aside for the moment. Lets just talk signal. Same tower, >> >> same height Telrad 3ghz LTE with the Alpha dual-slant sector within 1db >> >> signal as 2.4 NBM2 on a UBNT 10db omni. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> LTE does not change physics. The sales guys want you to believe that. >> >> It >> >> ain't so. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> So, if you can attain a -75 on a 2.4 omni on a tower it won't work >> >> worth >> >> anything. That same signal on LTE will rock. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> If you think it was have equal penetration to 900mhz and be a >> >> replacement >> >> for your old FSK system, you are sorely mistaken. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Near line of site? Yes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We had a very specific application that Patrick said without question >> >> would work. When it didn't it was a bad antenna, then it was bad >> >> jumpers, >> >> then it was a bad compact, finally they flew someone in who argued with >> >> it >> >> for a day and at the end of the day? You can't argue with physics. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The whole "watch it work at -110" is garbage too. They skewed the >> >> numbers >> >> by 30db. Yes, it will work at -80, will it work well? YMMV. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> In the end it was too expensive for the limited benefits we observed. >> >> They >> >> swear I'm the only one in the world it didn't work for in the same >> >> breath >> >> they swore it would work without any doubt. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> John Woodfield, President >> >> >> >> Delmarva WiFi Inc. >> >> >> >> 410-870-WiFi >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: "Ty Featherling" <[email protected]> >> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 2:46pm >> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] I need a valium >> >> >> >> Ditto. Hell, onlist would be fine too. I'm sure many of us would like >> >> to >> >> hear your experience. >> >> -Ty >> >> >> >> >> >> -Ty >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:49 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> I would like to know your complaints as well, please. Thanks. >> >>> (offlist >> >>> is fine) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: Adam Moffett >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 9:30 AM >> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] I need a valium >> >>> If I may ask John, what were your complaints? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On 3/16/2016 10:17 AM, John Woodfield wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I wouldn't touch Telrad again if you paid me. That is a week of my >> >>> life >> >>> I'll never get back. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> John Woodfield, President >> >>> >> >>> Delmarva WiFi Inc. >> >>> >> >>> 410-870-WiFi >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:14am >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >>> Subject: [AFMUG] I need a valium >> >>> >> >>> Hate being a decision maker sometimes. >> >>> Love the cambium pmp450 roadmap. I know several people are using >> >>> pmp450 >> >>> in 3.65 and it works. I also see now that a panel antenna is >> >>> available >> >>> based on the 450i in 3.65 >> >>> I may have fallen in love with lte. Haven't seen the telrad talk yet. >> >>> Hear the new vendor does lte for roughly what we started our 900 >> >>> network for >> >>> back in 2004. >> >>> Why would I choose lte over cambium ? >> >>> Would I? I think the cambium pmp450 (in 3.65) has a better >> >>> roadmap....one gig aps by like 2017..... >> >>> What if I choose the wrong product? >> >>> Convince me..... >> >>> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone >> >>> >> >>> ----- Reply message ----- >> >>> From: "Jeff Broadwick - Lists" <[email protected]> >> >>> To: <[email protected]> >> >>> Subject: [AFMUG] 450M >> >>> Date: Wed, Mar 16, 2016 10:02 AM >> >>> >> >>> 450i is backwards compatible with 450 today. >> >>> >> >>> Jeff Broadwick >> >>> ConVergence Technologies, Inc. >> >>> 312-205-2519 Office >> >>> 574-220-7826 Cell >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> >> >>> On Mar 16, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Brian Sullivan >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Just like FSK? >> >>> >> >>> On 3/16/2016 7:40 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Backwards compatibility. >> >>> >> >>> With existing 450 >> >> >> >> >> > > >
