Ya. Me too. You guys hearing this over in Rolling Meadows or did you already start popping the champagne for the announcement?
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > I think a lot of the difference is that it isn't technically as good, so > people discount it, but there's little attention paid to if the differences > are realized or significant. > > I'd love for frame utilization as an OID. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Josh Luthman" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Thursday, June 2, 2016 2:53:39 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP > > WOW that's a healthy amount of people. Lucky you!!! > > The SNMP value is coming soon (TM) (C) (R) (A) (P) from what I hear. > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Josh Baird <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is our most loaded 5Ghz ePMP AP: >> >> [image: Inline image 1] >> >> [image: Inline image 2] >> >> Users on this AP have plans from 1.5-10Mbps. >> >> I think it averages 70-80% of downlink frame usage during peak times, but >> I don't have a graph available because Cambium won't expose this as a >> percentage via SNMP (you have to look at the real-time value in the web >> UI). >> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:41 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> we are moving to epmp for cheap in 5ghz, the most populated ap only has >>> like 12 users on 12/2 plans up to 8 miles, I dont see it scaling well >>> compared to 450, but much better than the ubnt could ever dream. Its sync >>> lets us do ABAB with no notable hit yet. >>> 3ghz we are moving to 450 from a mix of ubnt shit and 320 garbage >>> (though the 320 has been a beast) because the 1x gets us the edge of nlos >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Josh Luthman < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> PMP450 is better. It will win the interference war. It will offer a >>>> bit better bits/hz. If the revenue supports it, use it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Matt <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have mostly PMP100 and PMP450 deployed. Some Ubiquiti we tried and >>>>> some we inherited as well. Have some ePMP we have tested but so far >>>>> have not deployed more then couple test links. >>>>> >>>>> For those who have tried both ePMP and PMP450 what are the differences >>>>> you have seen in performance? Interference tolerance among others? >>>>> >>>>> For those that have gone with PMP450 over ePMP what was the reasoning? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>> >> >> > >
