What is your SNMP polling interval on that and RRD step size? If you're seeing peaks of 35 Mbps, I bet that your microburst peaks are actually around 55 Mbps but you're not seeing them due to >60 second polling.
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:49 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. >> > >
