Well, as long as your ethernet is fast and not jittery it sure seems like an 
ideal solution.  I guess it all depends on the absolute resolution you have to 
have on a guaranteed basis.  

From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 7:35 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I'm not sure why everyone doesn't use that for timing. There may be technical 
reasons I don't know about, but it seems like a logical first step, use 
something everyone else is already using.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:30:53 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing


So that makes me very confused unless the PTPV2 is a "future" feature...



On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 4:19 PM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:




So interesting story here...we have three 450m's in the air and they are 
getting sync over power from a packetflux gigabit sync injector & timing over 
timing port via a packetflux sync injector 12.

Old style sync seems to work just fine on the 450m.

-Sean 

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 4:06 PM Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:

  Based on what others have said, I think it is all part of the "Precision 
Timing Protocol", it is an IP-based way of distributing timing information. 
Look up IEEE 1588-2008, or Precision Timing Protocol Version 2.

  No more timing pulses.



  On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:03 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:




  Well, sending a pulse sounds like AM to me.  Perhaps level shifting would be 
a better term to use.  

  From: Daniel White 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:40 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

  Something completely new.

  Instead of interrupting power, they are sending a “pulse” of power per sync 
pulse.  I don’t recall the details on it at this point.

  CMM5 FYI is looking like December availability now.

  Daniel White
  Managing Director – Hardware Distribution Sales
  ConVergence Technologies
  Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
  dwh...@converge-tech.com

  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
  Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 12:40 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

  So.. is "Cambium Sync" still a power interruption scheme or something 
completely new? I thought the thing they were going to move to was 1588v2?
  On 11/15/2016 1:26 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
    I guess I need to be more clear on this. ..
    There are two types of sync over power.   
    The first is being called Canopy sync,  which is compatible  with the 450i 
and earlier radios. 
    The second is being called Cambium sync and is compatible with the 450M and 
I'm guessing later radios. 
    Currently there are devices that produce the cambium sync pulse...  The 
CMM5 and I'm about 100% certain that Last Mile Gear has one as well.   I have 
the technical information I need,  just haven't had a chance to get the circuit 
designed (I only received it shortly before wispapalooza), let alone tested. 

    On Nov 14, 2016 7:52 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
      No,  Cambium elected  to drop the traditional sync over power on the 450M.
      So,  you either need to use timing port sync (via the aux port) or use 
what they're calling cambium sync.   
      The 1U injector is very close.  I need to finish validation on the latest 
board revisions and then will be releasing it to production assuming there 
isn't some showstopper I missed.  

      On Nov 14, 2016 7:34 PM, "Matt" <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote:
        Shouldn't the sync over power for the 450M be the same as PMP450i?

        How is the 1u sync injector coming?


        On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account)
        <li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
        > All of the currently shipping syncbox product line are compatible.  
For sync
        > over power, I have the specs, but the design isn't done yet.
        >
        >
        > On Nov 14, 2016 5:40 PM, "Sam Lambie" <samtaos...@gmail.com> wrote:
        >>
        >> A question for Forrest mostly. Have you come up with a timing 
product for
        >> the 450m AP yet? If not, have you got a timeline for release?
        >>
        >> Sam
        >>
        >> --
        >> --
        >> Sam Lambie
        >> Taosnet Wireless Tech.
        >> 575-758-7598 Office
        >> www.Taosnet.com


       Virus-free. www.avast.com  







Reply via email to