Yup.

On 11/22/2016 12:09 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

The issue is on startup. The PTP master will "auto-range" before it decides on the timing parameters. Once it's done, it will stay put. There are two problems then. (1) get those timing parameters, and set the local PMP APs to a compatible timing, and (2) the problems it creates at startup time.

Both problems could be avoided if you could just "set" the timing parameters, and move along.

I have been asking for this for years. Perhaps a decade.


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 11/22/2016 4:35 AM, Jon Langeler wrote:
The PTP series has dynamic slots. You can't match it to PMP. PMP works as expected as always.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:55 AM, Mark Radabaugh <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Not sure what you are referring to here. 450 in 3.65 has had sync ever since it came out and it works exactly like sync in all the other bands. I use them in 4x90, 20Mhz channels with ABAB all the time.

Mark



On Nov 21, 2016, at 11:37 PM, Jon Langeler <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

I confirmed with support that they weren't able to sync.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Nov 21, 2016, at 10:58 PM, Bill Prince <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

We have PTP450s installed, and they appear to be syncing with co-located PMP450s.


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 11/21/2016 7:56 PM, Jon Langeler wrote:
Except it doesn't sync with anything yet. They may have fixed it in 15.0 but I haven't had time to test it.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Nov 21, 2016, at 10:47 PM, Bill Prince <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

That's correct. The PTP450 does support sync, but not over power. It's the timing port or the highway.


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 11/21/2016 4:06 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
If I remember right, PTP450 does support sync, just not sync over power (so you have to use the timing port), but AF-3x does have a pretty significant speed advantage, since they can use 40mhz channels and the PTP450 is limited to 20mhz (if I'm remembering right).

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    Good point, I forgot the 3.65 band allows up to 1W/MHz
    EIRP, so maybe the conducted xmt power is higher than the 2
    and 5 GHz variants.


    Oh, and I was looking at AF3x vs PTP450 3.65 connectorized
    today, and was surprised to see that Cambium was actually
    cheaper.  Not quite apples-to-apples since if I remember
    right PTP450 doesn’t support GPS sync?  And AFx includes
    the GPS antenna.


    *From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Colin Stanners
    *Sent:* Monday, November 21, 2016 4:17 PM


    *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium PMP450 3.65 pricing?

    It may be amplifiers are the reason for the 3.65SM heatsink
    and a contributor to the higher pricing. There's a variety
    of COTS high-power 2ghz and 5ghz 256-QAM-capable amplifier
    ICs that I've seen inside various WISP products, it could
    be there is nothing easily available for 3.65 so that is a
    cause of the additional hardware/cooling and partially cost.


    On Nov 21, 2016 6:48 AM, "Stefan Englhardt" <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

        I guess calculation is different for 3.65. They sell
        much less and in 5GHz there are more competitors.

        I dont believe UBNT/Cambium does something LTE Based.
        This SIM-Stuff and complicated infrastructure would
        hinder low cost. Wasn't there any licensing the vendor
        has to pay for patents? UBNT want to target their
        airmax price range.


        > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
        > Von: Af [mailto:[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>] Im Auftrag von Ken Hohhof
        > Gesendet: Montag, 21. November 2016 12:37
        > An: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium PMP450 3.65 pricing?
        >
        > Take a look at AF-3x pricing vs AF-5x, parts cost is
        probably the same but
        > Ubiquiti prices it at double.  Also, I wouldn't
        expect any vendor to rush a new
        > 3.65 product to market unless it is fully CBRS
        compatible and probably LTE
        > based.
        >
        > Best we could probably hope for is Cambium does some
        kind of HW refresh
        > based on the new wideband SM and brings the price
        down. It's not obvious to
        > me why the 3.65 SM is different from the 5 GHz SM,
        with the heatsink fins and
        > different LEDs, like it is based on the 450i design
        or something. It's not like you
        > are going to run 40 MHz channels in 3.65.  There's
        something going on that's
        > not apparent to the casual observer.
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Stefan
        Englhardt
        > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 2:59 AM
        > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium PMP450 3.65 pricing?
        >
        > I think there is 0,1% possibility this will happen.
        > As I understand the parameters of both systems are
        quite different. It would
        > need a lot of work to make them GPS-Compatible. Think
        you are Pera and have
        > the choice of bringing this to market 2017 or make
        compatibility and bring this
        > to market 2018. Guess what ...
        >
        >
        > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
        > > Von: Af [mailto:[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
        > > Gesendet: Montag, 21. November 2016 09:13
        > > An: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        > > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium PMP450 3.65 pricing?
        > >
        > > "I just hope that Ubiquiti can copy the exact
        timing parameters from
        > > the Cambium products"
        > >
        > > Good luck with that.
        > >
        > > I understand it could be a good way to transition,
        don't get me wrong,
        > > I just don't (A) think they really care, for
        whatever reason and (B)
        > > built their own system from the ground up with what
        they wanted to
        > maximize performance.
        > >
        > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Kurt Fankhauser
        > > <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
        > > > I just hope that Ubiquiti can copy the exact
        timing parameters from
        > > > the Cambium products so we can mix and match
        Cambium/UBNT PtMP in
        > > the
        > > > same frequency band in the network. Im getting so
        much 450 gear up
        > > > that it just has to be synced because its so
        dense, I wont' be able
        > > > to coordinate throwing some other brand of AP in
        their and having to
        > > > watch frequency usage even closer.
        > > >
        > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Jon Langeler
        > > > <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>>
        > > > wrote:
        > > >>
        > > >> Yeah can't wait
        > > >>
        > > >> Jon Langeler
        > > >> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >> On Nov 20, 2016, at 11:09 PM, Kurt Fankhauser
        > > >> <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>>
        > > >> wrote:
        > > >>
        > > >> No I'm not good with paying that price for it
        but what else are we
        > > >> supposed to do? That's still the cheapeast
        3.65ghz solution out right now.
        > > >> Now its going to get real interesting if
        Airfiber PtMP comes out
        > > >> with some 3.65ghz gear....
        > > >>
        > > >> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Ken Hohhof
        <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
        > > wrote:
        > > >>>
        > > >>> Depends on what you mean by "good".
        > > >>>
        > > >>> Actually we buy the 20M SM at around $315 and
        for special
        > > >>> occasions the uncapped integral panel at around
        $500 including the
        > > >>> tilt bracket, so worse than your $275.
        > > >>>
        > > >>> They are certainly more expensive than we'd
        like, but you do what
        > > >>> you gotta do. We do have a lot of 3.65 Lite APs
        so we save a
        > > >>> little at that end.
        > > >>>
        > > >>> If you go through a lot of them, I'd work with
        your reseller to
        > > >>> negotiate a volume discount from Cambium.  Like
        commit to 200 SMs
        > > >>> over the next year, see if they'll give you a
        better price, and
        > > >>> then take deliveries 50 at a time.  It won't be
        50% off, but
        > > >>> you'll probably get something.  On the other
        hand, if you're like
        > > >>> me and most of your volume is 5 GHz, then just
        open your wallet,
        > > >>> unless you want to do LTE.
        > > >>>
        > > >>>
        > > >>>
        > > >>> -----Original Message-----
        > > >>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Jon Langeler
        > > >>> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 9:25 PM
        > > >>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        > > >>> Subject: [AFMUG] Cambium PMP450 3.65 pricing?
        > > >>>
        > > >>> Is everyone good with paying $275 for cambium
        10Mbps SMs ? Or has
        > > >>> everyone just jumped ship?
        > > >>>
        > > >>> Jon Langeler
        > > >>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
        > > >>>
        > > >>>
        > > >>>
        > > >>
        > > >
        >
        >
        >
        >











Reply via email to