Calculation. This is how I have the data source set up the Dude:
Uplink always says 100%, so I don't bother with uplink. Hopefully they
fix that some day.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Josh Baird" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: 1/5/2017 2:43:12 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] epmp vs 450 comparison
Did they finally expose downlink utilization as a percentage over SNMP?
Or.. are you doing some calculations?
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
wrote:
mbps and DL airtime utilization for the same time period on an AP with
43 SM's.
The base package is 6x2, 10% of them bought something faster.
This is a seasonal low point....it might do more in the summer.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 1/5/2017 2:24:51 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] epmp vs 450 comparison
What kind of rate packages do you sell with this kind of loading?
What happens during netflix hour.
From:Josh Baird
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 12:08 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] epmp vs 450 comparison
We have ePMP AP's with 55 subs that are doing just fine. Probably
won't load any more on it due to high downlink utilization during
peak usage.
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
wrote:
Over 20-30 subs not recommended by whom?
When I talked to Cambium about subscriber density, they said they've
tested with up to 120, but suggested keeping it under 65. I do have
an ePMP AP with 43 SM's at this point, no trouble that I'm aware of.
It hits abou 60% air utilization at peak times.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Trey Scarborough" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 1/5/2017 9:21:24 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] epmp vs 450 comparison
Your biggest difference is your throughput per MHZ your epmp will
do less bandwidth in a 20mhz channel than a 450. he other big
difference is subscriber density. It is not recommended to go over
20-30 subs per AP on epmp without loss of performance. I regularly
see 450 APs with 70+ subs per AP. With Medusa I have seen over 130.
As far as the Medusa not being field proven you may not have field
tested it yet, but I know for a fact it has been tested and running
on networks for some time now and a viable solution.
If you have any more questions feel free to hit me up off list.
On 1/5/2017 7:36 AM, David Milholen wrote:
The radios on these 2 are entirely different. One is using std
based
radio and the other completely proprietary.
Since framing will be slightly different and so will processing
delay.
The stds based radio gets close to mimicking the
450 series but thats strictly based on Cambium magic. Capacity and
sustained rates per VC is the where you will see a difference.
Latency will be very consistent from ap to sub. PMP450i is where
its at.
On 1/4/2017 2:55 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
if im running 75/25, epmp is roughly 87mb capacity, 450 93mb
capacity
is this correct?
are efficiencies batter on 450 if installation is the same? ie,
if I
forlifted one AP with 17 epmps to 450, where would my gains be
assuming everything stays installed in the same spot. Its not
like the
FCC gives 450 any more power than epmp, so path loss should be
the same.
Im looking at this epmp 1000 sector thats running overall about
64-7%
efficient with 17 subscribers and wondering what the gain is to
move
to 450 (exclude medusa, as its not field proven)
--
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.
--
