yup 15.0.2.1 enables the 5.4 band on the 450m (including 5600-5650 which the regular 450AP is not approved for)
50mhz of new spectrum is much appreciated!!!!! -sean On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Tushar Patel <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh 450m is approved for 5.4 band now? > > Tushar > > > On Jan 20, 2017, at 2:22 PM, Sean Heskett <[email protected]> wrote: > > also the 450i and 450m are approved for 5600-5650 (TWDR) so there's > another 50Mhz of spectrum to use if you are not in an area with TWDR ;-) > the 450 SMs can use that spectrum with the latest software release. > > -sean > > > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Eric Muehleisen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Sean, >> >> No worries. I appreciate any advice given. I'm gonna make a push for >> 450m. The steep price tag will be a major hurdle to overcome. >> >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Sean Heskett <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Eric, >>> >>> another option is 450i and 450m can use the 5.1 band (i think 450m is >>> still waiting for FCC) >>> >>> right now the only SM available for 5.1Ghz is the 450i SM which is >>> expensive, but cambium is supposed to release really soon a new wideband >>> 450SM that can do 4.9-6Ghz. >>> >>> You can probably gain some efficiencies with the 450m because if your >>> SMs are physically spread out enough then it can talk to several SMs at the >>> same time. >>> >>> also just FYI I'm not part of the +1 slapping crowd...we all need to do >>> what we need to do to sling interwebs in our areas. I was merely pointing >>> out that the symptoms you described sounded like low modulation rate SMs. >>> I'm not here to bash or berate anyone, just here to help find solutions >>> because others have helped me along the way :-) >>> >>> -Sean >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Eric Muehleisen <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sean, >>>> >>>> We are about half 5.4 and half 5.8. You need you to understand that in >>>> this particular case we have about 20+ AP's crammed in a town about 2.5 >>>> square miles along with two other wireless internet providers. The >>>> frequency coordination and high noise floor is the primary reason for 1x >>>> and 2x connections. On top of that we have around 3k subscribers and 30 >>>> roaming combination techs installing CPE all across western Kansas. You may >>>> have complete oversight of where and when you install customers... I simply >>>> do not have that luxury. I preach the importance of quality installs >>>> constantly, but between their supervisors, marketing teams and pressure >>>> from customers, they install what they feel comfortable. The install tech >>>> has full discretion, for better or for worse. In the face of all this, 2x >>>> subs sometimes get installed. I understand fully that we made our own bed >>>> here. It is what it is. This is why I say "in a perfect world". >>>> >>>> As I said before, we truck-rolled our entire customer base for those >>>> who have poor/marginal signals. We made significant improvements but only >>>> gained very little in capacity for our efforts. In hindsight, it cost us >>>> more than we gained. Hence the reason I ask if 450i has any significant >>>> improvements over vanilla 450. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Sean Heskett <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> eric are any of your APs using the 5.4 band? >>>>> >>>>> you could put up some additional APs in the 5.4 band and migrate the >>>>> close-in clients to them to provide more capacity. >>>>> >>>>> -sean >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Eric Muehleisen <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In a perfect world. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Kurt Fankhauser < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> You shouldn't be putting any clients on a 450AP with less than 4x >>>>>>> connections, when they start pulling a lot of traffic they significantly >>>>>>> choke the AP. Whoever engineered those links needs slapped. I know it >>>>>>> probably looked like a good idea at the time to add a new customer but >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> couple low signal clients really affect total AP capacity. You could >>>>>>> probably pull all the 1x and 2x clients and replace them with 10 times >>>>>>> more >>>>>>> customers running at 8x mnodulatio n and maintain the same utilization >>>>>>> rates on that AP. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Craig Schmaderer < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Remember that even a couple of sms runing at 2x or 4x will kill >>>>>>>> your peak performance if they are the ones that are usually streaming. >>>>>>>> We >>>>>>>> are very careful on what aps we put low signals on and we control what >>>>>>>> plans we offer as well based on signal strength. I just can not have a >>>>>>>> 2x >>>>>>>> customer want a 10mb plan. I do think that a 450i will definitely help >>>>>>>> with uplink interference like others have said. But i think your best >>>>>>>> bet >>>>>>>> is to drop the cash and put some 450m up on that tower. Sounds like >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> is a cash cow tower like my main tower is. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>> *From:* Af <[email protected]> on behalf of Jon Langeler < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:18:22 PM >>>>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450 vs 450i >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Put a Mikrotik behind an SM and speed test to the internet >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jon Langeler >>>>>>>> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > On Jan 19, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Brian Sullivan < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > I would check out page 9-51 in the PMP 450x Configuration and >>>>>>>> User Guide 15.0.2 >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> On 1/19/2017 11:37 AM, Tushar Patel wrote: >>>>>>>> >> So how can we tell when we are really saturating the connection? >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
