I prefer the AF11 to the B11 and am thinking of replacing the B11 with the AF11 as well.
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > The web site will send your information over to Liz, though, IIRC. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> > *To: *"af" <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Wednesday, April 12, 2017 11:50:31 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] mimosa > > > The website does not handle FCC stuff... you still have to go through a > coordinator, same as any other 11ghz link. > > They work, and they get a ton of throughput for cheap, but don't expect > them to work like a SAF. Between the two, I think I actually prefer the > AF11... they can't quite match the speed of the B11, but they behave more > like a normal licensed radio than the B11... they just lack an SFP port and > 80mhz channels. > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Steve Jones <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> we are looking to drop some dough on these guys if the sales pitch is true >> >> does the website handle the FCC stuff? I personally find that hard to >> believe, considering the FCC itself has a fee, unless the reseller >> (unnamed) is building it into the price. Still less than SAF >> Im not looking to move away from SAF, my only complaint with SAF is that >> it works too well, so much that I altered routing the other day before I >> realized the winds a while back turned the 800 plus pound ballast NPM and >> the signal drop wasnt weather fade and that up until essentially nothing >> the beast runs at full modulation >> >> Literally, the only reason for looking at mimosa is the low cost, and >> comparing the low cost of mimosa to SAF, its alot, considering SAF is >> relatively cheap. >> >> from what Ive seen, mimosa is like running mikrotik routers, you pay a >> shit ton less in exchange for a little more poking, not constant diddling, >> just occasional poking. >> >> I have no interest in looking at ubnt noisy crickets on our licensed >> gear, but mimosa seems promising >> >> I need a good teeth kick now before we commit to at least 3 links locked >> into this gear >> >> SAF presales engineering is on the cautious side, a good example is our >> first licensed link, our partner told us could be done with cambium at 2 >> foot antennas on each side >> >> the reseller told use with SAF it required a 3 and a 4, and that (without >> saying it) our partner was smoking crack cocain after they took bath salts. >> I have no doubt at 2 foot the link would have come up, but not to a degree >> that a 30 db drop caused by a turned NPM would still result in full >> modulation until failure, >> >> I dont want to have an "It will link" solution at the end of the day >> >> >> > >
