As I understand it, they told people you couldn't use frequency reuse on the integrated product.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Jones" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 10:54:39 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF attenuators - Integrated 450i Sector do I read this correct, cambium shipped a product that didn't meet their own spec? are they making right, as in shipping replacements at no cost? not being a dick, their reuse has always been phenomenal, even though they to this day refuse to admit the Motorola 320 doesn't sync for ABAB On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:00 PM, George Skorup < [email protected] > wrote: Slide didn't come though. Picture the new ePMP 2000 sector antenna with a 450i AP turned backwards and mounted directly on the back of the sector. It's hawt. I want 3GHz too, Matt! On 5/5/2017 9:42 AM, Matt Mangriotis wrote: <blockquote> I want to make sure everyone has the correct information on this topic. Darin - It was true that when it was first launched, and we had the 90 degree Mars sector antenna, the front-to-back of that antenna was not good enough to do frequency re-use. However, the current shipping integrated Access Points (part numbers ending in “B”, e.g. C050045A006B) have a Cambium Networks-designed antenna attached (more like a standard tall and narrow sector, rather than a 14” square flat panel). This antenna was built with frequency re-use in mind, and is optimized for use with the 450i platform. It is a true 90 degree sector, and eliminates the need for jumper cables as George mentions. I have attached a slide highlighting this (if it comes through). Matt From: Af [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Darin Steffl Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 9:03 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF attenuators Be careful with the integrated 450i though as the FTB isn't good enough for gps sync according to cambium. On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:00 AM George Skorup < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> Accuracy. Known-good connectorized SMs to verify multiple APs in 3 and 5GHz. Coaxes and attenuators only. I've used antennas and bare SMs pointed up at the ceiling and it's just not reliable. We ended up redeploying an old AP that apparently has bad Tx on one polarity. Really trying to cut down on the BS and multiple tower climbs. Also getting really sick of weather-seals leaking for no apparent reason. Which is another reason I'm not so mad about the 450AP going away. We'll probably just start using that fancy new 450i integrated 90 over time. No coaxes to worry about with that. On 5/4/2017 7:23 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: > Yes. > But is there a reason you don't want to use the paper clip trick? > Single piece of wire quarter wavelength is all you need. > > -----Original Message----- From: George Skorup > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 5:54 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF attenuators > > So... I'm having bad luck finding 60dB attenuators in DC-6GHz or > greater. I found some 50's, but they're only 4GHz. WTF. > > Stupid question. Can I stack 30's to get 60? I see lots of N to N in > 30dB on Amazon. Up to 1W mostly. Looks like for cellular amp/repeater > type stuff. So I assume they won't have a problem with bi-directional Tx. > > On 5/4/2017 5:33 PM, Matt Mangriotis wrote: >> 60 dB pads are what we typically use internally... >> >> Matt >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Af [mailto: [email protected] ] On Behalf Of George Skorup >> Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 5:31 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [AFMUG] RF attenuators >> >> I need to RF test some 450 APs with connectorized SMs. What's a good >> option for N to N attenuators? I'm thinking I want like 60dB so >> there's no chance of the SM overloading the AP Rx (because SM Tx >> power control doesn't kick in for a few minutes). > -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi Like us on Facebook </blockquote> </blockquote>
