Yep, probably not a lot you can do other than improving the signal - a Force 200 is going to be the best way to do that.
On Aug 27, 2017 7:24 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Agreed. Will give it a shot. Firmware too > > Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [AFMUG] epmp 2.4 > Date: Sun, Aug 27, 2017 7:11 PM > > They released 3.5 last week. I'm running it on a couple sites. Seems fine > so far. The throughput improvements involve basic bridge config. No extra > QoS, no L2/L3 firewall rules. Basically like MikroTik's fast-path. > > Jay, I think Force200's are going to be your best bet. If your uplink > speeds suck, then more gain at the SM and thus higher RSSI at the AP > certainly can't hurt. Get the uplink SNRs up and the speeds should come > with it. > > On 8/27/2017 7:03 PM, Steve Jones wrote: > > The current beta rc says it has throughput improvements, may look into that > > On Aug 27, 2017 6:00 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> I will post this on the epmp forums a bit later but aside from improving >> the upload signal or changing the downlink ratio on a timed EPMP system is >> there any way to improve the upload? We have a few customers I know with >> signals in the mid 70s on 2.4 that are getting 10-15 meg down but less than >> a meg up. Sometimes as little as 200k up. >> >> Looking to improve that. >> >> One (and possibly both) are with an integrated unit with I believe a 60 >> degree antenna. I feel sure a force 200 with a tighter beamwidth will help >> increase the received signal at the tower. >> >> Any one having this problem? >> Anyone having any luck using a ubnt radio over a force 200 to get a >> little better signal strength at the tower? >> >> 2.4 and 900 are both challenging bands to work in :) >> >> >> > >
