Ummmm. What? Our links are aligned. The issue is the failover does not work properly.
> On Oct 19, 2017, at 19:39, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> wrote: > > I echo what Eric is saying. Part of the issue is alignment. No different > than the AirFibers. You have to make sure you have as much headroom as > possible for fade. Second, is the issue of which channel you select. The > highest channel has the least amount of rain fade. > > Matt, I suspect that if Ubiquiti had a 60Ghz radio out, you wouldn’t even be > part of this discussion or you would say that rain fade was a feature to > protect the environment. > > Rory > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 3:57 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > I would have to say my experience was the opposite. Good quality and highly > reliable, as long as it was installed correctly, but expensive. Somewhat less > so now that they have more serious 80 GHz competition from SIAE, Siklu and > others. > > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > I tried Bridgewave back in the day of Daniel. Did not have a good experience. > So far nothing has changed my mind about that band. And I am in Utah.... > > From: Eric Kuhnke > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 4:52 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Please don't let your impression of 60 GHz be influenced by IgniteNet's silly > USB dongle in front of a reflector, cheap stuff... > > Bridgewave (REMEC/Mosely) and others make much more expensive, carrier grade, > fiber-connected 60 GHz PTP equipment that is good for five nines reliability > at 500 to 650 meters in a Seattle-like rain zone. Somewhat less distance in > places that have higher mm/hour rain rates. These are serious products that > take direct 48VDC power, singlemode fiber connections, and have dedicated > management interfaces. > > "serious" 60 GHz equipment is built to the same standards as $15,000 80 GHz > links and is used by a lot of large ISPs. Most of whom don't consider > themselves to be WISPs, but rather ISPs that happen to use PTP millimeter > wave when it is necessary or justified. > > I have not personally seen a Metrolinq 60 GHz but I have seen photos of one > disassembled, and it is literally a USB 802.11ad 60 GHz dongle hot glued to a > plastic thing in front of a reflector. Scary. > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > Well hell, that is almost TMI. I expected as such from this band. Sounds > like if they increase the sensitivity of the switchover mechanism it would be > a contender. > > From: Matt Hoppes > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 4:38 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Let me back up. > > We lose our IN link every time a bird pees. It generally holds up during > torrential down pours. > > Random fog events will cause it to become trashed. > > The link is .6 miles. I expected it to fade from time to time. The problem > for me is the fail over does not happen properly. > > It's a gosh darn USB dongle attached to a reflector dish. Don't expect too > much out of it. > > On Oct 19, 2017, at 18:28, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> wrote: > > How far is your shot? What channel are you using? > > Rory > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 3:26 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > I disagree. We lose our IN link every time it rains. And the 5GHz does not > fail over seemleasly at all. > > There is packet loss and high pings until the 60GHz finally dies. Then it > sometimes flips. > > On Oct 19, 2017, at 17:56, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > > If a bunch of folks deploy it and do so correctly, there won't be > complaining. ;-) > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > The Brothers WISP > > > > From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 4:55:08 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > I ain’t belivin nuthing until a bunch of folks have deployed this stuff and > start complaining about it. Then we will have believable data. > > From: Mike Hammett > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 3:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > https://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet70/oet70a.pdf > > page 7 vs. page 15 > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > The Brothers WISP > > > > From: "Chris Wright" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 4:28:48 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Between 50-80GHz, oxygen attenuates the EM spectrum significantly more than > water. Not to say that it doesn’t contribute at all to fade, but at 300 > meters you’d probably only ever go down if Poseiden himself took offense to > your client. > > http://windowsil.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/atm_absorption.gif > > Chris Wright > Network Administrator > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 1:19 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > This link would be just under 300 meters. Will I ever go down for rain? > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 10/19/2017 4:17:00 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Yes, it's still an issue. To say otherwise is dumb. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > The Brothers WISP > > > > From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 3:16:09 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Is rain fade an issue? > > I just read an article claiming that the atmospheric attenuation at 60ghz is > so great that at any range where 60ghz will operate the rain fade is > insignificant. > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Carl Peterson" <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: 10/19/2017 2:58:56 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > Yes, and the LR brackets. They should just drop the regular bracket and make > everyone order the decent ones. > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > At 1300m will I really need a scope to align it? > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Chris Wright" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 10/19/2017 2:41:28 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > I have a 1300 meter link on PTP60-35 radios doing -59/-61. Very happy with > them. The mounts they come with are trash. Get the “long range” brackets and > alignment scope. > > Chris Wright > Network Administrator > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 11:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [AFMUG] IgniteNet Metrolinq > > I have a microwave shot about 3 blocks long, so 60ghz seems like an option. > > Have any of you tried IgniteNet? Has it been reliable for you? > > I don't actually need a gigabit in this case, I just need it to be up. > > > > > > -- > Carl Peterson > PORT NETWORKS > 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 > Baltimore, MD 21202 > (410) 637-3707 > > > > >
