It varies if that matters or not, though. A chain of six backhauls, yeah, that starts to matter.
Just one, probably not. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Prince" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 11:51:17 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link The other consideration is latency. On backhauls you want very low latency, and what I'm used to is almost wire speed WRT latency; measured in microseconds, not milliseconds. Latency on a B11 is a couple dozen milliseconds when it's working well, and we didn't see "well" most of the time. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 10/28/2017 9:42 AM, [email protected] wrote: More of a comparison between a Yugo and a semi with triples. I am hauling product. I want to be able to haul the most product and to not have to build fiber. Or at least buy some time before I have to build the fiber. From: Rory Conaway Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 10:34 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link If I can get to work in a Yugo, why do I need to spend 5 times that for the Corvette? I’m making the same amount of money when I get there. The Corvette might get there 20% faster than the Yugo but…. Hence, the 80/20 problem. Then again, the job might not pan out in which case, I might need a different vehicle. None of us know the future. And to go back to the original point, if money was no object and you wanted to use the spectrum most efficiently, why isn’t everyone buy Cambium 820’s or Ceragons or whoever has 4096 QAM out for every link? Rory From: Af [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 9:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link Rory has an excellent point. If the cheap radio get the revenue flowing, you can go back a year or two later and put in the radio you really wanted. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rory Conaway" < [email protected] > To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 11:09:44 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link Why does that matter? It’s about the economics and the ROI. I’m in business to make money, not to worry how efficiently I’m using my spectrum. It’s the 80/20 problem. If I can achieve 80 percent of my goal with 20% of the budget, then I’m not going to spend additional funds until it produces a return on that investment. When I need to be more efficient and it makes sense financially, then it will be addressed. For example, we now need more bandwidth in the spectrum I have with the B11’s, time to spend the additional capital. If the financial return had not panned out, then I would have wasted $40K dollars. Rory From: Af [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Bill Prince Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link The B11 will eat the most spectrum for the least throughput of any 11 GHz radios I have found. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 10/28/2017 8:31 AM, Mathew Howard wrote: <blockquote> That would be nice. Other than the AF11 and B11, I think most of the licensed radios will get pretty similar capacity at any given channel BW and modulation, so it pretty much just comes down to what modulations and channel sizes they support. The B11 can get particularly confusing being the only half-duplex radio out there, and having several different ways it can be configured. On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 10:14 AM, < [email protected] > wrote: I wish someone would make a chart showing the max of each radio per channel BW size. The radio charts have way to many modulation options. Like some kind of apples to apples comparisons for these different radios per BW channel size. From: Mathew Howard Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 9:11 AM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link Yeah, but to use the same channels that a SAF lumina is using, you wouldn't be able to transmit on both channels... you'd have to use FD mode, which if I remember right, means you'd also have to use a fixed traffic split (although I may be wrong on that... ), so you're going to get more like 300Mbps, at best. But since it's MIMO, that still wouldn't be using the same channels anyway... if the B11 could run in SISO mode, then you'd have to cut that in half again. But since Paul said there were sufficient channels available to license, none of that is really relevant anyway. If it were my link, I think I'd look into what it would take to adapt the B11's to the existing dishes... if that could be done fairly cheaply, then I would more than likely just go with the B11's... especially if I already had them. If using B11's with those dishes is going to be too costly or too much of a pain, then I'd look at other options. If you don't have to replace, remount and realign the dishes, you can spend a lot more on radios and still come out ahead. I probably wouldn't use AF11's on this link, because they need to be able to do 1024qam to match the capacity of most 256qam radios, and if the SAFs can't do 256qam on this link, it's a pretty safe bet that an AF11 isn't going to be able to do 1024qam. On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Rory Conaway < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> Just ran a test we have on a 16 mile link and pulling 420-435Mbps on a 40MHz link. Rory From: Af [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 8:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link A B11 can transmit on both channels simultaneously in the same direction and it’s MIMO. Rory From: Af [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 5:50 PM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Considerations for upgrading passed SAF Lumina link Well, no, a B11 wouldn't get more capacity using the same channels... I'm pretty sure it would do quite a bit less, actually. We're assuming he'd be able to license new channels. On Oct 27, 2017 7:23 PM, "Eric Kuhnke" < [email protected] > wrote: If he wants to keep his existing FDD band plan license and channel sizes, I don't see how a B11 would be any more capacity at all, since it would be replacing a 256QAM radio link with a 256QAM radio link. The B11 is only high capacity when you give it huge channel sizes or let it do its special weird pseudo-FDD band plan. On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Mathew Howard < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> B11's are going to get you the most capacity for the least amount of money, but don't expect them to be as stable as the SAF link. I've been pretty happy with our AF-11FX link, but you're only going to get around double the capacity you have now, and I don't know if there's currently a way to do multiples on one dish... it might make more sense to do like Lewis suggested and add a second Lumina. There are lots of options for higher capacity licensed links, but they start to get pricey. You could probably get Chuck to make you some adapters to hook up just about anything to the SAF dishes. On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Paul McCall < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> We have a 4 year old Lumina link from our core, 12.9 miles, 11Ghz with 3ft dishes on each end, that doesn’t have enough BW for us long term, as we are going to do another hop from there (7.3 miles), then FTTH. I get around 270Mbit from it, and we already use 120Mit pretty consistently and if another tower OSPFs to it, more than that. Sooo, I am looking for alternatives. Its mainly one-way traffic of course, so a solution that favored that would be acceptable. Cost is a factor of course, as I also have a “parallel path” a few miles south to do the same on very soon. Something that could use the same dishes from the SAF would be good also. I have some undeployed Mimosa B11’s that we bought for a project and are still waiting on some tower rights to get settled. I could use those, or maybe AF-11X or multiples thereof. I might as well plan for the future since this is a “main artery” link. We have sufficient 11 Ghz channels available to license. Thoughts and suggestions are appreciated ! Paul Paul McCall, President PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc. 658 Old Dixie Highway Vero Beach, FL 32962 772-564-6800 [email protected] www.pdmnet.com www.floridabroadband.com </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
