The unique thing about the 450m is the SFP port. The concept would be
fiber to each radio for data, and this box would be for power+sync. It
would include the GPS antenna in the box, etc. Essentially you'd provide
bulk power to this box, run a short CAT5 jumper to each radio for
power/management, and a strand of fiber down the tower for management of it
all. That would get you management into each of the 450m's and power and
For data, you'd put a SFP in each of the 450m's and run that down the tower
At the bottom, you'd just have a fiber switch and a bulk power source.
This box would do double duty with small clusters of 450i.
On Feb 2, 2018 10:40 AM, "George Skorup" <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> Could be fine for a tower-top DC+fiber fed injector(+sync)-switch. Same
> concept as the UBNT edge thing. Consider that something like this would
> need a 10G uplink if you're going to be powering and timing a 450m cluster.
> You're probably going to want at least 500Mbps to each sector. So only a 1G
> pipe up the tower isn't thinking towards the future. Something I think a
> product like this would need is an integrated voltage regulator. And wasn't
> something similar kicked around in the past? Instead of a switch, make it a
> multi port injector+sync with media conversion. A strand or pair per radio.
> Or even CWDM mux.
> On 2/2/2018 6:44 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> and some of us hate switches in their network altogether. :-)
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> *From: *"TJ Trout" <t...@voltbb.com> <t...@voltbb.com>
> *To: *firstname.lastname@example.org
> *Sent: *Friday, February 2, 2018 1:52:34 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA Members] 450m power
> It would be awesome if you could ever develop products with switches
> inside, I know you have a (Cisco?) preference but other's dont.
> I would have purchased lots. I hate that I have to use a separate switch
> so we moved away from packetflux for new deployments.
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>> I'm assuming you mean includes switch+poe.
>> I'm in the process of working on something specificaly for the 450i/450m
>> with 5 ports and sync hardware all in one box (+1 SFP port), mainly
>> designed for tower top mounting. Not far enough along to say when it will
>> ship, or even if it's ever going to see the light of day.
>> Any other solution you look at, you should make sure that whatever
>> solution you find will support at least 70W per port, and all 4 pairs.
>> Neither the 450i or 450m really care about polarity, unless you're doing
>> sync, and then only on the 450i since the 450m does the new cambium sync
>> If you can live with separate poe box, of course the packetflux
>> powerinjector+sync powers 450m's really well. There will be a version
>> which does medusa sync out sometime soon, it's a sure thing, just we don't
>> know timing yet.
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:07 AM, Tyson Burris <t...@franklinisp.net> wrote:
>>> Good morning,
>>> Looking for an all in one, but reliable, power source for 4 - 450m aps
>>> per tower.
>>> I have heard netonix a few times but I have also heard about some issues
>>> with these devices and their support not being that great.
>>> *Tyson Burris, President*
>>> *Internet Communications Inc.*
>>> *739 Commerce Dr.*
>>> **Franklin, IN 46131*
>>> *317-738-0320 <317-738-0320> Daytime #*
>>> *317-412-1540 <317-412-1540> Cell/Direct #*
>>> *Online: **www.surfici.net* <http://www.surfici.net>
>>> VIA WIRELESS
>>> Members mailing list
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>