Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to all of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is worth every penny.
But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every deployment. 2 cents -sean On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great. > > I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in > 802.11ax via OFDMA. > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't. > > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing......ePMP will probably never > have > > something like that. > > UI is still sluggish on ePMP. > > > > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over these > > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it > > provides. > > > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > > From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > > > > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen. > > > > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those > 25? > > > > Packetflux GPS sync. > > > > From: Joe Novak > > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > > > > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the > early > > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having > > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem > > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is > > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly > > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around > 25 > > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of room. > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets > >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and > on > >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of > 2017 > >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change > them > >> since. Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues. The > >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with > us as > >> well. Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no > >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well. > >> > >> Jaime Solorza > >> > >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other > >>> radios within 4 mile radius... > >>> > >>> Jaime Solorza > >>> > >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> All on the same tower, right? > >>>> > >>>> From: Jaime Solorza > >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM > >>>> To: Animal Farm > >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > >>>> > >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs > >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... > >>>> > >>>> Jaime Solorza > >>>> > >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp. He is about > 5.5 > >>>>> miles from a backbone connection. I would suggest AF5X to him but > he is > >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. > >>>>> > >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points > peacefully > >>>>> coexist on a tower? > >>>>> Very rural area. Not expecting much interference other than home > >>>>> routers. > > > > >
