That's a good point. If his build out time frame is a year down the road, I'd pick something now as a fallback plan, but keep my eyes peeled for both Ubiquiti LTU and ePMP 3000. These are both interesting sounding.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Stefan Englhardt" <s...@genias.net>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/13/2018 3:58:33 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may give a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at smaller Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper than 450m so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might densify at the direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you could aggregate them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up there. You only need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.

For greenfield? Probably not.

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
<george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs in the
same frame.
> But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
> instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
> only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just another
tool in the toolbox.
>
> On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>>
>> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
>> :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
>>>
>>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds
>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to
>>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the
>>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take
>>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is
>>>>> 64qam).
>>>>>
>>>>> it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing with
>>>>> regular
>>>>> 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would
>>>>> need 3 APs each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used.
>>>>>
>>>>> win, win, win.
>>>>>
>>>>> but i also wouldn't install them at every tower.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>
>>>>> -sean
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds
>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients
>>>>>> are short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is costly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a niche of a niche.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at all,
>>>>>> I'm just saying it's not the second coming like people make it
>>>>>> out to be.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then by all means don’t deploy any 450m’s josh. Geeze dude take
>>>>>>> a chill pill.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m just stating what I have on my network in a real world
>>>>>>> environment, earning me real world dollars and conserving much
>>>>>>> needed spectrum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It’s not the right tool for every situation, BUT under the right
>>>>>>> conditions the 450m delivers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers bud
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sean
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:46 PM Josh Reynolds
>>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Further note: You can see I did those calcs at 1024QAM, so
>>>>>>>> reduce that down the 256QAM for closer to real numbers :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Josh Reynolds
>>>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's break this down a bit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Firstly, what outdoor PTMP platform is really using WiFi anymore?
>>>>>>>>> *shakes head*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread
>>>>>>>>> apart (physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into
>>>>>>>>> almost the same timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one
>>>>>>>>> client that ends up in the same window as other clients
>>>>>>>>> reduces the overall capacity of the AP (like in many other
>>>>>>>>> situations). It can, in some situations, lead to cumulative
>>>>>>>>> transfer windows where overall throughput ends up getting
>>>>>>>>> reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up
>>>>>>>>> taking a hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings of
>>>>>>>>> MU-MIMO, not even taking into account "massive" systems like
>>>>>>>>> 14x14 that end up costing quite a bit in overall power budget >>>>>>>>> due to the number of elements, further meaning that your range >>>>>>>>> is severely limited in a system like this... so only decent in
>>>>>>>>> very dense situations.
>>>>>>>>> That's a
>>>>>>>>> unique niche.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern
>>>>>>>>> system (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually
>>>>>>>>> streaming.
>>>>>>>>> Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps
>>>>>>>>> for gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets >>>>>>>>> sent in most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous.
>>>>>>>>> Let's
>>>>>>>>> take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's
>>>>>>>>> assume that maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something
>>>>>>>>> like that, and that's probably a generous number. 56
>>>>>>>>> customers. So 56 customers x 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz
>>>>>>>>> channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to work out!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Soo.... 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very
>>>>>>>>> roughly.
>>>>>>>>> If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an
>>>>>>>>> 80/20
>>>>>>>>> and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
>>>>>>>>> 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20
>>>>>>>>> camp, giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect
>>>>>>>>> conditions, gives you
>>>>>>>>> 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p
streaming.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput
>>>>>>>>> and subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed >>>>>>>>> a "perfect storm" of client distribution and data patterns to
>>>>>>>>> really take advantage of. With working GPS in all modern
>>>>>>>>> platforms, I would be hard pressed to not use an additional
>>>>>>>>> 20mhz channel if available, or just cut the channel width in
>>>>>>>>> half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 Mimosas or 4 Gen2 Prism
>>>>>>>>> radios and have far more than 4x the possible subscriber
>>>>>>>>> account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range (increasing
>>>>>>>>> distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly reduced
>>>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
>>>>>>>>> efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on
>>>>>>>>> tx/rx chains for multi-client transmission (costing your
>>>>>>>>> range, per client snr, and per-client throughput in the
>>>>>>>>> process). MU-MIMO is and will always be a niche hack that
>>>>>>>>> never lived up to what was promised.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett
>>>>>>>>> <af...@zirkel.us>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>> <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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: af@afmug.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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"
<ch...@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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"
<ch...@wbmfg.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>


Reply via email to