Coming from Gino, real world. Client radio ~100-150mbps maximum (Gino can confirm)
TJ On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Rory Conaway <r...@triadwireless.net> wrote: > Do you actually see that in the real world or is that theoretical > capacity? Also, what is the maximum speed of the client radios? > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Gino A. Villarini > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:05 PM > > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp > > > > I have an aggregate capacity of 400 mbps+ on a single 450 Medusa sector > using 40 mhz channelsŠ > > On 2/13/18, 11:26 AM, "Af on behalf of Rory Conaway" <af-boun...@afmug.com > > > > *Gino A. Villarini* > > President > > Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 > > on behalf of r...@triadwireless.net> wrote: > > >You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as > >other products still coming out. > > > >We always looks at ROI. Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz > >450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting > >from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability. I'm also not > >convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in > >terms of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products > >are cheap to upgrade. > > > >As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA. New 802.11ac > >chipsets are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features > >that will change how we deploy on towers. RF Elements horns have already > >done that. > > > >For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering > >30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K. > >Even if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least > >1.2Gbps of download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer > >average). Need more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to > >double that. What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down > >significantly depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more > >capacity. > > > >We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120 > >degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we > >needed, meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees. If we added users > >that weren't in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of > >Mimosa, swapped out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more > >APs to expand coverage . A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in > >the first 8 months and 2 users Mimosa. I understand this doesn't work > >well for tower deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that > >are billed by cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc... > >which is also why we rarely use towers. I'd rather find a few lower > >locations that have easy access than a single tower but that's not always > >realistic. > > > >Rory > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf > Of Stefan Englhardt > >Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM > >To: af@afmug.com > >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 <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 don¹t deploy any 450m¹s josh. Geeze dude > >> >>>>>>> take a chill pill. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> I¹m just stating what I have on my network in a real world > >> >>>>>>> environment, earning me real world dollars and conserving much > >> >>>>>>> needed spectrum. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> It¹s 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 it¹s one tool in the tool box and isn¹t 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. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>> > >> > > > >
