Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Rory Conaway]

It always comes down to budget and ROI.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 10:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

What, you mean you don't want to build carrier-grade five nines infrastructure 
out of USB dongles held in place with a hot-glue gun?

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures of its 
insides.


-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" >
To: "af" >
Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it needs more 
than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an AF24HD... An 80ghz 
link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and then it'll be able to handle 
enough bandwidth that you'll probably never have to mess with it again. There 
are also other 24ghz radios that would at least give you the option of smaller 
antennas, if nothing else. But I'd more than likely just use an ignitenet.

On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett" 
> wrote:
But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can...  which are 
$6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs.

Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities.

If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is now the 
issue.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP





From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there.

On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:
Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more about cost 
savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz link at 1/3 the cost and 
twice the throughput will fit the bill perfectly.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if it's only 
going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish meg, the AF24 link will 
handle that perfectly fine, and I see no reason to mess with it.

Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only needed 
700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point where ~700Mbps 
isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP




From: "Steve Jones" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 3:28:11 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this to get 
to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas

I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity 
utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas

Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and putting 
that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth into the 
core of our network just seems like moving backward.

before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the SAF 
gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. Lumina is older and 
nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the units can be used.

on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 700 feet, 
so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short link solution. Im 
assuming af24hd will meet that need

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP2000 bug

[George Skorup]

Lite AP to Full upgrade and the flash experiences some corruption so the 
license key can't be found/loaded? That scenario isn't unique to ePMP 
though, happens on Canopy gear as well. Had a handful or two of those 
over the years. If it's under warranty and Cambium wants it back, 
replace with a spare and they send you a new one. It's an inconvenience, 
but meh, shit happens.


On 11/29/2017 8:36 PM, Adair Winter wrote:

What causes this to happen?

On Nov 29, 2017 7:16 PM, "Chuck McCown" > wrote:


I know this has been discussed here before. Thought I would cross
post it.
*From:* christ...@cybernet1.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 29, 2017 4:58 PM
*To:* memb...@wispa.org
*Subject:* [WISPA Members] ePMP2000 bug

Apparently there is a bug that limits the epmp2000 sector down to
10 subscribers with no workable solution to get it back to 120.  I
don’t know if anyone else has run in to this but it sucks.  They
are telling me it is hardware so I have to replace the AP and RMA
the original.  A software license lock caused by a hardware
problem seems pretty nuts to me.

Christian Palecek

Chief Operations Officer

Cybernet1 Inc

Hamilton, MT


___
Members mailing list
memb...@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members

Re: [AFMUG] ePMP2000 bug

[Adair Winter]

What causes this to happen?

On Nov 29, 2017 7:16 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> I know this has been discussed here before.  Thought I would cross post
> it.
>
> *From:* christ...@cybernet1.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 29, 2017 4:58 PM
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org
> *Subject:* [WISPA Members] ePMP2000 bug
>
>
> Apparently there is a bug that limits the epmp2000 sector down to 10
> subscribers with no workable solution to get it back to 120.  I don’t know
> if anyone else has run in to this but it sucks.  They are telling me it is
> hardware so I have to replace the AP and RMA the original.  A software
> license lock caused by a hardware problem seems pretty nuts to me.
>
>
>
> Christian Palecek
>
> Chief Operations Officer
>
> Cybernet1 Inc
>
> Hamilton, MT
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> Members mailing list
> memb...@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members
>

Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels

[Jaime Solorza]

The voltage is 28.4 vdc on meter...the controller keeps it at 24 ish...

Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 7:15 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> I would think a 24 VDC batt would want to float at 28 volts.  You are only
> getting 22.3 from the panels?
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 29, 2017 5:43 PM
> *To:* Animal Farm
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels
>
> They came with Tycon Remote Solar Kit...I will check tomorrow.  4 per site
> with two panels...voltage is 22.3 from panels and with batteries on
> controller we get 24.6 vdc
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Nov 29, 2017 6:35 PM, "Jon Langeler"  wrote:
>
>> What kind of batteries?
>>
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:26 PM, Jaime Solorza 
>> wrote:
>>
>> We clean up wiring tomorrow...one tank has problems and they digging
>> right where we have to work so will finish next week.
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Nov 29, 2017 5:58 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> You can see power levels from solar  panels easily and once completed,
>> owner will get alarms from our system.
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>

[AFMUG] ePMP2000 bug

[Chuck McCown]

I know this has been discussed here before.  Thought I would cross post it.  

From: christ...@cybernet1.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 4:58 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org 
Subject: [WISPA Members] ePMP2000 bug

Apparently there is a bug that limits the epmp2000 sector down to 10 
subscribers with no workable solution to get it back to 120.  I don’t know if 
anyone else has run in to this but it sucks.  They are telling me it is 
hardware so I have to replace the AP and RMA the original.  A software license 
lock caused by a hardware problem seems pretty nuts to me.

 

Christian Palecek

Chief Operations Officer

Cybernet1 Inc

Hamilton, MT

 




___
Members mailing list
memb...@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members

Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels

[Chuck McCown]

I would think a 24 VDC batt would want to float at 28 volts.  You are only 
getting 22.3 from the panels?

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 5:43 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels

They came with Tycon Remote Solar Kit...I will check tomorrow.  4 per site with 
two panels...voltage is 22.3 from panels and with batteries on controller we 
get 24.6 vdc


Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 6:35 PM, "Jon Langeler"  wrote:

  What kind of batteries?


  Jon Langeler
  Michwave Technologies, Inc.


  On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:26 PM, Jaime Solorza  wrote:


We clean up wiring tomorrow...one tank has problems and they digging right 
where we have to work so will finish next week. 


Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 5:58 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

  You can see power levels from solar  panels easily and once completed, 
owner will get alarms from our system. 


  Jaime Solorza

Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels

[Jaime Solorza]

They came with Tycon Remote Solar Kit...I will check tomorrow.  4 per site
with two panels...voltage is 22.3 from panels and with batteries on
controller we get 24.6 vdc

Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 6:35 PM, "Jon Langeler"  wrote:

> What kind of batteries?
>
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>
>
> On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:26 PM, Jaime Solorza 
> wrote:
>
> We clean up wiring tomorrow...one tank has problems and they digging right
> where we have to work so will finish next week.
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Nov 29, 2017 5:58 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
> You can see power levels from solar  panels easily and once completed,
> owner will get alarms from our system.
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
>
> 
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Our panel on top of tank for measuring water levels

[Jon Langeler]

What kind of batteries?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:26 PM, Jaime Solorza  wrote:
> 
> We clean up wiring tomorrow...one tank has problems and they digging right 
> where we have to work so will finish next week. 
> 
> Jaime Solorza
> 
> On Nov 29, 2017 5:58 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:
> You can see power levels from solar  panels easily and once completed, owner 
> will get alarms from our system. 
> 
> Jaime Solorza
> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium 450i

[Matt]

They can be PTP as well.


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Jaime Solorza
 wrote:
> Thanks!!!
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Nov 29, 2017 4:44 PM, "Sean Heskett"  wrote:
>>
>> The i is for industrial (it’s rated to be installed in hazardous locations
>> etc)
>>
>> They come connectorized or integrated.
>>
>> -Sean
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM Bill Prince  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes. The i is (I think) for integrated
>>>
>>> -bp
>>>
>>> --
>>> bp
>>> part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Jaime Solorza
>>>  wrote:

 Are these ptmp?



 Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Two down

[Eric Kuhnke]

highly dependent on the cubic volume as well. something small with 8-10
cubic yards vs. 30 or 40.



On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> After 1 day it has 16% strength, which may be enough for may applications
> if the wind is not blowing.
> 3 days = 40%
> 7 days = 65%
>
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Matt Hoppes
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 3:50 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two down
>
>
> U. You're not going to let the base cure for 30 days?
>
> On Nov 29, 2017, at 17:46, Jaime Solorza 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Cement crew showed up today...tower should be up by next week.
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>> 
>> 
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Two down

[Chuck McCown]

After 1 day it has 16% strength, which may be enough for may applications if 
the wind is not blowing.

3 days = 40%
7 days = 65%



-Original Message- 
From: Matt Hoppes

Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 3:50 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Two down

U. You're not going to let the base cure for 30 days?

On Nov 29, 2017, at 17:46, Jaime Solorza  
wrote:


Cement crew showed up today...tower should be up by next week.

Jaime Solorza

 

Re: [AFMUG] Two down

[Jaime Solorza]

Nope

Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 4:50 PM, "Matt Hoppes" 
wrote:

> U. You're not going to let the base cure for 30 days?
>
> > On Nov 29, 2017, at 17:46, Jaime Solorza 
> wrote:
> >
> > Cement crew showed up today...tower should be up by next week.
> >
> > Jaime Solorza
> > 
> > 
>

Re: [AFMUG] Two down

[Matt Hoppes]

U. You're not going to let the base cure for 30 days?

> On Nov 29, 2017, at 17:46, Jaime Solorza  wrote:
> 
> Cement crew showed up today...tower should be up by next week.  
> 
> Jaime Solorza
> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium 450i

[Jaime Solorza]

Thanks!!!

Jaime Solorza

On Nov 29, 2017 4:44 PM, "Sean Heskett"  wrote:

> The i is for industrial (it’s rated to be installed in hazardous locations
> etc)
>
> They come connectorized or integrated.
>
> -Sean
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM Bill Prince  wrote:
>
>> Yes. The i is (I think) for integrated
>>
>> -bp
>>
>> --
>> bp
>> part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Jaime Solorza > > wrote:
>>
>>> Are these ptmp?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium 450i

[Sean Heskett]

The i is for industrial (it’s rated to be installed in hazardous locations
etc)

They come connectorized or integrated.

-Sean


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:37 PM Bill Prince  wrote:

> Yes. The i is (I think) for integrated
>
> -bp
>
> --
> bp
> part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Jaime Solorza 
> wrote:
>
>> Are these ptmp?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium 450i

[Bill Prince]

Yes. The i is (I think) for integrated

-bp

--
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> Are these ptmp?
>
>
>
> Jaime Solorza
>

[AFMUG] Cambium 450i

[Jaime Solorza]

Are these ptmp?



Jaime Solorza

Re: [AFMUG] NetFlow Analyzers

[Dave]

Anyone use the new cacti-ez netflow plugin for simple snapshots?
I love it for where we are now...
I wish Ntopng would get off the GPL thingy



On 11/28/2017 11:59 AM, Zach Underwood wrote:

I found this one yesterday, only had a chance to look at the website.
https://github.com/robcowart/elastiflow/

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Justin Marshall > wrote:


Hi,

Does anyone know of a good (preferably open-source) NetFlow
analyzer?   Ntop’s pricing scheme seems to be a little steep for
the amount of data I need to collect…

Thanks,

Justin

just...@pdmnet.net 




--
Zach Underwood (RHCE,RHCSA,RHCT,UACA)
My website 
advance-networking.com 


--

Re: [AFMUG] WTB M900 Nanostation

[Alan Luelf]

I have 6 new and 2 used that I will make a great deal on

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Christopher Gray  
> wrote:
> 
> I've got 2x M900 and 1x RF Armor kit. They are basically unused, although one 
> was mounted for a while. Email me if you're interested in only 2.
> 
>
> 
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Craig House  
>> wrote:
>> I know I know everyones thoughts on this WHY WHY WHY.  Just looking for a 
>> few of them.  Anyone have some to get rid of Maybe 6-10 depending on price?
>> 
>> Craig
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Eric Kuhnke]

What, you mean you don't want to build carrier-grade five nines
infrastructure out of USB dongles held in place with a hot-glue gun?


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures of
> its insides.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mathew Howard" 
> To: "af" 
> Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>
> Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it needs
> more than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an AF24HD...
> An 80ghz link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and then it'll be able
> to handle enough bandwidth that you'll probably never have to mess with it
> again. There are also other 24ghz radios that would at least give you the
> option of smaller antennas, if nothing else. But I'd more than likely just
> use an ignitenet.
>
> On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
>> But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can...
>>  which are $6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs.
>>
>> Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities.
>>
>> If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is now
>> the issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Mathew Howard" 
>> *To: *"af" 
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>>
>> Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there.
>>
>> On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:
>>
>>> Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more about
>>> cost savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz link at 1/3 the
>>> cost and twice the throughput will fit the bill perfectly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Wright
>>>
>>> Network Administrator
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM
>>> *To:* af
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if it's
>>> only going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish meg, the AF24
>>> link will handle that perfectly fine, and I see no reason to mess with it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only needed
>>> 700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point where ~700Mbps
>>> isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Brothers WISP 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Steve Jones" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, November 28, 2017 3:28:11 PM
>>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>>>
>>> We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this
>>> to get to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity
>>> utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and
>>> putting that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth
>>> into the core of our network just seems like moving backward.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the
>>> SAF gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a 

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Mathew Howard]

Our Ignetnets have been pretty reliable so far... as far as I can remember,
the only time I've rebooted any of them was when I did firmware upgrades a
couple days ago.

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Good point.  SBC's can be reliable.  But it's also about the USB adapter.
> My view may be colored by USB adapters which I've had to reinsert.  I'm
> picturing an interface lockup requiring a reboot.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mike Hammett" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: 11/29/2017 9:50:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>
> I have a few MT Rootennas deployed 10 years later. Seems fine to me.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Adam Moffett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, November 29, 2017 8:48:54 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>
> I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures of
> its insides.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mathew Howard" 
> To: "af" 
> Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>
> Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it needs
> more than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an AF24HD...
> An 80ghz link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and then it'll be able
> to handle enough bandwidth that you'll probably never have to mess with it
> again. There are also other 24ghz radios that would at least give you the
> option of smaller antennas, if nothing else. But I'd more than likely just
> use an ignitenet.
>
> On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
>> But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can...
>>  which are $6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs.
>>
>> Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities.
>>
>> If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is now
>> the issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Mathew Howard" 
>> *To: *"af" 
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>>
>> Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there.
>>
>> On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:
>>
>>> Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more about
>>> cost savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz link at 1/3 the
>>> cost and twice the throughput will fit the bill perfectly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Wright
>>>
>>> Network Administrator
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM
>>> *To:* af
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if it's
>>> only going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish meg, the AF24
>>> link will handle that perfectly fine, and I see no reason to mess with it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only needed
>>> 700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point where ~700Mbps
>>> isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Adam Moffett]

Good point.  SBC's can be reliable.  But it's also about the USB 
adapter.  My view may be colored by USB adapters which I've had to 
reinsert.  I'm picturing an interface lockup requiring a reboot.



-- Original Message --
From: "Mike Hammett" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 11/29/2017 9:50:03 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish


I have a few MT Rootennas deployed 10 years later. Seems fine to me.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 


Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 


The Brothers WISP 





From: "Adam Moffett" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 8:48:54 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures 
of its insides.



-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it 
needs more than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an 
AF24HD... An 80ghz link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and 
then it'll be able to handle enough bandwidth that you'll probably 
never have to mess with it again. There are also other 24ghz radios 
that would at least give you the option of smaller antennas, if 
nothing else. But I'd more than likely just use an ignitenet.


On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can...  
which are $6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs.


Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities.

If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is 
now the issue.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 


Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 


The Brothers WISP 





From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there.

On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:
Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more 
about cost savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz 
link at 1/3 the cost and twice the throughput will fit the bill 
perfectly.




Chris Wright

Network Administrator



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish



I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if 
it's only going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish 
meg, the AF24 link will handle that perfectly fine, and I see no 
reason to mess with it.




Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only 
needed 700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point 
where ~700Mbps isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet.




On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett  
wrote:


I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 


Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 


The Brothers WISP 

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Mike Hammett]

I have a few MT Rootennas deployed 10 years later. Seems fine to me. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Adam Moffett"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 8:48:54 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish 


I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures of its 
insides. 




-- Original Message -- 
From: "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish 





Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it needs more 
than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an AF24HD... An 80ghz 
link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and then it'll be able to handle 
enough bandwidth that you'll probably never have to mess with it again. There 
are also other 24ghz radios that would at least give you the option of smaller 
antennas, if nothing else. But I'd more than likely just use an ignitenet. 


On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can... which are 
$6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs. 

Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities. 

If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is now the 
issue. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish 


Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there. 


On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright" < ch...@velociter.net > wrote: 





Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more about cost 
savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz link at 1/3 the cost and 
twice the throughput will fit the bill perfectly. 

Chris Wright 
Network Administrator 

From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish 


I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if it's only 
going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish meg, the AF24 link will 
handle that perfectly fine, and I see no reason to mess with it. 



Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only needed 
700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point where ~700Mbps 
isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet. 



On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 







From: "Steve Jones" < thatoneguyst...@gmail.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 3:28:11 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish 

We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this to get 
to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas 



I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity 
utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas 



Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and putting 
that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth into the 
core of our network just seems like moving backward. 



before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the SAF 
gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. Lumina is older and 
nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the units can be used. 



on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 700 feet, 
so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short link solution. Im 
assuming af24hd will meet that need 

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Adam Moffett]

I've been scared of IgniteNet MetroLinq ever since I saw the pictures of 
its insides.



-- Original Message --
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: 11/28/2017 9:00:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

Well, yeah, it depends what all he ends up feeding with it. If it needs 
more than what the current AF24 can handle, I wouldn't go to an 
AF24HD... An 80ghz link wouldn't even cost all that much more, and then 
it'll be able to handle enough bandwidth that you'll probably never 
have to mess with it again. There are also other 24ghz radios that 
would at least give you the option of smaller antennas, if nothing 
else. But I'd more than likely just use an ignitenet.


On Nov 28, 2017 7:48 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
But can't use the whole gig, so he's looking at AF24HD so he can...  
which are $6k opposed to $1k and don't have SFPs.


Gig upstream - AF24 - multiple 11 GHz channels\polarities.

If he gets his wish and fixes the 11 GHz 1 gigabit issue, the AF24 is 
now the issue.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 


Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 


The Brothers WISP 





From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:27:49 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

Yeah, but if I'm understanding right, the AF24 link is already there.

On Nov 28, 2017 7:10 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:
Everything works beautifully at 700’. At this distance it’s more 
about cost savings. Don’t waste your time with AF24 when a 60ghz link 
at 1/3 the cost and twice the throughput will fit the bill perfectly.




Chris Wright

Network Administrator



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 4:59 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish



I wouldn't use IgnetNet if I already had the airFibers there... if 
it's only going to be feeding an 11ghz link that's around 700ish meg, 
the AF24 link will handle that perfectly fine, and I see no reason to 
mess with it.




Ignitenets should work beautifully on a 700ft link, but if I only 
needed 700Mbps, I'd rather have airFibers. If it gets to the point 
where ~700Mbps isn't enough, then yes, I'd use IgniteNet.




On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Mike Hammett  
wrote:


I'd use IgniteNet over airFiber for 700 feet.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
 
 
 


Midwest Internet Exchange 
 
 


The Brothers WISP 






From: "Steve Jones" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 3:28:11 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 
this to get to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas




I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream 
connectivity utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the 
same antennas




Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and 
putting that much variable latency into the network bringing our 
bandwidth into the core of our network just seems like moving 
backward.




before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order 
the SAF gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. 
Lumina is older and nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the 
units can be used.




on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 
700 feet, so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short 
link solution. Im assuming af24hd will meet that need

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Stephen Patrick]

Yes, same range FOR3 is available in L6 or U6 (lower and upper) 6GHz.
Usually a few weeks leadtime.

Look forward to hearing more,

Best regards
Stephen

On 29 November 2017 at 13:40, Gino A. Villarini  wrote:

> Stephen, do you stock the 6 ghz radios?
>
> From: Af  on behalf of Stephen Patrick <
> stephen.patr...@cablefree.co.uk>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 9:27 AM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish
>
> In 11GHz, the CableFree FOR3 would be well suited.
> Depending on what channel allocation you are allowed - up to 112MHz
> channel widths are supported, with 1024QAM (gives 891Mbps full duplex)
> For NA markets, 40, 60 & 80MHz are supported.
> Widely deployed for ISPs in several markets.
> Both Standard and High Power versions are fully shipping.
> Copper and Fibre interface versions available.
> www.cablefree.net/for3
>
> Best regards
> Stephen
>
>
>
> *Gino A. Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On 28 November 2017 at 21:28, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this to
>> get to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas
>>
>> I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity
>> utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas
>>
>> Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and
>> putting that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth
>> into the core of our network just seems like moving backward.
>>
>> before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the
>> SAF gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. Lumina is
>> older and nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the units can be
>> used.
>>
>> on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 700
>> feet, so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short link
>> solution. Im assuming af24hd will meet that need
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Gino A. Villarini]

Stephen, do you stock the 6 ghz radios?

From: Af > on behalf of 
Stephen Patrick 
>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 9:27 AM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

In 11GHz, the CableFree FOR3 would be well suited.
Depending on what channel allocation you are allowed - up to 112MHz channel 
widths are supported, with 1024QAM (gives 891Mbps full duplex)
For NA markets, 40, 60 & 80MHz are supported.
Widely deployed for ISPs in several markets.
Both Standard and High Power versions are fully shipping.
Copper and Fibre interface versions available.
www.cablefree.net/for3

Best regards
Stephen




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On 28 November 2017 at 21:28, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this to get 
to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas

I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity 
utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas

Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and putting 
that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth into the 
core of our network just seems like moving backward.

before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the SAF 
gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. Lumina is older and 
nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the units can be used.

on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 700 feet, 
so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short link solution. Im 
assuming af24hd will meet that need

Re: [AFMUG] 11 mile 11ghz gigabitish

[Stephen Patrick]

In 11GHz, the CableFree FOR3 would be well suited.
Depending on what channel allocation you are allowed - up to 112MHz channel
widths are supported, with 1024QAM (gives 891Mbps full duplex)
For NA markets, 40, 60 & 80MHz are supported.
Widely deployed for ISPs in several markets.
Both Standard and High Power versions are fully shipping.
Copper and Fibre interface versions available.
www.cablefree.net/for3

Best regards
Stephen

On 28 November 2017 at 21:28, Steve Jones  wrote:

> We have a phenomenal saf lumina link we get 366 out of. I can 2+0 this to
> get to 732. using the existing 3 and 4 foot antennas
>
> I wouldnt mind seeing a little more of our gigabit upstream connectivity
> utilized here, somewhere along the same price using the same antennas
>
> Im not at all impressed with the mimosa gear, its not full duplex and
> putting that much variable latency into the network bringing our bandwidth
> into the core of our network just seems like moving backward.
>
> before I give my blessing, for what its worth, to the boss to order the
> SAF gear, I just want to make sure there isnt a better option. Lumina is
> older and nearing EOL im guessing, we have other places the units can be
> used.
>
> on the same note, we bring this bandwidth up from the fiber by AF24 700
> feet, so probably should ask about a 24ghz (or anything) short link
> solution. Im assuming af24hd will meet that need
>