Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I talk about max achievable throughput of 802.11n ,that may be got in ideal conditions. It is obvious that noask gives more throughput then with ask in ideal ( for example in lab via coax cable ptp connection without collisions and interference ) conditions. I agree that in noisy environment using of proprietary protocol like Nstreme may give more stable link and higher throughput then standard protocol 802.11a/b/g/n due to it's some useful features, like packet aggregation and link adaptation. Does Airmax have simular features? Is it only noask ? Noask is acceptable when packet losses rate due to interference are very small. Throughput is not only one link parameter. Also packets losses rate(BER) , delays, jitter, MOS ( VoIP applications) and others are also important. Using of proprieatry protocol in 802.11 a/g/n units very often help to improve these link parameters. We carried out field test of standard and proprietary 802.11n systems in various LOS and nearLOS conditions. One of the conclusion thatNstreme ON in 802.11n is not able to improve link in case multipath fading interference, but Nstreme On in 802.11a in the same link really makes connection more stable then in standard 802.11a/n mode. Vyacheslav Vasilyev Unidata 2010/9/6 Scott Carullo > I'm not sure your assessment of UBNT not recommending to use airmax on PTP > as a general statement hold true. It is unlikely that they would have built > in a specific PTP noack mode into airmax configuration if it was their > suggestion not to use it. I use it on lots of links and it works very well. > > You are incorrect in saying airmax and nstream cannot increase throughput > in comparison with 802.11n. In the real world in the wild a lot of times it > is only airmax or nstream that will even let a link perform reliably, > regardless of what the textbook says. Not to mention it allows our > throughput to increase in contrast to your statement. > > > Scott Carullo > Technical Operations > 877-804-3001 x102 > > > > -- > *From*: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" > *Sent*: Sunday, September 05, 2010 3:50 PM > *To*: "WISPA General List" > > *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti > > > > > 2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves > >> On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev >> wrote: >> > >> What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? >> > Ubnt does not recomend to use Airmax On in ptp due to lower performance. > We did not test it. > Ubnt , MT and any other atheros 802.11n based products have aprox > equal max throughput in standard 802.11n mode. > But when airmax and nstreme are ON they have different performance. > Tecnically Airmax is polling ( round robin algorithm ) like nstreme or > turbocell/ outdoor router Proxim . Ubnt polling uses latest Atheros > chipset clock timing ( ubnt calls it "tdma" ) , that may be usefull only > in ptmp . > Nstreme 2 is Nstreme 1, that also uses clock of atheros chipset > So both airmax and Nstreme 1,2 can not increase max throughput in ptp in > comparison with standard 802.11n (hardware atheros aggregation On, 2 chains) > in ptp in ideal conditions( no interference). > Nstreme 1,2 is able to improve 802.11n link in comparison with standard > 802.11n ( Nstreme Off) mode in presence of interference or/and multipath > fading due to it's feature of link parameter adaptation according packets > losses rate. > I do not know is Airmax support link adaptation ( modulation ) or > not . I suppose -not yet. > > > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the > simular > > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet > size > > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > > using more powerfull h/w. > >> Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD >> TDMA >> driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was >> missing glue and needed >> a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only >> been a matter of getting >> 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the >> timing windows synced. >> > > Software TDMA Linux/freebsd implementation based on 802.11 chipset > hardware is separate issue . I think it may be useful in ptp and our test > showed promising results. With regards to ptmp IMHO it is not viable. There > is standard fixed TDMA BWA techhology called fixed wimax 802.16-2004/2009. > There is 802.16-2004 miniPCI cards - ASIC hardware TDMA implementation . > There is TDMA 802.16-2004 BS/CPE Linux based software. For what a lot of > pe
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
$300 bucks per day seems damn reasonable considering what it is. I'd be down with that. Bob- -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 1:40 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 14:15 -0700, Forbes Mercy wrote: > I keep adding filters as traffic presents itself but help and training > is very expensive and extraordinarily technical While I would disagree that training is "very expensive", I would have to agree that it is very technical in nature. My training sessions are normally under $300/day for students (not counting hotels/flights/etc.). > On my backhauls > when one Mikrotik goes down its not unusual for the foul traffic to > permeate throughout (yes I'm bridged) the network and take down other > Mikrotik's and often requires a drive to reboot then they work fine > again, irritating, yes but still great equipment. Training would be especially good if you could learn something that would keep you from having to roll a truck even once every 2 weeks. It wouldn't take long to pay for that. > Ubiquiti is a monster for power and throughput, it's menus are basic > but filters entry options are slim and limited to IP rather than by > protocol so some things sneak through that wouldn't with Mikrotik. This, unfortunately, is one "cost" of less expensive gear. FWIW, you have most of the same functionality available in both platforms, but it's just not in the GUI for UBNT. > I promised an analogy so here goes, I feel from experience that > Mikrotik is the Linux of equipment, you better know what you're doing > when you buy it. UBNT is linux, too. :-) > Ubiquiti is like Windows, pretty GUI driven, and simplified at a > reasonable cost. You have access to iptables and more in the ssh/telnet interface with Ubiquiti. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I use No Ack only on links longer than 5 miles. I had problems with No Ack at shorter distances. But I put AirMax on it all, not just because it's TDMA but because it will screw with those trying to hack into it. Bob- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 6:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti I'm not sure your assessment of UBNT not recommending to use airmax on PTP as a general statement hold true. It is unlikely that they would have built in a specific PTP noack mode into airmax configuration if it was their suggestion not to use it. I use it on lots of links and it works very well. You are incorrect in saying airmax and nstream cannot increase throughput in comparison with 802.11n. In the real world in the wild a lot of times it is only airmax or nstream that will even let a link perform reliably, regardless of what the textbook says. Not to mention it allows our throughput to increase in contrast to your statement. Scott Carullo Technical Operations 877-804-3001 x102 <http://www.flhsi.com/files/emaillogo.jpg> _ From: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 3:50 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti 2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev wrote: > What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? Ubnt does not recomend to use Airmax On in ptp due to lower performance. We did not test it. Ubnt , MT and any other atheros 802.11n based products have aprox equal max throughput in standard 802.11n mode. But when airmax and nstreme are ON they have different performance. Tecnically Airmax is polling ( round robin algorithm ) like nstreme or turbocell/ outdoor router Proxim . Ubnt polling uses latest Atheros chipset clock timing ( ubnt calls it "tdma" ) , that may be usefull only in ptmp . Nstreme 2 is Nstreme 1, that also uses clock of atheros chipset So both airmax and Nstreme 1,2 can not increase max throughput in ptp in comparison with standard 802.11n (hardware atheros aggregation On, 2 chains) in ptp in ideal conditions( no interference). Nstreme 1,2 is able to improve 802.11n link in comparison with standard 802.11n ( Nstreme Off) mode in presence of interference or/and multipath fading due to it's feature of link parameter adaptation according packets losses rate. I do not know is Airmax support link adaptation ( modulation ) or not . I suppose -not yet. > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the simular > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > using more powerfull h/w. Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD TDMA driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was missing glue and needed a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only been a matter of getting 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the timing windows synced. Software TDMA Linux/freebsd implementation based on 802.11 chipset hardware is separate issue . I think it may be useful in ptp and our test showed promising results. With regards to ptmp IMHO it is not viable. There is standard fixed TDMA BWA techhology called fixed wimax 802.16-2004/2009. There is 802.16-2004 miniPCI cards - ASIC hardware TDMA implementation . There is TDMA 802.16-2004 BS/CPE Linux based software. For what a lot of people want full software TDMA implemenation? Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Today I wondered the same thing about the noack. My experience running a very short distance (1000 yards) PtP using two NS5M's with the TX turned almost all the way down, in the jungle where there is no interference what so ever is that there's no speed gain in using Airmax. But soon the PtP will become a PtMP and I'm expecting the TDMA of Airmax to outperform 802.11n. Greg On Sep 5, 2010, at 5:57 PM, Scott Carullo wrote: > I'm not sure your assessment of UBNT not recommending to use airmax on PTP as > a general statement hold true. It is unlikely that they would have built in > a specific PTP noack mode into airmax configuration if it was their > suggestion not to use it. I use it on lots of links and it works very well. > > You are incorrect in saying airmax and nstream cannot increase throughput in > comparison with 802.11n. In the real world in the wild a lot of times it is > only airmax or nstream that will even let a link perform reliably, regardless > of what the textbook says. Not to mention it allows our throughput to > increase in contrast to your statement. > > Scott Carullo > Technical Operations > 877-804-3001 x102 > > > > > From: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" > Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 3:50 PM > To: "WISPA General List" > Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti > > > > 2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves > On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev > wrote: > > > What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? > Ubnt does not recomend to use Airmax On in ptp due to lower performance. We > did not test it. > Ubnt , MT and any other atheros 802.11n based products have aprox equal > max throughput in standard 802.11n mode. > But when airmax and nstreme are ON they have different performance. > Tecnically Airmax is polling ( round robin algorithm ) like nstreme or > turbocell/ outdoor router Proxim . Ubnt polling uses latest Atheros chipset > clock timing ( ubnt calls it "tdma" ) , that may be usefull only in ptmp . > Nstreme 2 is Nstreme 1, that also uses clock of atheros chipset > So both airmax and Nstreme 1,2 can not increase max throughput in ptp in > comparison with standard 802.11n (hardware atheros aggregation On, 2 chains) > in ptp in ideal conditions( no interference). > Nstreme 1,2 is able to improve 802.11n link in comparison with standard > 802.11n ( Nstreme Off) mode in presence of interference or/and multipath > fading due to it's feature of link parameter adaptation according packets > losses rate. > I do not know is Airmax support link adaptation ( modulation ) or not . I > suppose -not yet. > > > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the > simular > > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size > > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > > using more powerfull h/w. > Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD > TDMA > driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was > missing glue and needed > a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only > been a matter of getting > 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the > timing windows synced. > > Software TDMA Linux/freebsd implementation based on 802.11 chipset > hardware is separate issue . I think it may be useful in ptp and our test > showed promising results. With regards to ptmp IMHO it is not viable. There > is standard fixed TDMA BWA techhology called fixed wimax 802.16-2004/2009. > There is 802.16-2004 miniPCI cards - ASIC hardware TDMA implementation . > There is TDMA 802.16-2004 BS/CPE Linux based software. For what a lot of > people want full software TDMA implemenation? > Vyacheslav Vasilyev > UNIDATA > Fixed BWA solution > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I'm not sure your assessment of UBNT not recommending to use airmax on PTP as a general statement hold true. It is unlikely that they would have built in a specific PTP noack mode into airmax configuration if it was their suggestion not to use it. I use it on lots of links and it works very well. You are incorrect in saying airmax and nstream cannot increase throughput in comparison with 802.11n. In the real world in the wild a lot of times it is only airmax or nstream that will even let a link perform reliably, regardless of what the textbook says. Not to mention it allows our throughput to increase in contrast to your statement. Scott Carullo Technical Operations 877-804-3001 x102 From: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 3:50 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti 2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev wrote: > What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? Ubnt does not recomend to use Airmax On in ptp due to lower performance. We did not test it. Ubnt , MT and any other atheros 802.11n based products have aprox equal max throughput in standard 802.11n mode. But when airmax and nstreme are ON they have different performance. Tecnically Airmax is polling ( round robin algorithm ) like nstreme or turbocell/ outdoor router Proxim . Ubnt polling uses latest Atheros chipset clock timing ( ubnt calls it "tdma" ) , that may be usefull only in ptmp . Nstreme 2 is Nstreme 1, that also uses clock of atheros chipset So both airmax and Nstreme 1,2 can not increase max throughput in ptp in comparison with standard 802.11n (hardware atheros aggregation On, 2 chains) in ptp in ideal conditions( no interference). Nstreme 1,2 is able to improve 802.11n link in comparison with standard 802.11n ( Nstreme Off) mode in presence of interference or/and multipath fading due to it's feature of link parameter adaptation according packets losses rate. I do not know is Airmax support link adaptation ( modulation ) or not . I suppose -not yet. > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the simular > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > using more powerfull h/w. Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD TDMA driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was missing glue and needed a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only been a matter of getting 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the timing windows synced. Software TDMA Linux/freebsd implementation based on 802.11 chipset hardware is separate issue . I think it may be useful in ptp and our test showed promising results. With regards to ptmp IMHO it is not viable. There is standard fixed TDMA BWA techhology called fixed wimax 802.16-2004/2009. There is 802.16-2004 miniPCI cards - ASIC hardware TDMA implementation . There is TDMA 802.16-2004 BS/CPE Linux based software. For what a lot of people want full software TDMA implemenation? Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves > On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev > wrote: > > > What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? > Ubnt does not recomend to use Airmax On in ptp due to lower performance. We did not test it. Ubnt , MT and any other atheros 802.11n based products have aprox equal max throughput in standard 802.11n mode. But when airmax and nstreme are ON they have different performance. Tecnically Airmax is polling ( round robin algorithm ) like nstreme or turbocell/ outdoor router Proxim . Ubnt polling uses latest Atheros chipset clock timing ( ubnt calls it "tdma" ) , that may be usefull only in ptmp . Nstreme 2 is Nstreme 1, that also uses clock of atheros chipset So both airmax and Nstreme 1,2 can not increase max throughput in ptp in comparison with standard 802.11n (hardware atheros aggregation On, 2 chains) in ptp in ideal conditions( no interference). Nstreme 1,2 is able to improve 802.11n link in comparison with standard 802.11n ( Nstreme Off) mode in presence of interference or/and multipath fading due to it's feature of link parameter adaptation according packets losses rate. I do not know is Airmax support link adaptation ( modulation ) or not . I suppose -not yet. > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the simular > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > using more powerfull h/w. > Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD > TDMA > driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was > missing glue and needed > a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only > been a matter of getting > 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the > timing windows synced. > Software TDMA Linux/freebsd implementation based on 802.11 chipset hardware is separate issue . I think it may be useful in ptp and our test showed promising results. With regards to ptmp IMHO it is not viable. There is standard fixed TDMA BWA techhology called fixed wimax 802.16-2004/2009. There is 802.16-2004 miniPCI cards - ASIC hardware TDMA implementation . There is TDMA 802.16-2004 BS/CPE Linux based software. For what a lot of people want full software TDMA implemenation? Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 14:15 -0700, Forbes Mercy wrote: > I keep adding filters as traffic presents itself but help and > training is very expensive and extraordinarily technical While I would disagree that training is "very expensive", I would have to agree that it is very technical in nature. My training sessions are normally under $300/day for students (not counting hotels/flights/etc.). > On my backhauls > when one Mikrotik goes down its not unusual for the foul traffic to > permeate throughout (yes I'm bridged) the network and take down other > Mikrotik's and often requires a drive to reboot then they work fine > again, irritating, yes but still great equipment. Training would be especially good if you could learn something that would keep you from having to roll a truck even once every 2 weeks. It wouldn't take long to pay for that. > Ubiquiti is a monster for power and throughput, it's menus are basic > but filters entry options are slim and limited to IP rather than by > protocol so some things sneak through that wouldn't with Mikrotik. This, unfortunately, is one "cost" of less expensive gear. FWIW, you have most of the same functionality available in both platforms, but it's just not in the GUI for UBNT. > I promised an analogy so here goes, I feel from experience that Mikrotik > is the Linux of equipment, you better know what you're doing when you > buy it. UBNT is linux, too. :-) > Ubiquiti is like Windows, pretty GUI driven, and simplified at a > reasonable cost. You have access to iptables and more in the ssh/telnet interface with Ubiquiti. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev wrote: > > 2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves >> >> On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev >> wrote: >> Airmax was on or off? What were the single direction speeds for each? > > In all Rocket ptp link tests Airmax is off. > Rocket "In comparison we tested in lab the same board RB411AH with CM9 802.11a card ( Nstreme On, packet aggregation frame policy is 3200). In this mode unit has 39K pps. In Nstreme off mode this unit has only 4K pps. " What is a Rockets PPS with airmax on? > -max simplex ( one direction) throughput BW 20 Mhz > -( udp,1470), UL/DL= 75.3/78.4 mbps > -(udp,64 bytes) UL/DL= 11.4/12.3 mbps > Max simplex throughput (udp, 1470) BW 40 MHz > ( udp,1470), UL/DL= 95.5/95.5 mbps - limited by 100 BaseT > -(udp,64 bytes) UL/DL= 7.6./8.6 mbps > RB411, MPLS; 5GHz-only-N; Nstreme OFF Polling disable,CSMA enable > showed aprox the same results. > Nstreme ON in 802.11n mode gives worse results at small packet traffic. >> >> > We noticed that internal bandwidth test ( between wireless interfaces ) >> > at >> > small packets shows much higher throughput than via Ethernet+wireless. >> MT, Ubnt, or both? With or with out NStream/NStream2/Airmax? Running >> as a bridge, a router, WDS? > > All MIPS platform (ubnt, mt ) and also we tested Alix (x86) have problem of > poor performance at small packet traffic between ethernet-wireless, > wireless-wireless in any mode ( bridge, routing..Nstremeairmax, ) that > cases low pps and problems with passing multiservice trafffc( data, voip, > p2p-utorrent etc). > Problem is connected with MAC802.11a/b/g and also 8022.11n implemetation. > Using more powerfull CPU does not resolve it. > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the simular > platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size > ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by > using more powerfull h/w. Ive read up on Sams work and have been very impressed. I looked at the BSD TDMA driver back in late 08 or early 09 (been a while), when I did it was missing glue and needed a bit of polish. It looked like adding GPS sync to it would have only been a matter of getting 2 or more AP's to hold then start on the same signal and keep the timing windows synced. > Vyacheslav Vasilyev > UNIDATA > Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
> > We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the > simular platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small > packet size ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be > improved by using more powerfull h/w. > > Sorry freebsd8 tdma Sam 802.11a implementation was tested with Wiston DCMA-82 (CM12 ) . > Vyacheslav Vasilyev > UNIDATA > Fixed BWA solution > >> > >> >> > WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> > http://signup.wispa.org/ >> > >> >> > >> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> > >> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > >> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
2010/9/5 Jeromie Reeves > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev > wrote: > Airmax was on or off? What were the single direction speeds for each? > In all Rocket ptp link tests Airmax is off. Rocket -max simplex ( one direction) throughput BW 20 Mhz -( udp,1470), UL/DL= 75.3/78.4 mbps -(udp,64 bytes) UL/DL= 11.4/12.3 mbps Max simplex throughput (udp, 1470) BW 40 MHz ( udp,1470), UL/DL= 95.5/95.5 mbps - limited by 100 BaseT -(udp,64 bytes) UL/DL= 7.6./8.6 mbps RB411, MPLS; 5GHz-only-N; Nstreme OFF Polling disable,CSMA enable showed aprox the same results. Nstreme ON in 802.11n mode gives worse results at small packet traffic. > > We noticed that internal bandwidth test ( between wireless interfaces ) > at > > small packets shows much higher throughput than via Ethernet+wireless. > MT, Ubnt, or both? With or with out NStream/NStream2/Airmax? Running > as a bridge, a router, WDS? > All MIPS platform (ubnt, mt ) and also we tested Alix (x86) have problem of poor performance at small packet traffic between ethernet-wireless, wireless-wireless in any mode ( bridge, routing..Nstremeairmax, ) that cases low pps and problems with passing multiservice trafffc( data, voip, p2p-utorrent etc). Problem is connected with MAC802.11a/b/g and also 8022.11n implemetation. Using more powerfull CPU does not resolve it. We tested TDMA freebsd Sam Lefler MAC 802.11a implementation .at the simular platform ( Alix, CM9) . It also has poor throughput at small packet size ( but much better then standard 802,11a) and it is may be improved by using more powerfull h/w. Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I hate to tell you your tests are flawed... I have in excess of 70MB TCP passing between two towers 30 miles apart with Rocket M5 and 20Mhz channels. If you only got 39Mbs you have a problem and it isn't the radios. That being said, I have radios running MT with N and 20Mhx channel that double your throughput tests live on towers too... Scott Carullo Technical Operations 877-804-3001 x102 From: "Vyacheslav Vasilyev" Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 5:38 PM To: fai...@snappydsl.net, "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti We have tested RB 411AH, (AR7161 680MHz, RAM 64 MB), miniPCI R52Hn (AR9220 802.11n, OS Mikrotik v.4.6 and UNBT Rocket M5 (Atheros MIPS 24KC, 400MHz) 1) LAB tests (connection via coax cable with attenuators) -max duplex throughput (iperf udp, 1470 bytes payload ) in 20 MHz channel bandwidth, MIMO 2x2 Tx/Rx Rate 130/130 of RB/R52Hn ( Nstreme Off ) is 49 Mbps duplex , Rocket -39 Mbps - max duplex throughput at 64 bytes UDP packet size is reduced for RB to 6.8 Mbps duplex, Rocket - 5.7 Mbps duplex. Throughput at small packets size of both devices is the same in 20 , 40 MHz channel bandwidth, and does not depend on using 1 or 2 chains. We noticed that internal bandwidth test ( between wireless interfaces ) at small packets shows much higher throughput than via Ethernet+wireless. - RB pps is higher than Rocket and is equal approx 28K ( in + out) in lab. Rocket has about 24K. Max pps does not depends on channel size 20 or 40, 1 or 2 chains, In comparison we tested in lab the same board RB411AH with CM9 802.11a card ( Nstreme On, packet aggregation frame policy is 3200). In this mode unit has 39K pps. In Nstreme off mode this unit has only 4K pps. Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Vyacheslav Vasilyev wrote: > We have tested RB 411AH, (AR7161 680MHz, RAM 64 MB), miniPCI R52Hn (AR9220 > 802.11n, OS Mikrotik v.4.6 and UNBT Rocket M5 (Atheros MIPS 24KC, 400MHz) > > 1) LAB tests (connection via coax cable with attenuators) > > -max duplex throughput (iperf udp, 1470 bytes payload ) in 20 MHz channel > bandwidth, MIMO 2x2 Tx/Rx Rate 130/130 of RB/R52Hn ( Nstreme Off ) is 49 > Mbps duplex , Rocket -39 Mbps Airmax was on or off? What were the single direction speeds for each? > > - max duplex throughput at 64 bytes UDP packet size is reduced for RB > to 6.8 Mbps duplex, Rocket - 5.7 Mbps duplex. Throughput at small packets > size of both devices is the same in 20 , 40 MHz channel bandwidth, and > does not depend on using 1 or 2 chains. > > We noticed that internal bandwidth test ( between wireless interfaces ) at > small packets shows much higher throughput than via Ethernet+wireless. MT, Ubnt, or both? With or with out NStream/NStream2/Airmax? Running as a bridge, a router, WDS? > > - RB pps is higher than Rocket and is equal approx 28K ( in + out) in lab. > Rocket has about 24K. Max pps does not depends on channel size 20 or 40, 1 > or 2 chains, > > In comparison we tested in lab the same board RB411AH with CM9 802.11a > card ( Nstreme On, packet aggregation frame policy is 3200). In this mode > unit has 39K pps. In Nstreme off mode this unit has only 4K pps. > > Vyacheslav Vasilyev > > UNIDATA > > Fixed BWA solution > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
We have tested RB 411AH, (AR7161 680MHz, RAM 64 MB), miniPCI R52Hn (AR9220 802.11n, OS Mikrotik v.4.6 and UNBT Rocket M5 (Atheros MIPS 24KC, 400MHz) 1) LAB tests (connection via coax cable with attenuators) -max duplex throughput (iperf udp, 1470 bytes payload ) in 20 MHz channel bandwidth, MIMO 2x2 Tx/Rx Rate 130/130 of RB/R52Hn ( Nstreme Off ) is 49 Mbps duplex , Rocket -39 Mbps - max duplex throughput at 64 bytes UDP packet size is reduced for RB to 6.8 Mbps duplex, Rocket - 5.7 Mbps duplex. Throughput at small packets size of both devices is the same in 20 , 40 MHz channel bandwidth, and does not depend on using 1 or 2 chains. We noticed that internal bandwidth test ( between wireless interfaces ) at small packets shows much higher throughput than via Ethernet+wireless. - RB pps is higher than Rocket and is equal approx 28K ( in + out) in lab. Rocket has about 24K. Max pps does not depends on channel size 20 or 40, 1 or 2 chains, In comparison we tested in lab the same board RB411AH with CM9 802.11a card ( Nstreme On, packet aggregation frame policy is 3200). In this mode unit has 39K pps. In Nstreme off mode this unit has only 4K pps. Vyacheslav Vasilyev UNIDATA Fixed BWA solution WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
? -- fmen...@xittel.net On 2010-09-04, at 15:41, "Robert West" wrote: > Be lucky you didn't throw Motorola in the mix.. > > > > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz > Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 11:53 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti > > Got to love this, a simple question about a comparison of 802.11n > performance on the two platforms turns into a tirade of primary school > 'pissing contest' ! > > No ONE is trying to dis any platform... and hopefully we all are mature > enough to understand that ... > > Mikrotik is a great routing platform that can do Wireless Links, While > the UBNT is a great Wireless Radios that can do some routing.. > > Folks that is apples and oranges > > Myself, I am greedy... I am looking for MORE PLATFORMS that can do > 802.11n MIMO Wireless Links... I don't care if they are MADE BY UBNT or > Mikrotik or Suzuki or commissioned by local WALMART I need a product > line that is STABLE, Performs WELL, and Provides a good ROI. > > Let's get back to the ORIGINAL POINT of DISCUSSION. > WHO HAS Mikrotik 802.11n Deployments, which are running STABLE (key > emphasis on 802.11n), and PERFORMING WELL ? What type of Antenna's are > you Using ?and is there anyone who has done some comparison on the two > platforms ? > > Can we please have a 'To the point' discussion without the snide remarks ? > > Thanks > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > > > On 9/4/2010 11:02 AM, Travis Johnson wrote: >> To each their own... we use 100% MT on our backbone (over 70 >> production links, some up to 73 miles). We are fully routed (even on >> each wireless hop), so using MT works great because I don't have to have >> a separate router like if I used UBNT. I have full telnet, speed test, >> packet sniffing, and routing protocols at EVERY wireless hop (we run > OSPF). >> >> And MT didn't build the case that holds an MT radio on a UBNT dish... >> that's a 3rd party thing. I guess it's hilarious that UBNT made a 2ft >> dish because Pac Wireless has had a 2ft dish for 6+ years? :) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> On 9/4/2010 8:17 AM, Ralph wrote: >>> Yes we are using Ubiquiti instead of Mikrotik. >>> We always have, because we will not build our own uncertified gear. If it >>> comes down to an interference issue we do not want the FCC fine or the >>> stigma of being nailed for violating FCC rules. >>> >>> That said, we like the routerboards pretty well for use at our hotspots, >>> with certified radios. The routerboards have a lot of features. >>> >>> As far as UBNT goes, the person who said Airmax is a game changer is >>> correct. >>> >>> We are sometimes even able to use UBNT in situations where we might have >>> used an Orthagon (sic?) >>> We can use narrower channels and get more bandwidth >>> When (and I'm sure it is coming) timing/synch becomes available, it will >>> frost the cake. >>> The support organization listens to users and takes suggestions and > doesn't >>> break more things than it fixes. >>> >>> And finally- I think it is absolutely hilarious that the latest MT >>> innovation is a device that leverages something that UBNT already > developed >>> (this routerboard that snaps on a UBNT dish thingie). Of course I would > snap >>> on a Rocket M5 instead- it has an FCC sticker (ducking). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> Data Technology Said: I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti > AirMax >>> Rocket now >>> instead of Mikrotik. >>> >>> I would like to know how they compare: >>> 1. As a point to point link. >>> 2. As an access point. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> > > >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Be lucky you didn't throw Motorola in the mix.. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 11:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti Got to love this, a simple question about a comparison of 802.11n performance on the two platforms turns into a tirade of primary school 'pissing contest' ! No ONE is trying to dis any platform... and hopefully we all are mature enough to understand that ... Mikrotik is a great routing platform that can do Wireless Links, While the UBNT is a great Wireless Radios that can do some routing.. Folks that is apples and oranges Myself, I am greedy... I am looking for MORE PLATFORMS that can do 802.11n MIMO Wireless Links... I don't care if they are MADE BY UBNT or Mikrotik or Suzuki or commissioned by local WALMART I need a product line that is STABLE, Performs WELL, and Provides a good ROI. Let's get back to the ORIGINAL POINT of DISCUSSION. WHO HAS Mikrotik 802.11n Deployments, which are running STABLE (key emphasis on 802.11n), and PERFORMING WELL ? What type of Antenna's are you Using ?and is there anyone who has done some comparison on the two platforms ? Can we please have a 'To the point' discussion without the snide remarks ? Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom On 9/4/2010 11:02 AM, Travis Johnson wrote: >To each their own... we use 100% MT on our backbone (over 70 > production links, some up to 73 miles). We are fully routed (even on > each wireless hop), so using MT works great because I don't have to have > a separate router like if I used UBNT. I have full telnet, speed test, > packet sniffing, and routing protocols at EVERY wireless hop (we run OSPF). > > And MT didn't build the case that holds an MT radio on a UBNT dish... > that's a 3rd party thing. I guess it's hilarious that UBNT made a 2ft > dish because Pac Wireless has had a 2ft dish for 6+ years? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > On 9/4/2010 8:17 AM, Ralph wrote: >> Yes we are using Ubiquiti instead of Mikrotik. >> We always have, because we will not build our own uncertified gear. If it >> comes down to an interference issue we do not want the FCC fine or the >> stigma of being nailed for violating FCC rules. >> >> That said, we like the routerboards pretty well for use at our hotspots, >> with certified radios. The routerboards have a lot of features. >> >> As far as UBNT goes, the person who said Airmax is a game changer is >> correct. >> >> We are sometimes even able to use UBNT in situations where we might have >> used an Orthagon (sic?) >> We can use narrower channels and get more bandwidth >> When (and I'm sure it is coming) timing/synch becomes available, it will >> frost the cake. >> The support organization listens to users and takes suggestions and doesn't >> break more things than it fixes. >> >> And finally- I think it is absolutely hilarious that the latest MT >> innovation is a device that leverages something that UBNT already developed >> (this routerboard that snaps on a UBNT dish thingie). Of course I would snap >> on a Rocket M5 instead- it has an FCC sticker (ducking). >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> Data Technology Said: I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax >> Rocket now >> instead of Mikrotik. >> >> I would like to know how they compare: >>1. As a point to point link. >>2. As an access point. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I am 99.9% all UBNT now. The UBNT are quick, plug and play. Cheaper to stock, antennas integrated into the CPE give a clean look. Signals are steady and my ROI is zero day. The 411AH are fantastic but for now I'd use them for a "weird" install where I need additional config features. The ONLY issue I have is firmware lockups. I still get the occasional Rocket or Bullet not responding. Not as much as before but still an issue. For the plastic case, I use the double shielded cable with static drain and shielded connectors. Have never had an issue with the grounding. Lucky maybe, who can tell! Bob- -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Data Technology Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 4:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now instead of Mikrotik. I would like to know how they compare: 1. As a point to point link. 2. As an access point. Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet surge protection in the enclosure. What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and reliability of Rockets? Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. Thanks and have a great Labor Day. LaRoy McCann Data Technology WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I like MT for APs but Ubnt for CPEs and ptp. On Sep 4, 2010 11:52 AM, "Faisal Imtiaz" wrote: Got to love this, a simple question about a comparison of 802.11n performance on the two platforms turns into a tirade of primary school 'pissing contest' ! No ONE is trying to dis any platform... and hopefully we all are mature enough to understand that ... Mikrotik is a great routing platform that can do Wireless Links, While the UBNT is a great Wireless Radios that can do some routing.. Folks that is apples and oranges Myself, I am greedy... I am looking for MORE PLATFORMS that can do 802.11n MIMO Wireless Links... I don't care if they are MADE BY UBNT or Mikrotik or Suzuki or commissioned by local WALMART I need a product line that is STABLE, Performs WELL, and Provides a good ROI. Let's get back to the ORIGINAL POINT of DISCUSSION. WHO HAS Mikrotik 802.11n Deployments, which are running STABLE (key emphasis on 802.11n), and PERFORMING WELL ? What type of Antenna's are you Using ?and is there anyone who has done some comparison on the two platforms ? Can we please have a 'To the point' discussion without the snide remarks ? Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom On 9/4/2010 11:02 AM, Travis Johnson wrote: > To each their own... we use 100% MT on our backbone... WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Got to love this, a simple question about a comparison of 802.11n performance on the two platforms turns into a tirade of primary school 'pissing contest' ! No ONE is trying to dis any platform... and hopefully we all are mature enough to understand that ... Mikrotik is a great routing platform that can do Wireless Links, While the UBNT is a great Wireless Radios that can do some routing.. Folks that is apples and oranges Myself, I am greedy... I am looking for MORE PLATFORMS that can do 802.11n MIMO Wireless Links... I don't care if they are MADE BY UBNT or Mikrotik or Suzuki or commissioned by local WALMART I need a product line that is STABLE, Performs WELL, and Provides a good ROI. Let's get back to the ORIGINAL POINT of DISCUSSION. WHO HAS Mikrotik 802.11n Deployments, which are running STABLE (key emphasis on 802.11n), and PERFORMING WELL ? What type of Antenna's are you Using ?and is there anyone who has done some comparison on the two platforms ? Can we please have a 'To the point' discussion without the snide remarks ? Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom On 9/4/2010 11:02 AM, Travis Johnson wrote: >To each their own... we use 100% MT on our backbone (over 70 > production links, some up to 73 miles). We are fully routed (even on > each wireless hop), so using MT works great because I don't have to have > a separate router like if I used UBNT. I have full telnet, speed test, > packet sniffing, and routing protocols at EVERY wireless hop (we run OSPF). > > And MT didn't build the case that holds an MT radio on a UBNT dish... > that's a 3rd party thing. I guess it's hilarious that UBNT made a 2ft > dish because Pac Wireless has had a 2ft dish for 6+ years? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > On 9/4/2010 8:17 AM, Ralph wrote: >> Yes we are using Ubiquiti instead of Mikrotik. >> We always have, because we will not build our own uncertified gear. If it >> comes down to an interference issue we do not want the FCC fine or the >> stigma of being nailed for violating FCC rules. >> >> That said, we like the routerboards pretty well for use at our hotspots, >> with certified radios. The routerboards have a lot of features. >> >> As far as UBNT goes, the person who said Airmax is a game changer is >> correct. >> >> We are sometimes even able to use UBNT in situations where we might have >> used an Orthagon (sic?) >> We can use narrower channels and get more bandwidth >> When (and I'm sure it is coming) timing/synch becomes available, it will >> frost the cake. >> The support organization listens to users and takes suggestions and doesn't >> break more things than it fixes. >> >> And finally- I think it is absolutely hilarious that the latest MT >> innovation is a device that leverages something that UBNT already developed >> (this routerboard that snaps on a UBNT dish thingie). Of course I would snap >> on a Rocket M5 instead- it has an FCC sticker (ducking). >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> Data Technology Said: I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax >> Rocket now >> instead of Mikrotik. >> >> I would like to know how they compare: >>1. As a point to point link. >>2. As an access point. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
To each their own... we use 100% MT on our backbone (over 70 production links, some up to 73 miles). We are fully routed (even on each wireless hop), so using MT works great because I don't have to have a separate router like if I used UBNT. I have full telnet, speed test, packet sniffing, and routing protocols at EVERY wireless hop (we run OSPF). And MT didn't build the case that holds an MT radio on a UBNT dish... that's a 3rd party thing. I guess it's hilarious that UBNT made a 2ft dish because Pac Wireless has had a 2ft dish for 6+ years? :) Travis Microserv On 9/4/2010 8:17 AM, Ralph wrote: > Yes we are using Ubiquiti instead of Mikrotik. > We always have, because we will not build our own uncertified gear. If it > comes down to an interference issue we do not want the FCC fine or the > stigma of being nailed for violating FCC rules. > > That said, we like the routerboards pretty well for use at our hotspots, > with certified radios. The routerboards have a lot of features. > > As far as UBNT goes, the person who said Airmax is a game changer is > correct. > > We are sometimes even able to use UBNT in situations where we might have > used an Orthagon (sic?) > We can use narrower channels and get more bandwidth > When (and I'm sure it is coming) timing/synch becomes available, it will > frost the cake. > The support organization listens to users and takes suggestions and doesn't > break more things than it fixes. > > And finally- I think it is absolutely hilarious that the latest MT > innovation is a device that leverages something that UBNT already developed > (this routerboard that snaps on a UBNT dish thingie). Of course I would snap > on a Rocket M5 instead- it has an FCC sticker (ducking). > > > > > -Original Message- > Data Technology Said: I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax > Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
And even then, it won't be backward compatible with everything else in the field. And, you will have to "set" the up/down percentage, etc. just like with Canopy... it can't be a "free for all" and still have sync. Doesn't work like that. ;) Travis Microserv On 9/4/2010 8:29 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: > Exactly Maybe with the M radios > > Sent from my Motorola Startac... > > > On Sep 4, 2010, at 10:19 AM, "Travis Johnson" wrote: > >> Won't happen... at least not with the current radios. >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> >> On 9/3/2010 9:50 PM, Robert West wrote: >>> UBNT + GPS?!!! >>> >>> Stop it! You're making me think that there may be a brighter future after >>> all! >>> >>> Shame on you for causing me to dream yet again! >>> >>> Bob- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message- >>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On >>> Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves >>> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:28 PM >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti >>> >>> We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's >>> NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I >>> need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to >>> canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised >>> up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people >>> that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had >>> canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. >>> Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some >>> port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' >>> in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it >>> took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. >>> Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a >>> canopy ap. >>> I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. >>> If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical >>> condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go >>> away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, >>> or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other >>> games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: >>>> What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor >>> nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a >>> (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from >>> CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as >>> well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get >>> these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the >>> sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one >>> vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like >>> MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. >>>> Steve Barnes >>>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> -- >>>> -- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>&
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Exactly Maybe with the M radios Sent from my Motorola Startac... On Sep 4, 2010, at 10:19 AM, "Travis Johnson" wrote: > Won't happen... at least not with the current radios. > > Travis > Microserv > > > On 9/3/2010 9:50 PM, Robert West wrote: >> UBNT + GPS?!!! >> >> Stop it! You're making me think that there may be a brighter future after >> all! >> >> Shame on you for causing me to dream yet again! >> >> Bob- >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On >> Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves >> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:28 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti >> >> We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's >> NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I >> need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to >> canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised >> up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people >> that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had >> canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. >> Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some >> port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' >> in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it >> took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. >> Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a >> canopy ap. >> I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. >> If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical >> condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go >> away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, >> or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other >> games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: >>> What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor >> nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a >> (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from >> CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as >> well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get >> these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the >> sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one >> vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like >> MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. >>> Steve Barnes >>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -- >>> -- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Won't happen... at least not with the current radios. Travis Microserv On 9/3/2010 9:50 PM, Robert West wrote: > UBNT + GPS?!!! > > Stop it! You're making me think that there may be a brighter future after > all! > > Shame on you for causing me to dream yet again! > > Bob- > > > > > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves > Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:28 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti > > We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's > NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I > need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to > canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised > up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people > that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had > canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. > Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some > port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' > in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it > took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. > Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a > canopy ap. > I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. > If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical > condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go > away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, > or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other > games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. > > > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: >> What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor > nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a > (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from > CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as > well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get > these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the > sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one > vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like > MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. >> Steve Barnes >> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -- >> -- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
Yes we are using Ubiquiti instead of Mikrotik. We always have, because we will not build our own uncertified gear. If it comes down to an interference issue we do not want the FCC fine or the stigma of being nailed for violating FCC rules. That said, we like the routerboards pretty well for use at our hotspots, with certified radios. The routerboards have a lot of features. As far as UBNT goes, the person who said Airmax is a game changer is correct. We are sometimes even able to use UBNT in situations where we might have used an Orthagon (sic?) We can use narrower channels and get more bandwidth When (and I'm sure it is coming) timing/synch becomes available, it will frost the cake. The support organization listens to users and takes suggestions and doesn't break more things than it fixes. And finally- I think it is absolutely hilarious that the latest MT innovation is a device that leverages something that UBNT already developed (this routerboard that snaps on a UBNT dish thingie). Of course I would snap on a Rocket M5 instead- it has an FCC sticker (ducking). -Original Message- Data Technology Said: I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now instead of Mikrotik. I would like to know how they compare: 1. As a point to point link. 2. As an access point. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
NO! I will yell the dream from every tower! I suspect they could do GPS with a multiport USB device to make the timing and have all APs sync to it. After reading a bit about the BSD TDMA software I am pretty sure this is technically possible. Not having a great in-depth understanding of the Atheros SoC's and the HAL in use, I could just be dreaming. Even if it meant a new AP, if the existing CPE worked with a firmware upgrade they would be sitting on silver plated gold (and so would the people using it). mmm, if only i had a gnu radio with a airmax load on it, I would lose my self for weeks. On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Robert West wrote: > UBNT + GPS?!!! > > Stop it! You're making me think that there may be a brighter future after > all! > > Shame on you for causing me to dream yet again! > > Bob- > > > > > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves > Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:28 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti > > We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's > NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I > need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to > canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised > up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people > that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had > canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. > Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some > port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' > in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it > took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. > Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a > canopy ap. > I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. > If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical > condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go > away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, > or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other > games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. > > > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: >> What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor > nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a > (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from > CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as > well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get > these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the > sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one > vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like > MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. >> >> Steve Barnes >> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -- >> -- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I did not mean to sound like i was saying anything bad about MT. Their NStream simply did not work for me and I did not have time to speed weeks working it out. I love my MT firewalls. I have two issues with the setup, once a month or two, DNS 'goes loopy' and I ahve to reboot the router. This also runs my core hotspot, which reaches a point where it also is a little drunk. Both problems likely have been fixed in a newer version (this is 3.30), but "if it is not too broken, do not fix it", and 3.30 was the first very stable mlppp release. I to am in love with the rockets. Airmax is a game changer. I can pull 50mb at a few miles off my main setup. That is changing what I do and where I will be going and offering. I do need to get around to snagging some M365's and free up some AP space. On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 8:53 PM, RickG wrote: > I have nothing bad to say about Mikrotik as my RB1000 firewall runs without > complaint. I also have a tower in the forest running an RB433AH with an XR9 > radio that I never hear from. LOL, that reminds me of an old saying, only > I'll amend it some: If a radio in the forest fails, does anyone hear it? > For backhaul links, my RocketM5's in PTP mode (no ack) and Airmax kick butt! > Best thing I ever did to my network! For AP's, just keep in mind that the M > radios dont like legacy CPE. So, I continue to upgrade CPE first then the > tower AP's, in that order. :) > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >> >> I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now >> instead of Mikrotik. >> >> I would like to know how they compare: >> 1. As a point to point link. >> 2. As an access point. >> >> Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for >> cpe. >> >> I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about >> Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will >> be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the >> amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. >> >> I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. >> I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards >> in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I >> have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the >> Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet >> surge protection in the enclosure. >> >> What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and >> reliability of Rockets? >> >> Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. >> >> Thanks and have a great Labor Day. >> >> LaRoy McCann >> Data Technology >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I have nothing bad to say about Mikrotik as my RB1000 firewall runs without complaint. I also have a tower in the forest running an RB433AH with an XR9 radio that I never hear from. LOL, that reminds me of an old saying, only I'll amend it some: If a radio in the forest fails, does anyone hear it? For backhaul links, my RocketM5's in PTP mode (no ack) and Airmax kick butt! Best thing I ever did to my network! For AP's, just keep in mind that the M radios dont like legacy CPE. So, I continue to upgrade CPE first then the tower AP's, in that order. :) On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: > I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for > cpe. > > I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about > Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will > be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the > amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. > > I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. > I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards > in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I > have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the > Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet > surge protection in the enclosure. > > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? > > Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. > > Thanks and have a great Labor Day. > > LaRoy McCann > Data Technology > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
UBNT + GPS?!!! Stop it! You're making me think that there may be a brighter future after all! Shame on you for causing me to dream yet again! Bob- -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a canopy ap. I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: > What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. > > Steve Barnes > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > > > -- > -- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -- > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
We are already there. I am firmly locked into Ubnt airmax. I tried MT's NStream, it did not work well for me. I am seeing enough 5ghz noise that I need airmax (or something like it). I was "this" close to going back to canopy only because I knew that while slow, it would work. If moto had wised up and dropped the price of the AP's, I would have, but they want people that are making 100 and 500 pack orders, not 10's and 20's. Mind you, I had canopy back in Nehalem days of 01. Days were good back then and got better when they fixed the NAT, added some port filters, and a few tweaks. Right till they closed the SM--> AP 'hole' in the firmware (gotta love check boxes and hidden web pages). After that it took some creative firmwares to do it, and they sniffed that one out too. Everything i've heard about Airmax says it will stand toe to toe with a canopy ap. I am glad airmax came when it did, and ubnts 900 is crazy affordable. If it works half as well in 900 as it does in 5ghz, I will have a medical condition called 'more then happy'. I have little fear that Ubnt will go away over night, or start changing the prices of gear like some vendors do, or suddenly changing the vendor/dealer relationships, or any number of other games. They just need to step up on delivery capabilities and GPS. On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: > What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor nstreame > 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a (to me the > only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from CPE's to the XR2 > that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as well and some have a > bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get these vendors to one day > work and make this a standard. If not all the sudden we will have a market > that requires you to standardize 100% on one vendor alone. And that vendor > will have you hook line and sinker (like MOTO). I like my cross vendor > options. > > Steve Barnes > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
What I wish is a standardized Linux TDMA mechanisim. Not airmax nor nstreame 2, a TDMA that you can use with a cross-vendor mix. Mikrotik is a (to me the only) router OS. Ubiquity is my major Wireless vendor, from CPE's to the XR2 that go in each Mikrotik AP. I really like Tranzeos as well and some have a bunch of Engenius. There has got to be away to get these vendors to one day work and make this a standard. If not all the sudden we will have a market that requires you to standardize 100% on one vendor alone. And that vendor will have you hook line and sinker (like MOTO). I like my cross vendor options. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
We're running a few hundred customers on Mikrotik PTMP and use it for most of our backhauls. I really like the programability of the tiks, and we use the API's extensively. I just don't have problems and they outperform my expectations, but it does take a bit of a learning curve. Really really looking forward to trying PTMP with TDMA in the tiks. I use WDS so have to wait for them to get that working (nstreme v2 in beta now). Randy On 9/3/2010 3:15 PM, Forbes Mercy wrote: > I'll weigh in here, I have almost an equal mix of Ubiquiti and Mikrotik > I'll detail each plus put a summary analogy for these and Motorola at > the end of my email. One of the things that jumps out on me is how raw > Mikrotik is, if you want to be able to write every filter, detail every > part of the packets, and throughput, it is a very robust piece of > equipment. I use it as my primary backhauls and about 70% of my AP's > other than a few "that shouldn't happen" problems they perform > admirably. I keep adding filters as traffic presents itself but help and > training is very expensive and extraordinarily technical On my backhauls > when one Mikrotik goes down its not unusual for the foul traffic to > permeate throughout (yes I'm bridged) the network and take down other > Mikrotik's and often requires a drive to reboot then they work fine > again, irritating, yes but still great equipment. I was 90% Mikrotik > until Ubiquiti came along. > >Ubiquiti is a monster for power and throughput, it's menus are basic > but filters entry options are slim and limited to IP rather than by > protocol so some things sneak through that wouldn't with Mikrotik. As a > backhaul they do seem to ignore foul traffic so I'm assuming Ubiquiti > entered a bunch of filters by default because these units just don't go > down, ever. Their user table as an AP is not very friendly, limited to > MAC without a description line so we have to look everyone up by MAC > now. I have integrated Ubiquiti for all of my 5 Gig customer AP's and > kept Mikrotik for 2.4 just because its not necessary to replace working > radios. The "M" format is amazing and has moved us up a notch in > delivery capability, oh and it's cheap as hell so I can afford to deploy > twice as fast as before. > > I promised an analogy so here goes, I feel from experience that Mikrotik > is the Linux of equipment, you better know what you're doing when you > buy it. Motorola is the Apple of equipment, do what they say and pay a > ton and you'll get a near-flawless product that you have almost no > control over, you just won't be able to deploy very fast due to the > cost. Ubiquiti is like Windows, pretty GUI driven, and simplified at a > reasonable cost. > > Forbes Mercy > President - Washington Broadband, Inc. > forbes.me...@wabroadband.com > > On 9/3/2010 1:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >> I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now >> instead of Mikrotik. >> >> I would like to know how they compare: >>1. As a point to point link. >>2. As an access point. >> >> Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. >> >> I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about >> Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will >> be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the >> amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. >> >> I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. >> I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards >> in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I >> have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the >> Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet >> surge protection in the enclosure. >> >> What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and >> reliability of Rockets? >> >> Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. >> >> Thanks and have a great Labor Day. >> >> LaRoy McCann >> Data Technology >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby| InfoWest, Inc | www.infowest.com Vice President | 435-
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I'll weigh in here, I have almost an equal mix of Ubiquiti and Mikrotik I'll detail each plus put a summary analogy for these and Motorola at the end of my email. One of the things that jumps out on me is how raw Mikrotik is, if you want to be able to write every filter, detail every part of the packets, and throughput, it is a very robust piece of equipment. I use it as my primary backhauls and about 70% of my AP's other than a few "that shouldn't happen" problems they perform admirably. I keep adding filters as traffic presents itself but help and training is very expensive and extraordinarily technical On my backhauls when one Mikrotik goes down its not unusual for the foul traffic to permeate throughout (yes I'm bridged) the network and take down other Mikrotik's and often requires a drive to reboot then they work fine again, irritating, yes but still great equipment. I was 90% Mikrotik until Ubiquiti came along. Ubiquiti is a monster for power and throughput, it's menus are basic but filters entry options are slim and limited to IP rather than by protocol so some things sneak through that wouldn't with Mikrotik. As a backhaul they do seem to ignore foul traffic so I'm assuming Ubiquiti entered a bunch of filters by default because these units just don't go down, ever. Their user table as an AP is not very friendly, limited to MAC without a description line so we have to look everyone up by MAC now. I have integrated Ubiquiti for all of my 5 Gig customer AP's and kept Mikrotik for 2.4 just because its not necessary to replace working radios. The "M" format is amazing and has moved us up a notch in delivery capability, oh and it's cheap as hell so I can afford to deploy twice as fast as before. I promised an analogy so here goes, I feel from experience that Mikrotik is the Linux of equipment, you better know what you're doing when you buy it. Motorola is the Apple of equipment, do what they say and pay a ton and you'll get a near-flawless product that you have almost no control over, you just won't be able to deploy very fast due to the cost. Ubiquiti is like Windows, pretty GUI driven, and simplified at a reasonable cost. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. forbes.me...@wabroadband.com On 9/3/2010 1:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. > > I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about > Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will > be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the > amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. > > I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. > I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards > in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I > have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the > Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet > surge protection in the enclosure. > > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? > > Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. > > Thanks and have a great Labor Day. > > LaRoy McCann > Data Technology > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 15:08 -0600, Randy Cosby wrote: > I'm waiting to see how Nstreme (TDMA) v2 compares on the Mikrotik. Another training topic. :-) In fact, if anyone who attends the MUM wants to do a direct comparison test, I'm game. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 15:50 -0500, Data Technology wrote: > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. This is one of the topics we will cover in my Training Before the MUM at the end of this month. > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? It is better than you'd expect from an $89 radio, but not better than you'd expect from a $300 radio. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
We have recently begun deploying the Rockets as backhauls to replace our older and less reliable StarOS links. Without exception, they have impressed us. It has only been a few months, and they have yet to experience winter, so the real test won't be for a while. From a pure reliability and performance standpoint, there has been no contest. We too have long been using metal enclosures that we ground for our StarOS links, but despite that we find there are still so many things that can go wrong, the reliability plummets. We are planning to deploy the Rockets as APs as well, due to how well they have performed as backhauls. I can't comment much on future reliability, as our oldest Rocket link is only about four months in - but it has been fantastic. On 09/03/2010 01:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. > > I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about > Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will > be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the > amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. > > I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. > I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards > in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I > have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the > Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet > surge protection in the enclosure. > > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? > > Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. > > Thanks and have a great Labor Day. > > LaRoy McCann > Data Technology > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
LaRoy, I'm waiting to see how Nstreme (TDMA) v2 compares on the Mikrotik. So far it looks very promising, and could give UBNT a run for the money. UBNT has the price advantage, but not as much configuration-ability nor can you choose to use cheap or high quality enclosures. Randy On 9/3/2010 2:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. > > I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about > Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will > be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the > amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. > > I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. > I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards > in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I > have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the > Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet > surge protection in the enclosure. > > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? > > Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. > > Thanks and have a great Labor Day. > > LaRoy McCann > Data Technology > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby| InfoWest, Inc | www.infowest.com Vice President | 435-674-0165 x 2010 | facebook.com/infowest WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
We have not used Mikrotik for wireless, but are using UBNT for Radios & Mikrotik for routing ... While your concerns are valid, we have not seen anything that would cause us to rethink our setup. Use good quality shielded outdoor rated cable, and Grounded Power supplies, with or without surge protectors.. your choice As far as performance goes, this is the main reason we are using UBNT M radios... since we are mainly interested in doing high bandwidth links, and not necessarily long links or marginal links... 802.11n with MIMO/ 2x2 chains is delivering approximately 10 x more tcp throughput when compared to traditional 802.11 a/b/g. I would suggest that you spend some time on the ubnt.com forum and review / share and learn from other's who are actively deploying UBNT networks, there is great info there, plus the UBNT folks actively monitor and participate in those Forums. ( I know Mike from UBNT also monitors the WISPA list). As far as reliability goes, overall it is an "A" from our side, we have test links (PTP) running for about 1 year now, only recently we have started taking on customers (PTMP), and have nothing significant or negative to report. But then again we are not trying to push things to their limits either... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom On 9/3/2010 4:50 PM, Data Technology wrote: >I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now > instead of Mikrotik. > > I would like to know how they compare: > 1. As a point to point link. > 2. As an access point. > > Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. > > I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about > Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will > be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the > amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. > > I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. > I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards > in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I > have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the > Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet > surge protection in the enclosure. > > What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and > reliability of Rockets? > > Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. > > Thanks and have a great Labor Day. > > LaRoy McCann > Data Technology > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] mikrotik vs ubiquiti
I think that several of you are using Ubiquiti AirMax Rocket now instead of Mikrotik. I would like to know how they compare: 1. As a point to point link. 2. As an access point. Right now I only use Mikrotik for links and AP's and I use Ubiquiti for cpe. I am ready to install equipment on a new tower and was thinking about Using AirMax Rocket for AP to take avantage of MIMO. I know Rocket will be cheaper but I don't know how they compare to a MT411AH as far as the amount of bandwidth and packets they can process. I am leaning towards MT on the links and Rocket for AP. I am concerned about the plastic cases. I really like having the boards in a metal enclosure so it can be grounded and shielded well. I know I have had problems with lightening popping the ethernet port on the Ubiquiti units even when they are grounded. With MT I can put ethernet surge protection in the enclosure. What are you guys seeing in the real world as the performance and reliability of Rockets? Any do and don'ts would be greatly appreciated here. Thanks and have a great Labor Day. LaRoy McCann Data Technology WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
