Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

mber 16, 2016 at 3:51 PM To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing hey gino, we are waiting for the FCC to approve the DFS band before we move clients to the 450m's. We had to get

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

ehalf of Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us > > > Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> > Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 8:17 PM > To: "af@afmug.com" <af@afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing > > So interesting

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

2016 7:35 AM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing > > I'm not sure why everyone doesn't use that for timing. There may be > technical reasons I don't know about, but it seems like a logical first > step, use something everyone else is already usi

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

ug.com>> Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 8:17 PM To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" <af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing So interesting story here...we have three 450m's in the air and they are getting sy

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

WISP - Original Message - From: "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:30:53 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing So that makes me very confused unless the PTPV2 is a "future" feature...

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

ange The Brothers WISP From: "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:30:53 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing So that makes me very c

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

3:03 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: Well, sending a pulse sounds like AM to me. Perhaps level shifting would be a better term to use. From: Daniel White Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:40 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Something

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Used to be, as a member of IEEE, publications like that were free grumble From: Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Based on what others have said, I think it is all part of the "Precisi

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

ke AM to me.  Perhaps level shifting would be a better term to use.   From: Daniel White Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:40 PMTo: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Something completely new.  Instead of interrupting power, they are sending a “pulse” of pow

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I is looking like December availability now. > > Daniel White > Managing Director – Hardware Distribution Sales > ConVergence Technologies > Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 > dwh...@converge-tech.com > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *George Skorup > *Se

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

uck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: Well, sending a pulse sounds like AM to me.  Perhaps level shifting would be a better term to use.   From: Daniel White Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:40 PMTo: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Something compl

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Well, sending a pulse sounds like AM to me. Perhaps level shifting would be a better term to use. From: Daniel White Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:40 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Something completely new. Instead of interrupting p

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Technologies Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 <mailto:dwh...@converge-tech.com> dwh...@converge-tech.com From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 12:40 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing So.. is &qu

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Like I said before; 375 milliamps per pin/wire. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/15/2016 7:25 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: I wouldn’t look at the max rating on an RJ45 plug and decide it’s safe to run it at that voltage or cur

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

grease works, I suspect not and that you would need both a lubricant and a grease to keep out moisture. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 9:14 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Way beyond wh

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Prince *Sent:* Tuesday, November 15, 2016 9:14 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Way beyond what I would be comfortable with. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/15/2016 7:10 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: 300V nominally but you can get 600V cable.

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I had some 260 volt circuits in the phone company that remotely powered equipment. You would feel it, not pleasant. From: Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 8:14 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Way beyond what I would be comfortable with.

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Prince *Sent:* Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:56 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing What's the breakdown voltage on the insulation for a 22 AWG wire? bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/15/2016 6:54 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: Perhaps jack it up to 100

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

300V nominally but you can get 600V cable. And since those insulation ratings are derated, pretty sure you can double them before sparks start flying. From: Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:56 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Wh

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Prince *Sent:* Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:51 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Using that kind of power scheme, and 48 volts, you're talking about over 500 watts? No way! bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 11/15/2016 6:26 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: To

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Perhaps jack it up to 1000 volts, 12 amps... Run your whole house off of a cat 5. Now that would be an interesting youtube video. From: Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:51 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Using that kind of power sc

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

5 amps. But you better not plug them in under load... *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:22 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing All one polarity? Where's the drain? You really think you can get 1-1/2 amps through each of those teeny l

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

1.5 amps per pin http://www.te.com/commerce/Document...108-1163EpdfEnglishENG_SS_108-1163_E.pdf Check out the derating curve. Sec 3.3 I think. From: Chuck McCown Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:26 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Tower gr

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Tower ground earth ground etc, like Trango does. Yes, I do, the manufacturer of the jacks I use rates them at 1.5 amps. But you better not plug them in under load... From: Bill Prince Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:22 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

ithout melting anything. *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2016 5:41 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Let me be more clear. The circuit that is pins 4,5 (+), and pins 7,8 (-) is one circuit. Total of .75 amps. The circuit that is pins 1,2 (-)

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

So, does the new method put some kind of low level AM on the power? From: Matt Mangriotis Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 2:22 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Yes, there is a new method of Sync-Over-Power for precisely the reasons you guys have highlig

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I am talking about all wires being one polarity. I think I can get 12 amps without melting anything. From: Bill Prince Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 5:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Let me be more clear. The circuit that is pins 4,5 (+), and

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

as a roadmap feature on the 450i and 450m as well. Matt From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 1:40 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing So.. is "Cambium Sync" still a power interruption schem

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

So.. is "Cambium Sync" still a power interruption scheme or something completely new? I thought the thing they were going to move to was 1588v2? On 11/15/2016 1:26 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: I guess I need to be more clear on this. .. There are two types of sync over power.

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I guess I need to be more clear on this. .. There are two types of sync over power. The first is being called Canopy sync, which is compatible with the 450i and earlier radios. The second is being called Cambium sync and is compatible with the 450M and I'm guessing later radios. Currently

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

i should pay more attention, no sync over power? balls and dicks On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > I can't wait till someone puts two 450M's pointed in the same direction > and basically they could potentially get 1Gbps over 40mhz of spectrum in

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I can't wait till someone puts two 450M's pointed in the same direction and basically they could potentially get 1Gbps over 40mhz of spectrum in a 90 degree view. Now times that by 4 since you might have customers on all sides of the tower and what are we looking at here? 4Gbps total capacity and

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

and insulation temperature rating are going to be the limiting factors there. Jacks I use have a 1.5 amp rating per pin. So, I think you can get 12 amps total if the cable is short enough. *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2016 1:11 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Pac

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Yes, that is correct. On Nov 14, 2016 8:44 PM, "Bill Prince" wrote: > At 48 volts, and .75 amps per pair of power wires, that would be 36 watts > + 36 watts, or 72 watts total? > > Just noodling here. > > > bp > > > > On 11/14/2016 11:38 AM,

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I would more say... incomplete information...We need to add "per pair" to that description. The 450M does support sync over power, it just is different. On Nov 14, 2016 8:38 PM, "George Skorup" wrote: > For the record, http://store.packetflux.com/powerinjector-plus-sync- >

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Yeah, when we talk 4-pair power, it's two pairs positive and two pairs negative. Each pair carrying 1A. So it is effectively 2A total on the port, or as Forrest said, 96W @ 48VDC. With a 2-pair power (one +, one -) radio, all you'd be able to get to it is 48 watts. In the case of Trango's

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

: Monday, November 14, 2016 1:11 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Each pair is one half of a power circuit. So there are 4 halves. There are two issues; how much current can each wire carry, and how much current can each connector pin can carry. bp <pa

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Each pair is one half of a power circuit. So there are 4 halves. There are two issues; how much current can each wire carry, and how much current can each connector pin can carry. bp On 11/14/2016 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: There are four pairs. AF5x and the H

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

There are four pairs. AF5x and the H in 24vh or 48vh POE ports of Netonix do power over all four pairs. Speaking with Ubnt support last week, AF5x should ideally do four pairs when possible. 48v (0.75*4a) = 144 watts Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

At 48 volts, and .75 amps per pair of power wires, that would be 36 watts + 36 watts, or 72 watts total? Just noodling here. bp On 11/14/2016 11:38 AM, George Skorup wrote: For the record, http://store.packetflux.com/powerinjector-plus-sync-gigabit-version/

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

For the record, http://store.packetflux.com/powerinjector-plus-sync-gigabit-version/ says: 1A per port maximum power. (48 watts at 48 Volts) So.. is the electronic over-current protection the 1A limit? Or is this just outdated info? Pretty sure it's >1A because I've "tested" it (cable

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

I think that rating might be based on RJ45 contacts. From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 12:33 PM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing My personal preference would be not to exceed .75A per pair because that matches the official

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

t saturating the cores of the transformer. > It will get hot, but not hot enough to unsolder itself. > > *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) > *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2016 12:00 PM > *To:* af > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing > > > The current produc

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing The current products should power the 450M just fine. The rating is 1A per pair per port, so at the 48V you're good up to 96W. On Nov 14, 2016 7:50 PM, "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: The 450m pulls 70 watts. The current SyncIn

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

The current products should power the 450M just fine. The rating is 1A per pair per port, so at the 48V you're good up to 96W. On Nov 14, 2016 7:50 PM, "George Skorup" wrote: The 450m pulls 70 watts. The current SyncInjector/PowerInjector+Sync is around 1A max per port. What

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Put in context, the 450M will fit in where 3, 4, 5, or maybe even 6 standard 450 APs fit. So you should figure that as 70/3, or 70/4, or whatever fits your situation. bp On 11/14/2016 10:50 AM, George Skorup wrote: The 450m pulls 70 watts. The current

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

No, Cambium elected to drop the traditional sync over power on the 450M. So, you either need to use timing port sync (via the aux port) or use what they're calling cambium sync. The 1U injector is very close. I need to finish validation on the latest board revisions and then will be

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

The 450m pulls 70 watts. The current SyncInjector/PowerInjector+Sync is around 1A max per port. What you could do for now is a GigE-POE-APC and the new aux port version SyncBox Junior. On 11/14/2016 12:34 PM, Matt wrote: Shouldn't the sync over power for the 450M be the same as PMP450i? How

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

> It’s a lot of power compared to 450i, right? Aw, I didn't think of that...

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

It’s a lot of power compared to 450i, right? From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sam Lambie Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 12:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing Yeah, I am looking for Sync over Power if possible. On Mon, Nov 14,

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Yeah, I am looking for Sync over Power if possible. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) < li...@packetflux.com> wrote: > All of the currently shipping syncbox product line are compatible. For > sync over power, I have the specs, but the design isn't done yet. > >

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

Shouldn't the sync over power for the 450M be the same as PMP450i? How is the 1u sync injector coming? On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > All of the currently shipping syncbox product line are compatible. For sync > over power, I

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

All of the currently shipping syncbox product line are compatible. For sync over power, I have the specs, but the design isn't done yet. On Nov 14, 2016 5:40 PM, "Sam Lambie" wrote: > A question for Forrest mostly. Have you come up with a timing product for > the 450m AP

[AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing

A question for Forrest mostly. Have you come up with a timing product for the 450m AP yet? If not, have you got a timeline for release? Sam -- -- *Sam Lambie* Taosnet Wireless Tech. 575-758-7598 Office www.Taosnet.com