Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[TJ Trout]

Coming from Gino, real world.

Client radio ~100-150mbps maximum (Gino can confirm)

TJ

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Rory Conaway <r...@triadwireless.net>
wrote:

> Do you actually see that in the real world or is that theoretical
> capacity?  Also, what is the maximum speed of the client radios?
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Gino A. Villarini
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:05 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
>
>
> I have an aggregate capacity of 400 mbps+ on a single 450 Medusa sector
> using 40 mhz channelsŠ
>
> On 2/13/18, 11:26 AM, "Af on behalf of Rory Conaway" <af-boun...@afmug.com
>
>
>
> *Gino A. Villarini*
>
> President
>
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> on behalf of r...@triadwireless.net> wrote:
>
> >You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as
> >other products still coming out.
> >
> >We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz
> >450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting
> >from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not
> >convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in
> >terms of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products
> >are cheap to upgrade.
> >
> >As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac
> >chipsets are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features
> >that will change how we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already
> >done that.
> >
> >For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering
> >30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.
> >Even if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least
> >1.2Gbps of download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer
> >average).  Need more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to
> >double that.  What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down
> >significantly depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more
> >capacity.
> >
> >We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120
> >degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we
> >needed, meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users
> >that weren't in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of
> >Mimosa, swapped out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more
> >APs to expand coverage .  A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in
> >the first 8 months and 2 users Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work
> >well for tower deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that
> >are billed by cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc...
> >which is also why we rarely use towers.  I'd rather find a few lower
> >locations that have easy access than a single tower but that's not always
> >realistic.
> >
> >Rory
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf
> Of Stefan Englhardt
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
> >To: af@afmug.com
> >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >
> >At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon
> >arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may
> >give a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at
> >smaller Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper
> >than 450m so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might
> >densify at the direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you
> >could aggregate them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up
> >there. You only need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.
> >
> >
> >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> >> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] Im
> Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> >> An: af@afmug.com
> >> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>
> >> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> >>
> >> For greenfield? Probably not.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
> >> <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> >> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> >> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs
> >

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Rory Conaway]

Do you actually see that in the real world or is that theoretical capacity?  
Also, what is the maximum speed of the client radios?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

I have an aggregate capacity of 400 mbps+ on a single 450 Medusa sector
using 40 mhz channelsŠ

On 2/13/18, 11:26 AM, "Af on behalf of Rory Conaway" <af-boun...@afmug.com



Gino A. Villarini

President

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


[cid:image001.png@01D3A4D9.08879C80]
on behalf of r...@triadwireless.net<mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:

>You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as
>other products still coming out.
>
>We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz
>450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting
>from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not
>convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in
>terms of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products
>are cheap to upgrade.
>
>As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac
>chipsets are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features
>that will change how we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already
>done that.
>
>For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering
>30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.
>Even if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least
>1.2Gbps of download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer
>average).  Need more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to
>double that.  What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down
>significantly depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more
>capacity.
>
>We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120
>degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we
>needed, meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users
>that weren't in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of
>Mimosa, swapped out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more
>APs to expand coverage .  A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in
>the first 8 months and 2 users Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work
>well for tower deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that
>are billed by cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc...
>which is also why we rarely use towers.  I'd rather find a few lower
>locations that have easy access than a single tower but that's not always
>realistic.
>
>Rory
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt
>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
>To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
>At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon
>arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may
>give a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at
>smaller Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper
>than 450m so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might
>densify at the direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you
>could aggregate them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up
>there. You only need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.
>
>
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
>> An: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
>> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>
>> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
>>
>> For greenfield? Probably not.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
>> <george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
>> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
>> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs
>> > in the
>> same frame.
>> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
>> > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
>> > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
>> > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just
>> > another
>> tool in the toolbox.
>> >
>> > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "st

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Gino A. Villarini]

I have an aggregate capacity of 400 mbps+ on a single 450 Medusa sector
using 40 mhz channelsŠ

On 2/13/18, 11:26 AM, "Af on behalf of Rory Conaway" <af-boun...@afmug.com



Gino A. Villarini


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

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

on behalf of r...@triadwireless.net> wrote:

>You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as
>other products still coming out.
>
>We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz
>450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting
>from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not
>convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in
>terms of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products
>are cheap to upgrade.
>
>As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac
>chipsets are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features
>that will change how we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already
>done that.
>
>For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering
>30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.
>Even if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least
>1.2Gbps of download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer
>average).  Need more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to
>double that.  What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down
>significantly depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more
>capacity.
>
>We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120
>degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we
>needed, meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users
>that weren't in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of
>Mimosa, swapped out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more
>APs to expand coverage .  A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in
>the first 8 months and 2 users Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work
>well for tower deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that
>are billed by cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc...
>which is also why we rarely use towers.  I'd rather find a few lower
>locations that have easy access than a single tower but that's not always
>realistic.
>
>Rory
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt
>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
>To: af@afmug.com
>Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
>At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon
>arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may
>give a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at
>smaller Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper
>than 450m so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might
>densify at the direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you
>could aggregate them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up
>there. You only need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.
>
>
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
>> An: af@afmug.com
>> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>
>> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
>>
>> For greenfield? Probably not.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
>> <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
>> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
>> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs
>> > in the
>> same frame.
>> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
>> > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
>> > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
>> > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just
>> > another
>> tool in the toolbox.
>> >
>> > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
>> >> :)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
>>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
>> >>>
>> >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> &

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Dave]

4x increase in spectral
> efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
> chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per client
> snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
> always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us
<mailto:af...@zirkel.us>> wrote:
>> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps
service to all
>> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without
breaking a sweat is
>> worth every penny.
>>
>> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution
for every
>> deployment.
>>
>> 2 cents
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds
<j...@kyneticwifi.com <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all
that great.
>>>
>>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous
transmissions in
>>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett
<dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will
probably never
>>> > have
>>> > something like that.
>>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
    >>> >
>>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature
improvements over
>>> > these
>>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with
the value it
>>> > provides.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -- Original Message --
>>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
>>> > To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>> >
>>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>>> >
>>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you
sell to those
>>> > 25?
>>> >
>>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
>>> >
>>> > From: Joe Novak
>>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
>>> > To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>> >
>>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way
since the
>>> > early
>>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of
people are having
>>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have
this problem
>>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid
though. That is
>>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I
don't exactly
>>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting
right around
>>> > 25
>>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a
bit of room.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
>>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com <mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on
AFx5s...On Rockets
>>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest
on APs and
>>> >> on
>>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well
since August of
>>> >> 2017
>>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had
to change
    >>> >> them
>>> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on
issues.
>>> >> The
>>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and
works with
>>> >> us as
>>> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens
but still no
>>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as
well.
>>> >>
>>> >> Jaime Solorza
>>> >>
&

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Rory Conaway]

So far, all of it.  We don’t have to worry about reusing frequencies with this 
kind of deployment.  We have such a dynamic and high-interference environment 
with competitors moving stuff around all the time, there is no channel we can 
use that may not have interference within 24 hours, hence the more narrow beam 
patterns.  We also have so many new customers going in that things that  
topologies are changing drastically.  We have migrated many APs to 40MHz as we 
understand more of where we have to cover and can plan better.  You have to 
take care with distances in DFS directions but that’s pretty much it.

That being said, as we get more APs per location, we are starting to migrate 
towards GPS and with Ubiquiti, 40MHz channels.  With Mimosa, we are moving 
towards 80MHz channels (more customers per AP due to range differences in 
deployment models).  This should set us up for next generation products also.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Baird
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 8:34 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

How much total frequency are you using with 12 horns deployed at a site?  What 
does your frequency re-use pattern look like?



On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Rory Conaway 
<r...@triadwireless.net<mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:
You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as other 
products still coming out.

We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz 450's 
for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting from scratch 
makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not convinced that the 
450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in terms of capacity without 
much more investment whereas 802.11 products are cheap to upgrade.

As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac chipsets are 
already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features that will change how 
we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already done that.

For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering 30-40 
degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.  Even if you 
use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least 1.2Gbps of download 
capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer average).  Need more, RF 
Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to double that.  What's even more 
amazing is that the need for GPS goes down significantly depending on how you 
deploy the horns meaning even more capacity.

We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120 degrees or 
Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we needed, meant we 
didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users that weren't in the 
pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of Mimosa, swapped out the 
antenna with more narrow patterns and added more APs to expand coverage .  A 
single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in the first 8 months and 2 users 
Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work well for tower deployments with 
outsourced climbers or with towers that are billed by cable pulls, antenna 
square footage, number of APs, etc...  which is also why we rarely use towers.  
I'd rather find a few lower locations that have easy access than a single tower 
but that's not always realistic.

Rory

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Stefan Englhardt
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

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


> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] Im Auftrag 
> von Josh Reynolds
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> An: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
>
> For greenfield? Probably not.
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
> <george.sko...@cbcast.com<mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs
> > in the
> same frame.
> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> >

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Mathew Howard]

t; But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
> >> deployment.
> >>
> >> 2 cents
> >>
> >> -sean
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that
> great.
> >>>
> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably
> never
> >>> > have
> >>> > something like that.
> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >>> >
> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
> >>> > these
> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value
> it
> >>> > provides.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > -- Original Message --
> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >
> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >>> >
> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to
> those
> >>> > 25?
> >>> >
> >>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
> >>> >
> >>> > From: Joe Novak
> >>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >
> >>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since
> the
> >>> > early
> >>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
> having
> >>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
> problem
> >>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
> That is
> >>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
> exactly
> >>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
> around
> >>> > 25
> >>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of
> room.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
> >>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On
> Rockets
> >>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs
> and
> >>> >> on
> >>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since
> August of
> >>> >> 2017
> >>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to
> change
> >>> >> them
> >>> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
> >>> >> The
> >>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works
> with
> >>> >> us as
> >>> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
> no
> >>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com
> >
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all
> other
> >>> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> >>> >>>> To: Animal Farm
> >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4
> >>> >>>> APs
> >>> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is
> about
> >>> >>>>> 5.5
> >>> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him
> but
> >>> >>>>> he is
> >>> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
> >>> >>>>> peacefully
> >>> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
> >>> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
> >>> >>>>> routers.
> >>> >
> >>> >
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Rory Conaway]

You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as other 
products still coming out.

We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz 450's 
for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting from scratch 
makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not convinced that the 
450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in terms of capacity without 
much more investment whereas 802.11 products are cheap to upgrade.

As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac chipsets are 
already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features that will change how 
we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already done that.

For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering 30-40 
degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.  Even if you 
use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least 1.2Gbps of download 
capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer average).  Need more, RF 
Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to double that.  What's even more 
amazing is that the need for GPS goes down significantly depending on how you 
deploy the horns meaning even more capacity.  

We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120 degrees or 
Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we needed, meant we 
didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users that weren't in the 
pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of Mimosa, swapped out the 
antenna with more narrow patterns and added more APs to expand coverage .  A 
single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in the first 8 months and 2 users 
Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work well for tower deployments with 
outsourced climbers or with towers that are billed by cable pulls, antenna 
square footage, number of APs, etc...  which is also why we rarely use towers.  
I'd rather find a few lower locations that have easy access than a single tower 
but that's not always realistic.

Rory   

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

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


> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> An: af@afmug.com
> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> 
> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> 
> For greenfield? Probably not.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup 
> <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the 
> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs 
> > in the
> same frame.
> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right 
> > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And 
> > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need 
> > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just 
> > another
> tool in the toolbox.
> >
> > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> >>
> >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
> >> :)
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
> >>>
> >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds 
> >>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to 
> >>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the 
> >>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take 
> >>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Baird]

How much total frequency are you using with 12 horns deployed at a site?
What does your frequency re-use pattern look like?



On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Rory Conaway <r...@triadwireless.net>
wrote:

> You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as
> other products still coming out.
>
> We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz
> 450's for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting
> from scratch makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not
> convinced that the 450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in terms
> of capacity without much more investment whereas 802.11 products are cheap
> to upgrade.
>
> As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac chipsets
> are already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features that will
> change how we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already done that.
>
> For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering
> 30-40 degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.  Even
> if you use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least 1.2Gbps of
> download capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer average).  Need
> more, RF Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to double that.
> What's even more amazing is that the need for GPS goes down significantly
> depending on how you deploy the horns meaning even more capacity.
>
> We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120
> degrees or Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we needed,
> meant we didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users that weren't
> in the pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of Mimosa, swapped
> out the antenna with more narrow patterns and added more APs to expand
> coverage .  A single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in the first 8 months
> and 2 users Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work well for tower
> deployments with outsourced climbers or with towers that are billed by
> cable pulls, antenna square footage, number of APs, etc...  which is also
> why we rarely use towers.  I'd rather find a few lower locations that have
> easy access than a single tower but that's not always realistic.
>
> Rory
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon
> arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may give
> a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at smaller
> Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper than 450m
> so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might densify at the
> direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you could aggregate
> them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up there. You only
> need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.
>
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> > An: af@afmug.com
> > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >
> > I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> >
> > For greenfield? Probably not.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
> > <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> > > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> > > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs
> > > in the
> > same frame.
> > > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> > > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
> > > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
> > > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just
> > > another
> > tool in the toolbox.
> > >
> > > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
> > >> :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
> > >>>
> > >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds
> > >>&

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

And the cpes are very cheap...

On Feb 13, 2018 2:58 AM, "Stefan Englhardt" <s...@genias.net> wrote:

> At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon
> arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may give
> a real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at smaller
> Channels. They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper than 450m
> so you could install a 360 degree cluster which you might densify at the
> direction where most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you could aggregate
> them to 10GE and feed them with a Licensed gear right up there. You only
> need to bring 48V DC up to the tower.
>
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> > An: af@afmug.com
> > Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >
> > I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> >
> > For greenfield? Probably not.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
> > <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> > > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> > > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs in
> the
> > same frame.
> > > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> > > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
> > > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
> > > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just
> another
> > tool in the toolbox.
> > >
> > > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
> > >> :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
> > >>>
> > >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds
> > >>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to
> > >>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the
> > >>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take
> > >>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is
> > >>>>> 64qam).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing with
> > >>>>> regular
> > >>>>> 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would
> > >>>>> need 3 APs each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> win, win, win.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> but i also wouldn't install them at every tower.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 2 cents
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -sean
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds
> > >>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients
> > >>>>>> are short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is costly.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> It's a niche of a niche.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at all,
> > >>>>>> I'm just saying it's not the second coming like people make it
> > >>>>>> out to be.)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> >

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Adam Moffett]

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



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

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




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

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

For greenfield? Probably not.

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
<george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs 
in the

same frame.
> But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
> instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
> only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just 
another

tool in the toolbox.
>
> On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>>
>> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower 
plan"

>> :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> 
wrote:

>>>
>>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
>>>
>>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds
>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to
>>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the
>>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take
>>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is
>>>>> 64qam).
>>>>>
>>>>> it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing 
with

>>>>> regular
>>>>> 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would
>>>>> need 3 APs each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used.
>>>>>
>>>>> win, win, win.
>>>>>
>>>>> but i also wouldn't install them at every tower.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 cents
>>>>>
>>>>> -sean
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds
>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients
>>>>>> are short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is 
costly.

>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a niche of a niche.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at 
all,

>>>>>> I'm just saying it's not the second coming like people make it
>>>>>> out to be.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett 
<af...@zirkel.us>

>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then by all means don’t deploy any 450m’s josh.  Geeze dude 
take

>>>>>>> a chill pill.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m just stating what I have on my network in a real world
>>>>>>> environment, earning me real world dollars and conserving much
>>>>>>> needed spectrum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It’s not the right tool for every situation, BUT under the 
right

>>>&

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Stefan Englhardt]

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


> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> An: af@afmug.com
> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> 
> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> 
> For greenfield? Probably not.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup
> <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the
> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs in the
> same frame.
> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right
> > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And
> > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need
> > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just another
> tool in the toolbox.
> >
> > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> >>
> >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
> >> :)
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
> >>>
> >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds
> >>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to
> >>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the
> >>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take
> >>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is
> >>>>> 64qam).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing with
> >>>>> regular
> >>>>> 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would
> >>>>> need 3 APs each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> win, win, win.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> but i also wouldn't install them at every tower.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2 cents
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -sean
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds
> >>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients
> >>>>>> are short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is costly.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's a niche of a niche.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at all,
> >>>>>> I'm just saying it's not the second coming like people make it
> >>>>>> out to be.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Then by all means don’t deploy any 450m’s josh.  Geeze dude take
> >>>>>>> a chill pill.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I’m just stating what I have on my network in a real world
> >>>>>>> environment, earning me real world dollars and conserving much
> >>>>>>> needed spectrum.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It’s not the right tool for every situation, BUT und

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

shakes head*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread apart
>>>>>>>>> (physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into almost the same
>>>>>>>>> timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one client that ends up in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> same window as other clients reduces the overall capacity of the
>>>>>>>>> AP
>>>>>>>>> (like in many other situations). It can, in some situations, lead
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> cumulative transfer windows where overall throughput ends up
>>>>>>>>> getting
>>>>>>>>> reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up taking
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings of MU-MIMO, not
>>>>>>>>> even taking into account "massive" systems like 14x14 that end up
>>>>>>>>> costing quite a bit in overall power budget due to the number of
>>>>>>>>> elements, further meaning that your range is severely limited in a
>>>>>>>>> system like this... so only decent in very dense situations.
>>>>>>>>> That's a
>>>>>>>>> unique niche.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern system
>>>>>>>>> (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually
>>>>>>>>> streaming.
>>>>>>>>> Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps for
>>>>>>>>> gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets sent in
>>>>>>>>> most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous.
>>>>>>>>> Let's
>>>>>>>>> take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's assume
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and
>>>>>>>>> that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x
>>>>>>>>> 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to
>>>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>> out!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Soo 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very
>>>>>>>>> roughly.
>>>>>>>>> If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an
>>>>>>>>> 80/20
>>>>>>>>> and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
>>>>>>>>> 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
>>>>>>>>> giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives
>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>> 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
>>>>>>>>> subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a
>>>>>>>>> "perfect
>>>>>>>>> storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
>>>>>>>>> advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
>>>>>>>>> hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available,
>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4
>>>>>>>>> Mimosas
>>>>>>>>> or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
>>>>>>>>> subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
>>>>>>>>> (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly
>>>>>>>>> reduced
>>>>>>>>> co

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[George Skorup]

mhz channel if available,
or
just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4
Mimosas
or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
(increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly
reduced
cost.

Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per
client
snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and
will
always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
wrote:

Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps
service
to
all
of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking
a
sweat is
worth every penny.

But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for
every
deployment.

2 cents

-sean



On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds
<j...@kyneticwifi.com>
wrote:

The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all
that
great.

I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions
in
802.11ax via OFDMA.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett
<dmmoff...@gmail.com>
wrote:

450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will
probably
never
have
something like that.
UI is still sluggish on ePMP.

On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements
over
these
past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the
value
it
provides.


-- Original Message --
From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.

So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you
sell
to
those
25?

Packetflux GPS sync.

From: Joe Novak
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way
since
the
early
days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people
are
having
weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have
this
problem
once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid
though.
That is
assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I
don't
exactly
have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting
right
around
25
customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit
of
room.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on
AFx5s...On
Rockets
and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest
on
APs
and
on
PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since
August of
2017
when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had
to
change
them
since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on
issues.
The
other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and
works
with
us as
well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but
still
no
issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as
well.

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft
away...all
other
radios within 4 mile radius...

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
wrote:

All on the same tower, right?

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5
GHz
off
4
APs
in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no
issues...

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
wrote:

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He
is
about
5.5
miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to
him
but
he is
gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.

Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access
points
peacefully
coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other
than
home
routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

;> > That's a
>> >> >> > unique niche.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern system
>> >> >> > (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually
>> >> >> > streaming.
>> >> >> > Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps for
>> >> >> > gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets sent in
>> >> >> > most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous.
>> >> >> > Let's
>> >> >> > take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's assume
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and
>> >> >> > that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x
>> >> >> > 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to
>> >> >> > work
>> >> >> > out!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Soo 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very
>> >> >> > roughly.
>> >> >> > If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an
>> >> >> > 80/20
>> >> >> > and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
>> >> >> > 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
>> >> >> > giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives
>> >> >> > you
>> >> >> > 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
>> >> >> > subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a
>> >> >> > "perfect
>> >> >> > storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
>> >> >> > advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
>> >> >> > hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available,
>> >> >> > or
>> >> >> > just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4
>> >> >> > Mimosas
>> >> >> > or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
>> >> >> > subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
>> >> >> > (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly
>> >> >> > reduced
>> >> >> > cost.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
>> >> >> > efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
>> >> >> > chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per
>> >> >> > client
>> >> >> > snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and
>> >> >> > will
>> >> >> > always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps
>> >> >> >> service
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> all
>> >> >> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking
>> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> sweat is
>> >> >> >> worth every penny.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for
>> >> >> >> every
>> >> >> >> deployment.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> 2 cents
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> -sean
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Sean Heskett]

e
> that
> >> >> > maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and
> >> >> > that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x
> >> >> > 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to
> work
> >> >> > out!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Soo 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very
> roughly.
> >> >> > If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an 80/20
> >> >> > and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
> >> >> > 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
> >> >> > giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives
> >> >> > you
> >> >> > 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
> >> >> > subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a
> "perfect
> >> >> > storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
> >> >> > advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
> >> >> > hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available,
> or
> >> >> > just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4
> >> >> > Mimosas
> >> >> > or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
> >> >> > subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
> >> >> > (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly
> reduced
> >> >> > cost.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
> >> >> > efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
> >> >> > chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per
> client
> >> >> > snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
> >> >> > always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps
> service
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> all
> >> >> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a
> >> >> >> sweat is
> >> >> >> worth every penny.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for
> >> >> >> every
> >> >> >> deployment.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2 cents
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -sean
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds
> >> >> >> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that
> >> >> >>> great.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions
> in
> >> >> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <
> dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >> >> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will
> probably
> >> >> >>> > never
> >> >> >>> > have
> >> >> >>> > something like that.
> >> >> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements
> >> >> >>> > over
> >> >> >>> > these
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

Down, 50Mbps Up
>> >> > 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
>> >> >
>> >> > Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
>> >> > giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives
>> >> > you
>> >> > 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
>> >> > subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a "perfect
>> >> > storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
>> >> > advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
>> >> > hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available, or
>> >> > just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4
>> >> > Mimosas
>> >> > or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
>> >> > subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
>> >> > (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly reduced
>> >> > cost.
>> >> >
>> >> > Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
>> >> > efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
>> >> > chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per client
>> >> > snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
>> >> > always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> all
>> >> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a
>> >> >> sweat is
>> >> >> worth every penny.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for
>> >> >> every
>> >> >> deployment.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2 cents
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -sean
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds
>> >> >> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that
>> >> >>> great.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
>> >> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>> >> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably
>> >> >>> > never
>> >> >>> > have
>> >> >>> > something like that.
>> >> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements
>> >> >>> > over
>> >> >>> > these
>> >> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the
>> >> >>> > value
>> >> >>> > it
>> >> >>> > provides.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > -- Original Message --
>> >> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
>> >> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> >> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
>> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell
>> >> >>> > to
>> >> >>> > those
>> >> >>> > 25?
>> >> >>> >
>> >&

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Sean Heskett]

ion and data patterns to really take
> >> > advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
> >> > hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available, or
> >> > just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 Mimosas
> >> > or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
> >> > subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
> >> > (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly reduced
> >> > cost.
> >> >
> >> > Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
> >> > efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
> >> > chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per client
> >> > snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
> >> > always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> >> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service
> to
> >> >> all
> >> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a
> >> >> sweat is
> >> >> worth every penny.
> >> >>
> >> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for
> every
> >> >> deployment.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2 cents
> >> >>
> >> >> -sean
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that
> >> >>> great.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
> >> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably
> >> >>> > never
> >> >>> > have
> >> >>> > something like that.
> >> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements
> over
> >> >>> > these
> >> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the
> value
> >> >>> > it
> >> >>> > provides.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > -- Original Message --
> >> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to
> >> >>> > those
> >> >>> > 25?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > From: Joe Novak
> >> >>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> >> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since
> >> >>> > the
> >> >>> > early
> >> >>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
> >> >>> > having
> >> >>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
> >> >>> > problem
> >> >>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
> >> >>> > That is
> >> >>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
> >> >>> > exactly
> >> >>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
> &

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
>> >> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to
>> >> all
>> >> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a
>> >> sweat is
>> >> worth every penny.
>> >>
>> >> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
>> >> deployment.
>> >>
>> >> 2 cents
>> >>
>> >> -sean
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that
>> >>> great.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
>> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably
>> >>> > never
>> >>> > have
>> >>> > something like that.
>> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
>> >>> > these
>> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value
>> >>> > it
>> >>> > provides.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -- Original Message --
>> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
>> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
>> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >>> >
>> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to
>> >>> > those
>> >>> > 25?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > From: Joe Novak
>> >>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
>> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >>> >
>> >>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since
>> >>> > the
>> >>> > early
>> >>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
>> >>> > having
>> >>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
>> >>> > problem
>> >>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
>> >>> > That is
>> >>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
>> >>> > exactly
>> >>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
>> >>> > around
>> >>> > 25
>> >>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of
>> >>> > room.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
>> >>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On
>> >>> >> Rockets
>> >>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs
>> >>> >> and
>> >>> >> on
>> >>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since
>> >>> >> August of
>> >>> >> 2017
>> >>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to
>> >>> >> change
>> >>> >> them
>> >>> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
>> >>> >> The
>> >>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works
>> >>> >> with
>> >>> >> us as
>> >>> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
>> >>> >> no
>> >>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Jaime Solorza
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
>> >>> >> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all
>> >>> >>> other
>> >>> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Jaime Solorza
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>> >>> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>> >>> >>>> To: Animal Farm
>> >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off
>> >>> >>>> 4
>> >>> >>>> APs
>> >>> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Jaime Solorza
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is
>> >>> >>>>> about
>> >>> >>>>> 5.5
>> >>> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him
>> >>> >>>>> but
>> >>> >>>>> he is
>> >>> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
>> >>> >>>>> peacefully
>> >>> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
>> >>> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than
>> >>> >>>>> home
>> >>> >>>>> routers.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Sean Heskett]

at
> great.
> >>>
> >>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
> >>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably
> never
> >>> > have
> >>> > something like that.
> >>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >>> >
> >>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
> >>> > these
> >>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value
> it
> >>> > provides.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > -- Original Message --
> >>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >
> >>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >>> >
> >>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to
> those
> >>> > 25?
> >>> >
> >>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
> >>> >
> >>> > From: Joe Novak
> >>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> >>> > To: af@afmug.com
> >>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >
> >>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since
> the
> >>> > early
> >>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
> having
> >>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
> problem
> >>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
> That is
> >>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
> exactly
> >>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
> around
> >>> > 25
> >>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of
> room.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
> >>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On
> Rockets
> >>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs
> and
> >>> >> on
> >>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since
> August of
> >>> >> 2017
> >>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to
> change
> >>> >> them
> >>> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
> >>> >> The
> >>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works
> with
> >>> >> us as
> >>> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
> no
> >>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com
> >
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all
> other
> >>> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> >>> >>>> To: Animal Farm
> >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4
> >>> >>>> APs
> >>> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is
> about
> >>> >>>>> 5.5
> >>> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him
> but
> >>> >>>>> he is
> >>> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
> >>> >>>>> peacefully
> >>> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
> >>> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
> >>> >>>>> routers.
> >>> >
> >>> >
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

Further note: You can see I did those calcs at 1024QAM, so reduce that
down the 256QAM for closer to real numbers :)

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
> Let's break this down a bit.
>
> Firstly, what outdoor PTMP platform is really using WiFi anymore? *shakes 
> head*
>
> Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread apart
> (physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into almost the same
> timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one client that ends up in the
> same window as other clients reduces the overall capacity of the AP
> (like in many other situations). It can, in some situations, lead to
> cumulative transfer windows where overall throughput ends up getting
> reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up taking a
> hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings of MU-MIMO, not
> even taking into account "massive" systems like 14x14 that end up
> costing quite a bit in overall power budget due to the number of
> elements, further meaning that your range is severely limited in a
> system like this... so only decent in very dense situations. That's a
> unique niche.
>
> So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern system
> (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).
>
> 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually streaming.
> Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps for
> gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets sent in
> most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous. Let's
> take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's assume that
> maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and
> that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x
> 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to work
> out!
>
> Soo 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very roughly.
> If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an 80/20
> and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
>
> 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
> 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
>
> Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
> giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives you
> 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.
>
> That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
> subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a "perfect
> storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
> advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
> hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available, or
> just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 Mimosas
> or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
> subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
> (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly reduced
> cost.
>
> Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
> efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
> chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per client
> snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
> always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
>> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to all
>> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is
>> worth every penny.
>>
>> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
>> deployment.
>>
>> 2 cents
>>
>> -sean
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.
>>>
>>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
>>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never
>>> > have
>>> > something like that.
>>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>>> >
>>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
>>> > these
>>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
>>> > provides.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -- Original Message --
>>&

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

Let's break this down a bit.

Firstly, what outdoor PTMP platform is really using WiFi anymore? *shakes head*

Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread apart
(physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into almost the same
timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one client that ends up in the
same window as other clients reduces the overall capacity of the AP
(like in many other situations). It can, in some situations, lead to
cumulative transfer windows where overall throughput ends up getting
reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up taking a
hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings of MU-MIMO, not
even taking into account "massive" systems like 14x14 that end up
costing quite a bit in overall power budget due to the number of
elements, further meaning that your range is severely limited in a
system like this... so only decent in very dense situations. That's a
unique niche.

So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern system
(450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).

30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually streaming.
Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps for
gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data gets sent in
most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not continuous. Let's
take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's assume that
maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing something like that, and
that's probably a generous number. 56 customers. So 56 customers x
8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to work
out!

Soo 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very roughly.
If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between an 80/20
and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.

80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up

Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 camp,
giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect conditions, gives you
3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p streaming.

That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput and
subscriber count with such limitations in range and needed a "perfect
storm" of client distribution and data patterns to really take
advantage of. With working GPS in all modern platforms, I would be
hard pressed to not use an additional 20mhz channel if available, or
just cut the channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 Mimosas
or 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible
subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved range
(increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and greatly reduced
cost.

Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in spectral
efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut down on tx/rx
chains for multi-client transmission (costing your range, per client
snr, and per-client throughput in the process). MU-MIMO is and will
always be a niche hack that never lived up to what was promised.

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to all
> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is
> worth every penny.
>
> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
> deployment.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
>>
>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.
>>
>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never
>> > have
>> > something like that.
>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>> >
>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
>> > these
>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
>> > provides.
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Original Message --
>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >
>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>> >
>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those
>> > 25?
>> >
>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
>> >
>> > From: Joe Novak
>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >
>> > What

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Sean Heskett]

Not everyone uses the Internet at the same time bud.

My point is that we have APs with 80 subs on 30mbps package and the sector
hasn’t gotten past 80% utilization.

Try that with a Wi-Fi based AP in a 20mhz channel.

-sean

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:15 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:

> You have 2.5G ports on that AP do you?
>
> Fascinating.
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> > Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to
> all
> > of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat
> is
> > worth every penny.
> >
> > But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
> > deployment.
> >
> > 2 cents
> >
> > -sean
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.
> >>
> >> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
> >> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never
> >> > have
> >> > something like that.
> >> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >> >
> >> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
> >> > these
> >> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
> >> > provides.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -- Original Message --
> >> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >> > To: af@afmug.com
> >> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >> >
> >> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >> >
> >> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to
> those
> >> > 25?
> >> >
> >> > Packetflux GPS sync.
> >> >
> >> > From: Joe Novak
> >> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> >> > To: af@afmug.com
> >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >> >
> >> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the
> >> > early
> >> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
> having
> >> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
> problem
> >> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That
> is
> >> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
> exactly
> >> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
> around
> >> > 25
> >> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
> >> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On
> Rockets
> >> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs
> and
> >> >> on
> >> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August
> of
> >> >> 2017
> >> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
> >> >> them
> >> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
> >> >> The
> >> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works
> with
> >> >> us as
> >> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
> no
> >> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> Jaime Solorza
> >> >>
> >> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all
> other
> >> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jaime Solorza
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
> >> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> >> >>>> To: Animal Farm
> >> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4
> >> >>>> APs
> >> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Jaime Solorza
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about
> >> >>>>> 5.5
> >> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but
> >> >>>>> he is
> >> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
> >> >>>>> peacefully
> >> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
> >> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
> >> >>>>> routers.
> >> >
> >> >
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

You have 2.5G ports on that AP do you?

Fascinating.

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to all
> of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is
> worth every penny.
>
> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
> deployment.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
>>
>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.
>>
>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
>> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
>> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never
>> > have
>> > something like that.
>> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>> >
>> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over
>> > these
>> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
>> > provides.
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Original Message --
>> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >
>> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>> >
>> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those
>> > 25?
>> >
>> > Packetflux GPS sync.
>> >
>> > From: Joe Novak
>> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >
>> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the
>> > early
>> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having
>> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem
>> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is
>> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly
>> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around
>> > 25
>> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza
>> > <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets
>> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and
>> >> on
>> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of
>> >> 2017
>> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
>> >> them
>> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
>> >> The
>> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with
>> >> us as
>> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no
>> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
>> >>
>> >> Jaime Solorza
>> >>
>> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>> >>>
>> >>> Jaime Solorza
>> >>>
>> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>> >>>> To: Animal Farm
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4
>> >>>> APs
>> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jaime Solorza
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about
>> >>>>> 5.5
>> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but
>> >>>>> he is
>> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
>> >>>>> peacefully
>> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
>> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>> >>>>> routers.
>> >
>> >

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Sean Heskett]

Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 30mbps service to all
of them at peak Netflix time in a 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is
worth every penny.

But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best solution for every
deployment.

2 cents

-sean



On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:

> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.
>
> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
> 802.11ax via OFDMA.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> > Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never
> have
> > something like that.
> > UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >
> > On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over these
> > past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
> > provides.
> >
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >
> > The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >
> > So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those
> 25?
> >
> > Packetflux GPS sync.
> >
> > From: Joe Novak
> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >
> > What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the
> early
> > days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having
> > weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem
> > once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is
> > assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly
> > have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around
> 25
> > customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza <
> losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets
> >> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and
> on
> >> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of
> 2017
> >> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
> them
> >> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.  The
> >> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with
> us as
> >> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no
> >> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
> >>
> >> Jaime Solorza
> >>
> >> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
> >>> radios within 4 mile radius...
> >>>
> >>> Jaime Solorza
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> All on the same tower, right?
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Jaime Solorza
> >>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> >>>> To: Animal Farm
> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
> >>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
> >>>>
> >>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>>>
> >>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about
> 5.5
> >>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but
> he is
> >>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
> peacefully
> >>>>> coexist on a tower?
> >>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
> >>>>> routers.
> >
> >
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Reynolds]

The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not all that great.

I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous transmissions in
802.11ax via OFDMA.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never have
> something like that.
> UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
>
> On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over these
> past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the value it
> provides.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
>
> So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those 25?
>
> Packetflux GPS sync.
>
> From: Joe Novak
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the early
> days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having
> weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem
> once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is
> assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly
> have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around 25
> customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets
>> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on
>> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of 2017
>> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change them
>> since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.  The
>> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with us as
>> well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no
>> issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>>
>>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>>> To: Animal Farm
>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>>
>>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>>
>>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>>> routers.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

I am thinking of building an AF11 feed horn for my regular SM reflector 
dishes... probably not legal to use but cheap.  Call it a “test feedhorn”... ;-)

But then again, if I am running unlicensed, do I care if I am using legal 
dishes

Hypothetical questions of course...

From: Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 9:28 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

I love the AF-11 for its price point and overall value.  It’s a great product 
to use to build out an 11GHz backbone if you don’t need the speed of the big 
iron in the immediate future.


Jeff Broadwick 
CTIconnect

312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

On Feb 12, 2018, at 10:55 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:


  Wrong description. They are high value.

  Build quality is actually pretty good.



bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 2/12/2018 7:20 PM, TJ Trout wrote:

af11's are pretty cheap

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <jeffl...@att.net> 
wrote:

  In general, ePMP.


  Jeff Broadwick 
  CTIconnect

  312-205-2519 Office
  574-220-7826 Cell
  jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

  On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:


So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?

I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.  

I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t 
like it when it first came out.  

From: Joe Novak 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
        Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have 
vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some frequency 
separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's a purpose 
built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has the option to 
use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even better, I think it hit 
general availability.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza 
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

  Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other 
radios within 4 mile radius...


  Jaime Solorza

  On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

All on the same tower, right?

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
        To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 
APs in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... 

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

  Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is 
about 5.5 miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he 
is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

  Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points 
peacefully coexist on a tower?
  Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

I love the AF-11 for its price point and overall value.  It’s a great product 
to use to build out an 11GHz backbone if you don’t need the speed of the big 
iron in the immediate future.

Jeff Broadwick
CTIconnect
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 10:55 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Wrong description. They are high value.
> 
> Build quality is actually pretty good.
> 
> 
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
> 
>> On 2/12/2018 7:20 PM, TJ Trout wrote:
>> af11's are pretty cheap
>> 
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <jeffl...@att.net> 
>>> wrote:
>>> In general, ePMP.
>>> 
>>> Jeff Broadwick
>>> CTIconnect
>>> 312-205-2519 Office
>>> 574-220-7826 Cell
>>> jbroadw...@cticonnect.com
>>> 
>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>>>>  
>>>> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers. 
>>>>  
>>>> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t 
>>>> like it when it first came out.  
>>>>  
>>>> From: Joe Novak
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
>>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>>  
>>>> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have 
>>>> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some 
>>>> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's 
>>>> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has 
>>>> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even 
>>>> better, I think it hit general availability.
>>>>  
>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other 
>>>>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>>>  
>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>>>>> To: Animal Farm
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs 
>>>>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
>>>>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he 
>>>>>>> is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. 
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
>>>>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
>>>>>>> routers. 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Adam Moffett]

Why not both?  They rob themselves and also rob Ubiquiti, but that's 
better than letting Ubiquiti eat their lunch.



-- Original Message --
From: "Steve Jones" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/12/2018 11:09:50 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

I was given the budget if i wanted it for 450. After alot of 
consideration i just couldnt justify the 450 cost over epmp. Only a 
marginal aggregate gain. Mumimopappajohnspizza is so far not hammered 
snot like it was going to be, and hurt more by interference. Afaik 450 
was limited in band as well.
Epmp is so cheap you can keep throwing access points at it, different 
bands for different distances. We limit epmp to 8 miles, stay 
predominately in 5.1, 5 8 has more power, but everybody and their 
brother mucks it up.
We do lite APs and buy 4 packs of the upgrade keys so we always have 
them on hand.
I used to think cambium shot themselves in the foot with epmp. But 
really, they just robbed ubiquiti of a market share


On Feb 12, 2018 9:55 PM, "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:

Wrong description. They are high value.

Build quality is actually pretty good.



bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>


On 2/12/2018 7:20 PM, TJ Trout wrote:

af11's are pretty cheap

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
<jeffl...@att.net> wrote:

In general, ePMP.

Jeff Broadwick
CTIconnect
312-205-2519 <tel:%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826 <tel:%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:


So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?

I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.

I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I 
didn’t like it when it first came out.


From:Joe Novak
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
To:af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some 
have vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have 
some frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load 
is good, it's a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's 
purpose well. If he has the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever 
the naming convention is even better, I think it hit general 
availability.


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza 
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all 
other radios within 4 mile radius...


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

All on the same tower, right?

From:Jaime Solorza
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To:Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 
4 APs in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no 
issues...


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is 
about 5.5 miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest 
AF5X to him but he is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I 
presume.


Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points 
peacefully coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than 
home routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Steve Jones]

I was given the budget if i wanted it for 450. After alot of consideration
i just couldnt justify the 450 cost over epmp. Only a marginal aggregate
gain. Mumimopappajohnspizza is so far not hammered snot like it was going
to be, and hurt more by interference. Afaik 450 was limited in band as well.
Epmp is so cheap you can keep throwing access points at it, different bands
for different distances. We limit epmp to 8 miles, stay predominately in
5.1, 5 8 has more power, but everybody and their brother mucks it up.
We do lite APs and buy 4 packs of the upgrade keys so we always have them
on hand.
I used to think cambium shot themselves in the foot with epmp. But really,
they just robbed ubiquiti of a market share

On Feb 12, 2018 9:55 PM, "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:

Wrong description. They are high value.

Build quality is actually pretty good.


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>


On 2/12/2018 7:20 PM, TJ Trout wrote:

af11's are pretty cheap

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <jeffl...@att.net>
wrote:

> In general, ePMP.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> CTIconnect
> 312-205-2519 <%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@cticonnect.com
>
> On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
>
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t
> like it when it first came out.
>
> *From:* Joe Novak
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
> better, I think it hit general availability.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Bill Prince]

Wrong description. They are high value.

Build quality is actually pretty good.


bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>

On 2/12/2018 7:20 PM, TJ Trout wrote:

af11's are pretty cheap

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
<jeffl...@att.net <mailto:jeffl...@att.net>> wrote:


In general, ePMP.

Jeff Broadwick
CTIconnect
312-205-2519 <tel:%28312%29%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826 <tel:%28574%29%20220-7826> Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com <mailto:jbroadw...@cticonnect.com>

On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:


So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I
didn’t like it when it first came out.
*From:* Joe Novak
*Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
    *To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some
have vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta
have some frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under
load is good, it's a purpose built radio and I think it serves
it's purpose well. If he has the option to use the AF5XHD or
whatever the naming convention is even better, I think it hit
general availability.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft
away...all other radios within 4 mile radius...

Jaime Solorza
On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

All on the same tower, right?
*From:* Jaime Solorza
*Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
*To:* Animal Farm
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5
GHz off 4 APs in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3
WISPs...no issues...
Jaime Solorza
On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
wrote:

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small
wisp.  He is about 5.5 miles from a backbone
connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access
points peacefully coexist on a tower?
Very rural area. Not expecting much interference
other than home routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Mike Hammett]

Long gone. 

5150 - 5350 and 5470 - 5850 (with varring power restrictions) 

5150 - 5250 is actually the second most powerful band now. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 9:44:55 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp 




Back in the day, the 5.2 band was limited to indoor or low power. Is that 
limitation gone? 




From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 6:50 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp 


These days you have lots of 5.x ghz to work with. You've got 5.1 through 5.8 
minus that chunk of TDWR that they took out of the middle. 
Any products will coexist when you have that much room to spread them around. 


-- Original Message -- 
From: "Chuck McCown" < ch...@wbmfg.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: 2/12/2018 6:32:04 PM 
Subject: [AFMUG] mini wisp 






Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp. He is about 5.5 miles 
from a backbone connection. I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna want to 
use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. 

Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully coexist 
on a tower? 
Very rural area. Not expecting much interference other than home routers. 

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

Back in the day, the 5.2 band was limited to indoor or low power.  Is that 
limitation gone?

From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 6:50 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

These days you have lots of 5.x ghz to work with.  You've got 5.1 through 5.8 
minus that chunk of TDWR that they took out of the middle.
Any products will coexist when you have that much room to spread them around.


-- Original Message --
From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/12/2018 6:32:04 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] mini wisp

  Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 miles 
from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna want 
to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

  Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
  Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[TJ Trout]

af11's are pretty cheap

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <jeffl...@att.net>
wrote:

> In general, ePMP.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> CTIconnect
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@cticonnect.com
>
> On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
>
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t
> like it when it first came out.
>
> *From:* Joe Novak
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
> better, I think it hit general availability.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Joe Novak]

More 25 subs per access point. Anywhere from 3mbit to 20mbit. Average user
with kids and that usually goes with the 10mbit plan.

Don't mistake it. It's definitely a wifi based radio. It works well for us
though. If we had the sort of density to warrant the 450 product line and
450M... I'm guessing we would be down that path instead.


On Feb 12, 2018 7:28 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.

So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those 25?

Packetflux GPS sync.

*From:* Joe Novak
*Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the
early days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
having weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
problem once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
That is assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
exactly have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
around 25 customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of
room.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets
> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on
> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of
> 2017 when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
> them since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
> The other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with
> us as well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
> no issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[George Skorup]

But they work like crap a few feet apart when you're stuck in one rad 
center due to lack of front-end filtering and/or sync.


On 2/12/2018 7:50 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
These days you have lots of 5.x ghz to work with.  You've got 5.1 
through 5.8 minus that chunk of TDWR that they took out of the middle.
Any products will coexist when you have that much room to spread them 
around.



-- Original Message --
From: "Chuck McCown" >
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: 2/12/2018 6:32:04 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 
5.5 miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him 
but he is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points 
peacefully coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Adam Moffett]

450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing..ePMP will probably never 
have something like that.

UI is still sluggish on ePMP.

On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature improvements over 
these past few years that it's gotten really hard to argue with the 
value it provides.



-- Original Message --
From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp


The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.

So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to 
those 25?


Packetflux GPS sync.

From:Joe Novak
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
To:af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the 
early days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are 
having weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this 
problem once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid 
though. That is assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because 
then I don't exactly have enough experience with it. Most of our APs 
are sitting right around 25 customers, and according to airtime we 
still have quite a bit of room.


On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza 
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:
I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On 
Rockets and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on 
APs and on PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well 
since August of 2017 when I replaced all the radios on this network 
and have had to change them since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens 
and work with us on issues.  The other one from El Paso uses my 
services once in a while and works with us as well.  Texas Gas put up 
allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no issues. I used larger 
dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> 
wrote:
Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other 
radios within 4 mile radius...


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

All on the same tower, right?

From:Jaime Solorza
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To:Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 
APs in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 
5.5 miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him 
but he is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.


Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points 
peacefully coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jon Langeler]

Got ya. If he’s starting fresh, check out Mimosa also. Also consider AF11fx for 
backhaul at some point. I’m not sure I would recommend 450 unless it’s a 
government funded situation. 

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:49 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> 
> I never use an AF5X anywhere.  I used Orthogon when they first came out and 
> had good luck.
>  
> From: Jon Langeler
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:47 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>  
> He’ll need some frequency separation. Hey I thought you would’ve know all 
> this stuff a long time ago? 
> 
> Jon Langeler
> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>  
> 
>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:43 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> 
>> All on the same tower, right?
>>  
>> From: Jaime Solorza
>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>> To: Animal Farm
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>  
>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
>> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>  
>> Jaime Solorza
>>  
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is 
>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. 
>>>  
>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
>>> coexist on a tower?
>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers. 

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jaime Solorza]

Epmp

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 5:19 PM, "Jeff Broadwick - Lists" <jeffl...@att.net> wrote:

> In general, ePMP.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> CTIconnect
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@cticonnect.com
>
> On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
>
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t
> like it when it first came out.
>
> *From:* Joe Novak
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
> better, I think it hit general availability.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Adam Moffett]

These days you have lots of 5.x ghz to work with.  You've got 5.1 
through 5.8 minus that chunk of TDWR that they took out of the middle.
Any products will coexist when you have that much room to spread them 
around.



-- Original Message --
From: "Chuck McCown" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 2/12/2018 6:32:04 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he 
is gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.


Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.  

So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do you sell to those 25?

Packetflux GPS sync.  

From: Joe Novak 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the early 
days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having weird 
GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem once in a 
while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is assuming density 
isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly have enough experience 
with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around 25 customers, and according 
to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

  I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets and 
Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on 
PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of 2017 
when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change them 
since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.  The other 
one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with us as well.  
Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no issues. I used 
larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.   


  Jaime Solorza

  On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other 
radios within 4 mile radius...


Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

  All on the same tower, right?

  From: Jaime Solorza 
  Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
      To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

  Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... 

  Jaime Solorza

  On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna 
want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Mathew Howard]

I would use ePMP. 450 is nice stuff, but I just can't see how I would
justify the cost over ePMP for something like that.

It'll co-exist with an AF-5x link just fine, as long as there's enough
frequency separation. Ideally, you just use the 5.15-5.25ghz range for one,
and 5.8ghz for the other... of course that doesn't always work out if you
have other noise to deal with.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
>
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t
> like it when it first came out.
>
> *From:* Joe Novak
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
> better, I think it hit general availability.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Rory Conaway]

How much bandwidth do you have to provide to the clients?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Joe Novak
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the early 
days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are having weird 
GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem once in a 
while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though. That is assuming density 
isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't exactly have enough experience 
with it. Most of our APs are sitting right around 25 customers, and according 
to airtime we still have quite a bit of room.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza 
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com<mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets and 
Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on 
PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of 2017 
when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change them 
since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.  The other 
one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with us as well.  
Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still no issues. I used 
larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
<losguyswirel...@gmail.com<mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other radios 
within 4 mile radius...
Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" 
<ch...@wbmfg.com<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
All on the same tower, right?

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" 
<ch...@wbmfg.com<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 miles 
from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna want 
to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.

Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully coexist 
on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers.

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Joe Novak]

What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long way since the
early days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit deployed. A lot of people are
having weird GPS situations come up with the on-board GPS, we have this
problem once in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
That is assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then I don't
exactly have enough experience with it. Most of our APs are sitting right
around 25 customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a bit of
room.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets
> and Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on
> PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of
> 2017 when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
> them since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
> The other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with
> us as well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
> no issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

In general, ePMP.

Jeff Broadwick
CTIconnect
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> 
> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>  
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers. 
>  
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t like 
> it when it first came out. 
>  
> From: Joe Novak
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>  
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have 
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some frequency 
> separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's a purpose 
> built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has the option to 
> use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even better, I think it 
> hit general availability.
>  
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other radios 
>> within 4 mile radius...
>> 
>> Jaime Solorza
>>  
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>  
>>> From: Jaime Solorza
>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> To: Animal Farm
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>  
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
>>> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>  
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>  
>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is 
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. 
>>>>  
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points
>>>> peacefully coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers. 
> 
>  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Josh Baird]

50 customers over a cluster of 3-4APs?  ePMP 2000 for sure.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?
>
> I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.
>
> I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t
> like it when it first came out.
>
> *From:* Joe Novak
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
> vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
> frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
> a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
> the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
> better, I think it hit general availability.
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
>> radios within 4 mile radius...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All on the same tower, right?
>>>
>>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>>
>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs
>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>>
>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>>> coexist on a tower?
>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>>> routers.
>>>>
>>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jaime Solorza]

I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on AFx5s...On Rockets and
Powerbeams I choose one frequency and shut off the rest on APs and on
PowerBeams I only use two...this method has worked well since August of
2017 when I replaced all the radios on this network and have had to change
them since.  Two of the WISPs live in Fabens and work with us on issues.
The other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while and works with
us as well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 5GHz units around Fabens but still
no issues. I used larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza" <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
> radios within 4 mile radius...
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
>> All on the same tower, right?
>>
>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>> *To:* Animal Farm
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>
>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in
>> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>
>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>> coexist on a tower?
>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>> routers.
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

So if y’all were helping a friend would you recommend 450 or ePMP?

I doubt he will ever have more than 50 customers.  

I have not had much experience with ePMP in the last 4 years.  I didn’t like it 
when it first came out.  

From: Joe Novak 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have vertical 
separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some frequency 
separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's a purpose 
built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has the option to 
use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even better, I think it hit 
general availability.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

  Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other radios 
within 4 mile radius...


  Jaime Solorza

  On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

All on the same tower, right?

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To: Animal Farm 
    Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... 

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

  Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna 
want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

  Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
  Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home 
routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Joe Novak]

We have a few towers with AF5x and Cambium EPMP co-existing. Some have
vertical separation, some are grain elevators. Just gotta have some
frequency separation. I really like them. Latency under load is good, it's
a purpose built radio and I think it serves it's purpose well. If he has
the option to use the AF5XHD or whatever the naming convention is even
better, I think it hit general availability.

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
> radios within 4 mile radius...
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
>> All on the same tower, right?
>>
>> *From:* Jaime Solorza
>> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
>> *To:* Animal Farm
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>>
>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in
>> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>>
>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>>> coexist on a tower?
>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>>> routers.
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jaime Solorza]

Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft away...all other
radios within 4 mile radius...

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> All on the same tower, right?
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza
> *Sent:* Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> *To:* Animal Farm
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>
> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in
> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>
>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>>
>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
>> coexist on a tower?
>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
>> routers.
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

I never use an AF5X anywhere.  I used Orthogon when they first came out and had 
good luck. 

From: Jon Langeler 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:47 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

He’ll need some frequency separation. Hey I thought you would’ve know all this 
stuff a long time ago? 


Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:43 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:


  All on the same tower, right?

  From: Jaime Solorza 
  Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
  To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

  Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... 

  Jaime Solorza

  On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 
miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna 
want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jon Langeler]

He’ll need some frequency separation. Hey I thought you would’ve know all this 
stuff a long time ago? 

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:43 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
> 
> All on the same tower, right?
>  
> From: Jaime Solorza
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> To: Animal Farm
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
>  
> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
> Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...
>  
> Jaime Solorza
>  
>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 miles 
>> from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna 
>> want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume. 
>>  
>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
>> coexist on a tower?
>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers. 

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Chuck McCown]

All on the same tower, right?

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in 
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues... 

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

  Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5 miles 
from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is gonna want 
to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.  

  Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully 
coexist on a tower?
  Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home routers.  

Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

[Jaime Solorza]

Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 5 GHz off 4 APs in
Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no issues...

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  He is about 5.5
> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest AF5X to him but he is
> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
>
> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access points peacefully
> coexist on a tower?
> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference other than home
> routers.
>