On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, David E. Smith wrote:
The 192 (I don't think I've ever needed nine Ethernet ports on one
board) is a MIPS chip, the same as the Routerboard 500s, so in
theory it should work. I'm not Mikrotik, so I can't confirm this,
but it SHOULD work...
It's the same chip as the 100
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Travis Johnson wrote:
And even if they do, that doesn't make a complete radio system FCC
compliant... only their board.
No, but it is a GOOD first step toward creating certified systems.
If I were to try to build a certified system on the older boards,
I'd have to spend
Maybe someone can post the link to the FCC docs showing their certification?
Also, you will notice their PoE only supports up to 28VDC now, rather
than 48VDC like the RB532. They probably couldn't get the boards to pass
FCC at 48V.
Travis
Microserv
Butch Evans wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007,
Are you finding v3 to be a stable, functioning OS right now? I attempted
to load it on a 532 board about two months ago and the board would
reboot or lock-up about every 3-5 days. I put 2.9.40 back and it has
been up solid since then.
I did see about a 10% improvement on the wireless speeds
MT v3 is now in a release candidate release. Have they solved the issues
enough to really call it a release candidate?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List
I just jokingly said it, but with MT's track record of PR hell...
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 1:06 PM
Chipping in here,
To be fair to MT:
AFAIK It's harder/more expensive to design 48V-input power supplies (the
chips on most boards require some mix of 5.0/3.3/2.5V or other rails) than
lower voltages.
Of course 48V is desirable by users, because of lower cable loss, enabling
longer runs. I had this
I don't feel a need to defend my statements, but because I believe that this
particular incidence could provide a service for others, I will explain my
opinion as best as possible. I don't believe my opinion is right or wrong,
it is just that, an opinion. Your opinion has as much use as my own, to
HELP!
Got hit by lightning, was using a 5ghz CM9 w/LMR to a 2' PAC Wireless
5ghz dish.
When I enable the interface, EVERYTHING in 5ghz up here goes down.
Massive ping times, etc.
I've replaced the routerboard / CM9 (went up to R52) and the pigtail /
jumper. Only thing left is the feedhorn on the
I had a couple of customers running their cores with 3.0. on x86 platforms
though. We did find a weird nat issue, but that was on build 10.
On 8/4/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just jokingly said it, but with MT's track record of PR hell...
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent
10 matches
Mail list logo
