General List
Subject: [WISPA] UBNT, Aggregation, network latency
Though I'd pass this on.
I have BulletM2 as AP fed to two NanostationM5's as a backhaul that goes to
a 512k down/128k up satellite connection. Theoretically the pokey internet
connection shouldn't be able to send enough d
Though I'd pass this on.
I have BulletM2 as AP fed to two NanostationM5's as a backhaul that goes to a
512k down/128k up satellite connection. Theoretically the pokey internet
connection shouldn't be able to send enough data through the network to flood
the network to capacity however I was see
We have hundreds of legacy 802.11a/g UBNT equipment deployed in Colorado and
Costa Rica.
In Colorado we offer 12Mbps/6Mbps service over 802.11g--it works great. We
use NS2 and PS2 as AP, MT behind that to do things like QoS/routing.
Latency does spike and is not consistent. We have seen no issues
.
>
> Bob-
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Scott Carullo
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 11:45 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no point
18, 2010 11:45 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
What power adapters are you using specifically please...
Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102
From: "Robert West"
Sen
What power adapters are you using specifically please...
Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102
From: "Robert West"
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:41 AM
To: "WISPA General List"
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M"
It is in the forums
http://www.ubnt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19866
http://www.ubnt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19867
Be careful using it in production environments, it is a beta and may have bugs.
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Do you have a link to the f
Michael,
Do you have a link to the firmware? It is not listed at their website.
Scottie
-- Original Message --
From: Michael Baird
Reply-To: WISPA General List
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:12:14 -0400
>Bad firmware and poor compatibility with legacy proto
esday, April 14, 2010 3:13 PM
To: "WISPA General List"
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Canopy is proprietary. If you are not running canopy you will need a
spectrum analyzer that sees the raw RF.
--
Justin Wilson
http://www.mtin.net/blog
Wisp Co
General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Canopy is proprietary. If you are not running canopy you will need a
spectrum analyzer that sees the raw RF.
--
Justin Wilson
http://www.mtin.net/blog
Wisp Consulting Tower Climbing Network Support
From: Fai
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Interesting...
What would a Canopy Signature look like ?
Faisal
On 4/14/2010 2:56 PM, Gino Villarini wrote:
> Canopy wont show on his scan, that is a 802.11 scan
>
> Gi
t; -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 2:51 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
>
> Ouch... lo
2:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Ouch... looks like noise in the area is killing you...
Does any know what the Moto Canopy Mac address start with ?
This way you can check to see if there is Moto Canopy running there..
:9B:D1 OurMaddieWPA -78 / -83 2.412 1
>>> 00:18:F8:B8:AB:86 19darne57WEP -77 / -83 2.437 6
>>> 00:16:B6:45:69:4D RalphsWEP -71 / -83 2.437 6
>>> 00:13:10:69:BE:A8 linksysNONE -76 / -85 2.422 3
>>> 00:21:29:95:3A:67 JohnNONE -72
, 2010 2:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Current "stable" setup is Airmax on, 10 Mhz channel, freq 2417 (channel
2).
Noise floor varies -96 to -83 dBm
Signal RX from station -59 to -67
TX/RX 13 Mbps
CCQ 100%
Speed
WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Current "stable" setup is Airmax on, 10 Mhz channel, freq 2417 (channel
2).
Noise floor varies -96 to -83 dBm
Signal RX from station -59 to -67
TX/RX 13 Mbps
CCQ 100%
Speedtest shows 2.88 Mbps
6 / -85 2.422 3
> >00:21:29:95:3A:67 JohnNONE -72 / -83 2.437 6
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Gino Villarini
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If you are using the latest fw, use the airview spectrum analyzer to see
> >
r.com
>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>> 787.273.4143
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of AJ
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:24 PM
>> To: WISPA General L
14, 2010 2:09 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
Here is the upper portion of the band running Airview - it's roughly the
same across the entire 2.3-2.7 band that the NS2M can scan, of course
significantly higher centered on US
Go to the 5ghz version and you'll probably fly!
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of AJ
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:09 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made
I'm running the latest beta. Distance is around 500 meters.
I can drop the TX power another 20dbm and the rssi only goes down a few db.
Right now I dropped it to 7dbm and the rssi only dropped to -55. I'd like to
get to -65 but I'd have to skew the units and there's so many metal buildings
here
-
>> From: "Greg Ihnen"
>> To: "WISPA General List"
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
>>
>>
>> Do you mean like this? Notice the rssi on the lower
TCP/IP throughput on that?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Greg Ihnen
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 9:59 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M"
p/down... Running the latest
>>>>> Beta... Doesn't help the noise floor bounces around -85 to -80 all day
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> long
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> (I can see 26 different consumer r
: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
I'm on the latest beta firmware...
And swapping out $200 worth of gear to play on another band is
frustrating...
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Faisal Imtia
Looks like my images got stripped out. Here's links to the images.
The distance is only about 500 or 600 yards, that's why I have the transmit
power turned way down.
Do you mean like this? Notice the rssi on the lower pic. These are two NS5Ms
setup as a backhaul. I was assuming the rssi is bein
uters from both sides of the link)
> >>>
> >> from
> >>
> >>> the nearby subdivision...
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Joe Miller >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Holy crapwhere do
ion...
>>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Joe Miller>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Holy crapwhere do I get one of those. That is one hell of a link you
>>>> have there.
>>>>
>>>> Joe Miller
>>>> DSL
31-8881
> >> www.dslbyair.com
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Greg Ihnen"
> >> To: "WISPA General List"
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:59 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no poi
http://ubnt.com/nanostationm
http://ubnt.com/bulletm
I wanna get "hooked" too. I'm gonna drop UBNT for something else if
they dont improve soon.
Thanks!
-RickG
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> . NanoM ? or just plain Nano ?
> I have no experience with the plain Nano,
Yes, something like this... but in conjunction to the different RSSI,
you would also see a disparity in the TX/RX link.
reducing the power would end up exaggerating the difference..
Your units don't appear to have this problem... you also are running it
rather hot at -50 :)
You might consider t
gt; www.dslbyair.com
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Greg Ihnen"
>> To: "WISPA General List"
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
>>
>>
>&g
;
> Joe Miller
> DSLbyAir, LLC
> 228-831-8881
> www.dslbyair.com
> - Original Message -
> From: "Greg Ihnen"
> To: "WISPA General List"
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no poin
Damn!
Distance?
Whats the actual TCP/IP throughput on that?
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Greg Ihnen
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 9:59 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubi
Holy crapwhere do I get one of those. That is one hell of a link you
have there.
Joe Miller
DSLbyAir, LLC
228-831-8881
www.dslbyair.com
- Original Message -
From: "Greg Ihnen"
To: "WISPA General List"
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:59 AM
Subject: Re:
. NanoM ? or just plain Nano ?
I have no experience with the plain Nano, but would suggest that you
visit the UBNT forum and do a bit of pokeing arround, would not be
surprised if there were firmware related issues...
My playing has only been with the "M" grear. Their 2x2 MIMO "M" grear is
Sorry, I want clear. Thats what I get for hijacking the thread :)
I'm not using Rockets - just plain old Bullets & Nanos with "regular antennas.
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> ...not using MIMO mode ... ? what antenna are you using ?
>
> Using the Rocket M5 without the U
List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
It's all getting a bit confusing... I thought it was Forbes who had
purchased the 10packs of Airgrids and Nanobridges...
To the best of my short re-collection, Rick G has not stated what model
of "M&
gt; They've had some issues with the 15V not providing enough power even on
> short runs.
>
> Bob-
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010
short runs.
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
5V is on
Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 10:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubnt vs Moto vs ... your brand
Hi Chuck,
Do you have any field review/ deployment info comparison of the
other volt or 2 it behaves.
>
> Bob-
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of RickG
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:34 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M"
d" but if I hit it
with another volt or 2 it behaves.
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti
...not using MIMO mode ... ? what antenna are you using ?
Using the Rocket M5 without the Ubiquiti Antenna's is like driving a
sports car with all flat tires :)
There is a good documentation on the UBNT forum on how to verify the
bad/defective units
Testing them , have two units sync/link t
Upgraded to version 5.1.2 prior to installation. Still poor
performance. Not using Mimo mode. Using as an AP on a repeater. Having
no luck connecting to it with another M unit as CPE. Think its a bad
radio(s)?
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Michael Baird wrote:
> Bad firmware and poor compatib
] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] UBNT "M" Was: Ubiquiti made no points today
I've been using regular Bullets and NS2's which have been working
great. So, I thought I'd give the "M" units a try.
What are some of the specifics that you came across.
There are some known issues to watchout for...
Best use the Ubiquiti Antenna's...
The Panels have built in Electrical downtilt in them.
There some strange issues with older firmware...5.1.2 seems to be more
stable the previous ones.
Depending o
Bad firmware and poor compatibility with legacy protocols. Make sure you
upgrade them to the absolute latest beta available on the forums.
Regards
Michael Baird
> I've been using regular Bullets and NS2's which have been working
> great. So, I thought I'd give the "M" units a try. So far, nothing
I've been using regular Bullets and NS2's which have been working
great. So, I thought I'd give the "M" units a try. So far, nothing but
poor signal, dropped packets, & low throughput. Replacing them with
regular units fix the issue. What gives?
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Forbes Mercy
wrote
y dollar increase matters.
-Jeff
Convergence Technologies
"There is a difference"
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Francois D. Menard
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 7:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WI
00. Performance is just better and
>>> it scales.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chuck Hogg
>>> Shelby Broadband
>>> 502-722-9292
>>> ch...@shelbybb.com
>>> http://www.shelbybb.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Me
lbybb.com
>> http://www.shelbybb.com
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Travis Johnson
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 9:24 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>>
-Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 9:24 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubnt vs Moto vs ... your brand
>
> Hi,
>
> Let's
spa.org] On
> Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 9:24 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubnt vs Moto vs ... your brand
>
> Hi,
>
> Let's keep it simple and easy. With Canopy your system can scale
> infinitely (due to GPS sync) and
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 9:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubnt vs Moto vs ... your brand
Hi,
Let's keep it simple and easy. With Canopy your system can scale
infinitely (due to GPS sync) and latency is always very lo
Awesome overview - thank you.
On Apr 13, 2010, at 9:23 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Let's keep it simple and easy. With Canopy your system can scale
> infinitely (due to GPS sync) and latency is always very low and
> consistent (less than 10ms). With UBNT, you can build a system much
> che
Hi,
Let's keep it simple and easy. With Canopy your system can scale
infinitely (due to GPS sync) and latency is always very low and
consistent (less than 10ms). With UBNT, you can build a system much
cheaper, and one that will probably work in a small, rural area.
However, it does not scale.
Actually, both work together ... we extend our Canopy PPPoE bridged segments
with Ubnt's for el-cheapo point-to-point extensions ...
Sort of a Moto Canopy P2MP-to-UBnt(P)-to-UBnt(P)
F.
On 2010-04-13, at 8:29 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> It's not so much what you're discussing there as much as the
It's not so much what you're discussing there as much as the capabilities of
the ptmp products.
You simply can not offer the latency guarantees using Ubiquiti/802.11 that
Canopy provides.
Now if you've got 3 people to serve I think it's financially ridiculous to
get a Canopy system involved...
J
In trying to make the right buying decision - some simple answers may
help.
1. What is the meantime failure rate for your ubiquity equipment
2. What is the avg amount of truck rolls per week you run to fix an
issue vs the # of customers you have?
ie- if you have say 1500 clients and do 8
It wasnt.
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Josh Luthman
wrote:
> Depends if the station/CPE was using WDS.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
>
Sicne the AP's are WRAPs and dont do WDS (that I know of) I ended up
swapping out the WRAP with a BM2. Works great now!
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Cameron Kilton wrote:
> Are the Access point and the Station set to WDS. Ubnt recommends this
> for the units to be a full transparent bridge.
Usually adds trouble in that case. I have had good luck NATing at the
bullet/NS2 devices.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill
If the only clients are laptops (no WDS) to a Bullet or NS2 would WDS being on
offer anything?
Thanks!
Greg
On Apr 12, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> Depends if the station/CPE was using WDS.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
>
Depends if the station/CPE was using WDS.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Greg Ihnen wr
If a UBNT radio is used solely as an AP (not bridged to another unit) would
turning WDS on or off have any effect on the handling of data?
Greg
On Apr 12, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Cameron Kilton wrote:
> Are the Access point and the Station set to WDS. Ubnt recommends this
> for the units to be a fu
Are the Access point and the Station set to WDS. Ubnt recommends this
for the units to be a full transparent bridge.
We had a similar issue and this fixed it for us.
-Cameron
Thanks,
Cameron Kilton
Project Manager
Midcoast Internet Solutions
http://www.midcoast.com
c...@midcoast.com
(207) 594-
, April 08, 2010 9:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Kurt,
Are they reliable? They seem to be much lower cost compared to
what we've used previously (Snaptec).
Pat
Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:54:03AM -0400, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> This should fix your
r
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Patrick Cole
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 12:31
, April 07, 2010 12:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Phil,
The units we had would not boot unless they were powered using 48V.
This also caused us some dramas since our sites had 12V supplies
predominantly. The spec sheet of the radio lists a wide input
voltage but
Phil,
The units we had would not boot unless they were powered using 48V.
This also caused us some dramas since our sites had 12V supplies
predominantly. The spec sheet of the radio lists a wide input
voltage but acording to support our hardware required the 48.
The radios were definitely brand
Actually it is a Ubiquti radio and the power supply does not need to
be 48 volts, 9-48 works fine for the Gateworks board (Avila GW2348-2).
We had moisture get in the ethernet jack and burn the pins when it
was using 48 volts, so we switched to a Ubiquti 15 volt adapter and
have not had any proble
-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 7:24 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
270 customers will squash Ubiquiti if you put that kind of weight on its
shoulders. I strongly advise against a "higher end" backhaul. I love
270 customers will squash Ubiquiti if you put that kind of weight on its
shoulders. I strongly advise against a "higher end" backhaul. I love
MikroTik but at 270 customers, that is kind of iffy in my opinion. I'd
probably do it based on the fact that they always work for me and their
price point
I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical
as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster.
I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N
and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative.
We had one of
OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away from
UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this link with
270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 packet per sec
limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am looki
ld be for long range
> production.
>
> Bob-
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:36 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re
Same firmware.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 5:15 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
PowerBridgeM5 says 20km of distance but I guess that&#
et Service
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Robert West
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:33 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
I wouldn't go with a panel antenna at that range.
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Robert West"
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 3:32 PM
> To: "'WISPA General List'"
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
>
>
>> I wouldn't go with a panel antenna at tha
Not to mention running 40MHz channels long range at 25dbi.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Is
-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Is PowerBridge vs. NanoBridge just panel vs. dish?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-i
Is PowerBridge vs. NanoBridge just panel vs. dish?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: "Robert West"
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 3:32 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'&qu
I have better luck with
a parabolic type antenna be it grid or dish.
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 4:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
The problem is resolvable, that issue is caused by the multicast kernel
module they load.
I believe it should be resolved in the next firmware iteration, rather
then having to manually unload the module.
Regards
Michael Baird
> We've had issues with Ubiquiti and OSPF. We've had to move some si
Climbing Network Support
From: Steve Barnes
Reply-To: WISPA General List
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 16:18:24 -0400
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Wondering if anyone has an opinion good/bad on the Ubiquity PowerBridgeM5.
Need it for a 12 mile link with heavy traffic
We've had issues with Ubiquiti and OSPF. We've had to move some sites
to BGP to fix the problem.
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
Pretty pricey, $265 each retail. They aren't available on the market yet
either, I'd be careful about being an early adopter with Ubiquiti gear.
Regards
Michael Baird
> Wondering if anyone has an opinion good/bad on the Ubiquity PowerBridgeM5.
>
> Need it for a 12 mile link with heavy traffic. Br
Wondering if anyone has an opinion good/bad on the Ubiquity PowerBridgeM5.
Need it for a 12 mile link with heavy traffic. Bridged with OSPF pass through.
Something better. Also Looked at the LigoWave LigoPTP5-23 MiMo but prefer
UBNT price.
Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
I had a similar situation recently that I never figured out.
WRAP/StarOS on a tower and for some reason the CM9 radio card would no
longer connect to the source for backhaul. So, I added a BM5 in bridge
mode to the ethernet port. All the clients on the StarOS/WRAP worked
great but I could no longer
Well, I set the AP to use WDS and the bullet to station wds and now
everything works ok.
LaRoy McCann
Data Technology
Data Technology wrote:
> One thing I have noticed is that when I ping the local MT box
> (x.x.x.125) ip from the AP I get a reply and I also see icmp traffic on
> the local MT
One thing I have noticed is that when I ping the local MT box
(x.x.x.125) ip from the AP I get a reply and I also see icmp traffic on
the local MT with torch. If I ping the ip of the subnet that I am
trying to route to the local MT box (x.x.x.194) I get several reply's
back from x.x.x.126 whic
Yeah, that brings back bad memories. I did that once(wds ap mode) and
had nothing but problems.
I will try the wds station mode and see how that works.
LaRoy McCann
Data Technology
Greg Ihnen wrote:
> If one end is WDS AP and the other end (the bullet) is WDS Station then there
> won't be any
Shouldn't matter bridged, I've got different networks running through bridged
bullets and not in WDS.
-- Original Message --
From: Data Technology
Reply-To: WISPA General List
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:09:57 -0500
>Completely different subnets.
>
>AP x.
That does not matter, the Bullet is in bridge mode.
Regards
Michael Baird
> Is the subnet outside the scope of the ip range the bullet is on? In other
> words is the bullet on a /24 for example and does the subnet fall within that
> /24?
>
> Greg
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Data Technology wr
Completely different subnets.
AP x.x.x.65/26 (64-127) Bridged Bullet x.x.x.126/26 Local MT
x.x.x.125/26
Trying to route x.x.x.192/28 (192-207) from AP to Local MT x.x.x.125
LaRoy McCann
Data Technology
Greg Ihnen wrote:
> Is the subnet outside the scope of the ip range the bullet is on?
If one end is WDS AP and the other end (the bullet) is WDS Station then there
won't be any issues. If you set the bullet to WDS AP as well then you'll half
your throughput.
Greg
On Mar 31, 2010, at 3:08 PM, Data Technology wrote:
> The AP is MT but I don't think that is a problem. MT and UBNT
Is the subnet outside the scope of the ip range the bullet is on? In other
words is the bullet on a /24 for example and does the subnet fall within that
/24?
Greg
On Mar 31, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Data Technology wrote:
> I have an M5 bullet in station bridge mode. This is connected on the
> ether
The AP is MT but I don't think that is a problem. MT and UBNT wds work
together best I remember.
What is the down side to using WDS on the AP?
Will the other users on the AP have any performance issues due to using WDS?
LaRoy McCann
Data Technology
Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> Change both the Ap & CP
Change both the Ap & CPE (Ubiquity) from reguar to WDS mode...
(WDS is the transparent bridge mode on these units).
Faisal.
On 3/31/2010 3:14 PM, Data Technology wrote:
> I have an M5 bullet in station bridge mode. This is connected on the
> ethernet side to an MT router.
> Thru another port on
401 - 500 of 600 matches
Mail list logo
