[WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Tom DeReggi
I just installed a link using CM9, Station Server, WRAP board, about 300 yards away LOS, with only a single client so far on AP to SU mode. The radios associated at 54 mbps, and about -70 db, with a quality of 24/29. All speed enhancement features enable, and encryption turned off. Using

RE: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread G.Villarini
Change to Motorola Canopy ! ducking ! Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.767.7466 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:37 PM To: WISPA

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler
300 yards with LOS with a signal of -70 dB? That sure seems low. You either have another system real close or you have severe trouble with antenna or cabling. A Superpass 21 dB at that range would give you -40 dB or better signals, assuming proper cabling. Did you set the distance to a couple

Re: [WISPA] MRTG

2005-10-10 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
Ok, so I have got it working. Should I graph bytes or bits? Brian -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] MRTG

2005-10-10 Thread Aubrey Wells
I find bits to be more useful simply because we sell packages based around bits (1.5Mbit, 3Mbit, 10Mbit, etc). Graphing in bits lets me look at the graphs and quickly determine the amount of throughput a given user or link is getting in relation to what I sold them. If it were graphed in bytes

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread George
The wraps have a limitation, maybe the client does as well. Turn on the advanced features and it will go more speed. Buy WAR boads and StarVX and go TWICE as fast or use HALF the channel space. George Tom DeReggi wrote: I just installed a link using CM9, Station Server, WRAP board, about

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Matt Liotta
Sounds like you just want an external antenna jack on the Access5830. If so, you might consider doing something similar to what the LastMileGear guys do with the Canopy 5.7 gear. -Matt Tom DeReggi wrote: I just installed a link using CM9, Station Server, WRAP board, about 300 yards away

Re: [WISPA] MRTG

2005-10-10 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
I set up like 10 different IPs (build config) but it's only graphing the last one. Aubrey Wells wrote: I find bits to be more useful simply because we sell packages based around bits (1.5Mbit, 3Mbit, 10Mbit, etc). Graphing in bits lets me look at the graphs and quickly determine the amount

RE: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread G.Villarini
That's a easy mod, I have done it myself... Trango gear has a 2 mcx jacks on the pcb ... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.767.7466 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Matt Liotta
That's good to know if for no other reason than to use better coax jumpers. It is really annoying that Trango uses RP-SMA connectors as opposed to N. -Matt G.Villarini wrote: That's a easy mod, I have done it myself... Trango gear has a 2 mcx jacks on the pcb ... Gino A. Villarini,

RE: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread David E. Smith
I just installed a link using CM9, Station Server, WRAP board, about 300 yards away LOS, with only a single client so far on AP to SU mode. The radios associated at 54 mbps, and about -70 db, with a quality of 24/29. All speed enhancement features enable, and encryption turned off. Using

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Tom DeReggi
Oops... I'm using 5.3G with 19 dbi antenna, estimating 2 db in cable loss, to meet legal 30db limit. At a half mile, we calculated it to be -54db, and at 1/4 mile -48. However, I was reading the power in station server wrong, I was reading the Ack strength instead of Data strength which

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Tom DeReggi
Actually, I also have made the mods in the past. My point is the manufacturer should make the mods. Maybe they will someday, if they keep hearing justification spelled out. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler
Our test uses large packets and TCP. The problem is that the bandwidth tester consumes a lot of the CPU, so the solution is to test between machines on the edges, and thus get the true throughput without the limitations of CPU speed. Lots of guys have used desktop machines and found that the

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread George
Ahhh you've never cracked one open to see what's inside? Ask Gino, you have to take everything apart and see what makes it tick. :) George Matt Liotta wrote: That's good to know if for no other reason than to use better coax jumpers. It is really annoying that Trango uses RP-SMA connectors

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread George
Anyone picked up one of Valemount's new WAR boards and their modified StarOS distribution for them (StarVX)? David Smith MVN.net Yeppers, I have a couple of PtP links using the WAR StarVX. Using cloaking, 5 and 10MHz channel spacing in 5 gig.

Re: [WISPA] Atheros speed WRAP vs RB532

2005-10-10 Thread David E. Smith
George wrote: Anyone picked up one of Valemount's new WAR boards and their modified StarOS distribution for them (StarVX)? Yeppers, I have a couple of PtP links using the WAR StarVX. Using cloaking, 5 and 10MHz channel spacing in 5 gig.