Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Tom, I may be mistaken but wasn't that the case where Charles was discussing the licensed option which required a minimum 6' dish ? Tom DeReggi wrote: Charles, Your point is well demonstrated, except 6' Dish: +34 dBi Not sure what dishes you are talking about, You can get 34 dbi out of an Andrews 3 footer. With 6 foot you should be able to get 37 dbi. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - *From:* Charles Wu mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* 'WISPA General List' mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent:* Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:25 PM *Subject:* RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize that a similarly performing unlicensed solution will cost MUCH MORE (and be much riskier) relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb Air Rate transmits on V-pol 150 Mb Air Rate transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a theoretical path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin = ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of real-world performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com http://www.winog.com/ -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Travis Johnson *Sent:* Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PM *To:* WISPA General List *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Travis Microserv Charles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Yes, but it will deliver easily the speed requested in the original post. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: But a Spectra WILL NOT DELIVER anything close to 300 Mbps of REAL TCP THROUGHPUT from 9-16 miles (not even half duplex) And that's even assuming 30 Mhz of clean spectrum ( +25 dB SNR) in BOTH V H polarities -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.Villarini Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 7:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message snip Charles, Your point is well demonstrated, except 6' Dish: +34 dBi Not sure what dishes you are talking about, You can get 34 dbi out of an Andrews 3 footer. With 6 foot you should be able to get 37 dbi. /snip Lol -- you're right after not sleeping for a week -- I guess I'm allowed to make a mistake wink -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggiSent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:10 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Charles Wu To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul optionsTravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Charles you make a good point, but Im going to throw a but in here: but the Orthogon / Canopy 300 radios will run also run at: 64 QAM .92 dual -62 receive sensitivity +18 output (252.9 throughput) 64 QAM .75 dual -68 receive sensitivity +18 output (206.7 throughput) 16 QAM .87 dual -71 receive sensitivity +20 output (160.8 throughput) In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps Based on this data (and adding in timing degradation that a link would sustain when traveling over a longer distance), in order to acheive true "wire-speed" full-duplex 100 Mb Ethernet on the radio, I would guess that you would need to maintain the full-order modulation in order to keep the "apples-to-apples" comparison with a licensed 100 Mb radio link (e.g., Ceragon, Dragonwave, MNI). Full list can be found in the release notes and if you do the math on those modulations you can get some very good performance. I do agree with you that the licensed links would make more sense, buthanging4 foot dishes on towers becomes a very expensive task or if you have to do a non-penetrating roof mount skid, the cost difference between the sleds is big. So we have to take in more than the cost of the radios, licenses, leases and dishes but put together the total cost because if you are hanging BIG dishes youre going to dig deeper into your pocket. if he has clean spectrum to "spare" and doesn't need full 100 Mb wire speed performance, than the Spectra does make more economical sense -- but I would argue that you would need similarly (if not larger) sized dishes on the Spectra (4' 6' dishes) due to 5 GHz spectrum congestion "risks" and the need/desire to minimize Rf beamwidths -Charles -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dustin JurmanSent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:47 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Dustin Jurman From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles WuSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:26 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options TravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one o
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Charles Wu wrote: In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps What TCP settings did you use to achieve the above? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
We are running FreeBSD boxes w/ Gigabit Ethernet NICs I don't know all the details, since I'm not the technical guy running the tests, but I believe we are using standard 1500-byte packets w/ standard MTUs, etc On a 100 Mb FastE link (benchmark) we get the following 1 Way TCP Max: 94.0 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 92.7 / 92.4 Mbps On a GiGE link, due to Linux kernal processing issues, we max out at about 400 Mbps of raw TCP throughput -Charles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles Wu wrote: In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps What TCP settings did you use to achieve the above? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Technical guy I think Anton is more of a Rocket Scientist ... jeje Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 1:56 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options We are running FreeBSD boxes w/ Gigabit Ethernet NICs I don't know all the details, since I'm not the technical guy running the tests, but I believe we are using standard 1500-byte packets w/ standard MTUs, etc On a 100 Mb FastE link (benchmark) we get the following 1 Way TCP Max: 94.0 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 92.7 / 92.4 Mbps On a GiGE link, due to Linux kernal processing issues, we max out at about 400 Mbps of raw TCP throughput -Charles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles Wu wrote: In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps What TCP settings did you use to achieve the above? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Not sure what Linux kernel issues have to due with a FreeBSB box, but I am more interested in whether the following TCP settings are enabled. RFC 2018 SACK RFC 896 Nagle RFC 3168 ECN RFC 1323 Time stamping and window scaling It is very difficult to achieve max throughput of a TCP link without at least SACK and window scaling enabled. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: We are running FreeBSD boxes w/ Gigabit Ethernet NICs I don't know all the details, since I'm not the technical guy running the tests, but I believe we are using standard 1500-byte packets w/ standard MTUs, etc On a 100 Mb FastE link (benchmark) we get the following 1 Way TCP Max: 94.0 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 92.7 / 92.4 Mbps On a GiGE link, due to Linux kernal processing issues, we max out at about 400 Mbps of raw TCP throughput -Charles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles Wu wrote: In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps What TCP settings did you use to achieve the above? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Dustin, You have showed how using both Pols, can reduce the sensitivity requirements of the radio, able to extend link distance, and likely aid in NLOS(that could degrade signal) as well. However, when Tackling noise, that doesn't really help, does it? As the sensitivity drops, that RSSI level also gets closer to the noise floor, in many cases cancelling out the benefit. So my question to you is have you seen theDual Pol config help combat the noise? Meaning... Allowing the radio to operate closer to the noise floor at high modulations. Maybe by rebuilding the wave by comparing them?For example, Proxim's circular pol solution, often allows it to operate closer to the noise floor because if it. Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dustin Jurman To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:47 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles you make a good point, but Im going to throw a but in here: but the Orthogon / Canopy 300 radios will run also run at: 64 QAM .92 dual -62 receive sensitivity +18 output (252.9 throughput) 64 QAM .75 dual -68 receive sensitivity +18 output (206.7 throughput) 16 QAM .87 dual -71 receive sensitivity +20 output (160.8 throughput) Full list can be found in the release notes and if you do the math on those modulations you can get some very good performance. I do agree with you that the licensed links would make more sense, but hanging 4 foot dishes on towers becomes a very expensive task or if you have to do a non-penetrating roof mount skid, the cost difference between the sleds is big. So we have to take in more than the cost of the radios, licenses, leases and dishes but put together the total cost because if you are hanging BIG dishes youre going to dig deeper into your pocket. Sorry I missed you at the show, Im on baby watch so when she saw wireless beer and gear she called foul and took away my kitchen pass L. Dustin Jurman From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles WuSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:26 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options TravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Actually using both poles increases the sensitivity of the radio at least by the way the Orthogon/Canopy 300s operate when in single payload. The dual payload option decouples this feature and you really have two radios sending information on the same dish, one in H and one in V. If you look at the release notes any time the radios are in dual payload you need more receive sensitivity then in single payload. (makes sense right?) Only the Spectra/Canopy300s operate in dual payload mode. The Gemini/Moto 60s operate in single payload all the time giving them a very high system gain by allowing them to combine both poles into a single signal for processing. So to answer your question, Yes dual pole can combat noise by increasing system gain really just creating more C/I. A while ago I told you that I was testing some of the new Gabriel High Performance dishes. When I get some time I have some screen shots that Ill post that I think youll find very interesting. Dustin From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Dustin, You have showed how using both Pols, can reduce the sensitivity requirements of the radio, able to extend link distance, and likely aid in NLOS(that could degrade signal) as well. However, when Tackling noise, that doesn't really help, does it? As the sensitivity drops, that RSSI level also gets closer to the noise floor, in many cases cancelling out the benefit. So my question to you is have you seen theDual Pol config help combat the noise? Meaning... Allowing the radio to operate closer to the noise floor at high modulations. Maybe by rebuilding the wave by comparing them?For example, Proxim's circular pol solution, often allows it to operate closer to the noise floor because if it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dustin Jurman To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:47 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles you make a good point, but Im going to throw a but in here: but the Orthogon / Canopy 300 radios will run also run at: 64 QAM .92 dual -62 receive sensitivity +18 output (252.9 throughput) 64 QAM .75 dual -68 receive sensitivity +18 output (206.7 throughput) 16 QAM .87 dual -71 receive sensitivity +20 output (160.8 throughput) Full list can be found in the release notes and if you do the math on those modulations you can get some very good performance. I do agree with you that the licensed links would make more sense, but hanging 4 foot dishes on towers becomes a very expensive task or if you have to do a non-penetrating roof mount skid, the cost difference between the sleds is big. So we have to take in more than the cost of the radios, licenses, leases and dishes but put together the total cost because if you are hanging BIG dishes youre going to dig deeper into your pocket. Sorry I missed you at the show, Im on baby watch so when she saw wireless beer and gear she called foul and took away my kitchen pass L. Dustin Jurman From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:26 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performingunlicensed solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb Air Rate transmits on V-pol 150 Mb Air Rate transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a theoretical path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of real-world performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Hi Matt, To answer your questions from my relatively limited sales marketing point of view RFC 2018 SACK Yes it is enabled -- if you purchase a copy of our report, it shows the exact system parameters configured on the box (basically, sysctl -a | grep tcp) RFC 896 Nagle Can you please explain how this is applicable in modern-day implementations of TCP? From my limited understanding, Nagle is a relic of the past (been replaced by TCP Westwood, etc) RFC 3168 ECN Yes, the bit is turned on, but can you please explain how this is applicable for a transparent layer-2 bridging scenario? RFC 1323 TCP Extensions for High Performance Yes -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Charles Wu wrote: Can you please explain how this is applicable in modern-day implementations of TCP? From my limited understanding, Nagle is a relic of the past (been replaced by TCP Westwood, etc) Nagle is very old circa 1984 I believe, but it hasn't really be replaced. Many folks would choose to use other algorithms for queuing in high throughput links, but generally nagle is on by default. Clearly, some form of queuing is desirable for maximum throughput of small packets, but more interactive applications are hurt by queuing e.g. VoIP. Therefore, it is useful to see what throughput is obtained with and without the setting on if you are considering using the radio pair for VoIP. Yes, the bit is turned on, but can you please explain how this is applicable for a transparent layer-2 bridging scenario? It isn't applicable for a layer-2 bridging scenario. However, it can affect layer-3 devices on either side of the bridge when doing the throughput test, which may have an impact on the test. In my experience, it does not. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Dustin, I'd like to see those screen shots. In case interested... I had reviewed the spec sheet of Andrews 3 ft, Gabriel 2ft, 2ftHQ, 4ft, 4ft HQand compared. Understanding that this is theory based on spec sheets being accurate, this was my finding... 2ft HQ dish did great (best of 3)to prevent colocation interference. However, 4ft dish (regular) did muchbetter at preventingfront interference. However, Andrews 3ft, came pretty darn close to the performance of 4ft dish, at 3ft ease, price, and windload. Of course 4ft HQ dish beat them all in all categories, but at a hefty price and windload. Analyzing three sites in question, each site was better off with a different one of the antennas based on the need of the site. Site 1: The 3ft, needed high gain, some noise in front, but no other antennas on the roof. Site 2: The 2ft HQ, lots of colocation noise, but landlord not allow 4ft dish. (used 2ft over 3 ft, as msot noise was colocation based) Site 3: The 4ft HQ, lots of colocation noise, 4ft mounting OK, lots noise in front, and every db counts. I'm going to put them to the test next week when they arrive. Here were actual compulations from spec sheets, (averaged data). Degrees are number of degrees off center, not total beamwidth. 2ft compared to 2ft HQ aboutsame until...-60 deg off center,4 db more for HQ -90 deg off center, 12 db more for HQ.-180 deg off center, 9 db more for HQ summary: no benefit to combat front end noise. Great for colocations noise, and limited antenna seperation. 4 ft compared to 2 ft HQ 4 ft much better than 2ftHQ till 58 deg. at 7 deg, 4ft 9 deg betterat 40 deg, 4ft 5 deg better at 58 deg both antennas are equal at -32 isolation. at 90 deg, 2ftHQ -40 db isolation, 8 db better than 4ftat 180 deg, 2ftHQ -46db isolation, 4 db better than 4ft Summary: 4 ft better for front end interference.however, 2ftHQ still significantly better for colocation noise. Andrews 3 ft - 4ft at 7 deg, 4ft 9 db better than Andrewsat 10 deg, 4 ft 5 db better than andrewsat 20 deg, 4ft 8 db better than andrews at 40 deg, both about the same at -32db.(steady slope to 90)at 90 deg, andrews -38, 6 db better than 4 ft. at 119-180 deg, both at about -42.Summary, 4 ft better for front interference (below 35 degrees).however, Andrews has equal colocation protection, and better verticle speration, and 4ft dbi, at 3ft ease and windload. Andrews 3 ft - 2ft HQ at 4 degrees, andrews -13, 11 db better than 2ftHQ at 7 deg, about the same at 10 deg, andrews 5 db betterat 12 deg, the sameat 20 deg, andrews 4 db betterat 40 deg, andrews 3 db better at 90 deg, 2fthq (-40) 2 db betterat 180 deg, 2fthq (-46) 4 db better Andrews 3ft - 4ftHQ at 3 deg, 4fthq 3 db betterat 7 deg, 4fthq 8db betterat 20 deg, 4fthq 4 db betterat 40 deg, 4fthq 5 db betterat 72 deg, 4fthq 7 db better at 95 deg, 4fthq 15 db better Note: It is understood noise will rise with antenna gain, so increased dbi should not be considered regarding interference resilience, for side of link with interfrence.However, increased dbi will still add benefits on other side of link. So a higher gain antenna would still be more beneficial in some respects.So a smaller HQ antenna may not help the other side as well as the higher gain antenna. Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dustin Jurman To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:09 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Actually using both poles increases the sensitivity of the radio at least by the way the Orthogon/Canopy 300s operate when in single payload. The dual payload option decouples this feature and you really have two radios sending information on the same dish, one in H and one in V. If you look at the release notes any time the radios are in dual payload you need more receive sensitivity then in single payload. (makes sense right?) Only the Spectra/Canopy300s operate in dual payload mode. The Gemini/Moto 60s operate in single payload all the time giving them a very high system gain by allowing them to combine both poles into a single signal for processing. So to answer your question, Yes dual pole can combat noise by increasing system gain really just creating more C/I. A while ago I told you that I was testing some of the new Gabriel High Performance dishes. When I get some time I have some screen shots that Ill post that I think youll find very interesting. Dustin From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggiSent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:52 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Dustin, You have showed how using both Pols, can reduce the sensitivity requirements of the radio, able to extend link distance
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
But a Spectra WILL NOT DELIVER anything close to 300 Mbps of REAL TCP THROUGHPUT from 9-16 miles (not even half duplex) And that's even assuming 30 Mhz of clean spectrum ( +25 dB SNR) in BOTH V H polarities -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.Villarini Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 7:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message but with 2' on the Spectra, you're likely only to get about 60 Mbps of REAL THROUGHPUT at 10+ miles =( -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.VillariniSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 6:14 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Tad less wit 2 footers about $17k Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 12:03 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more.TravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles.We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop.Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop?Thanks,Bobby BurrowEast Texas Rural Netwww.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul optionsTravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Charles you make a good point, but Im going to throw a but in here: but the Orthogon / Canopy 300 radios will run also run at: 64 QAM .92 dual -62 receive sensitivity +18 output (252.9 throughput) 64 QAM .75 dual -68 receive sensitivity +18 output (206.7 throughput) 16 QAM .87 dual -71 receive sensitivity +20 output (160.8 throughput) Full list can be found in the release notes and if you do the math on those modulations you can get some very good performance. I do agree with you that the licensed links would make more sense, but hanging 4 foot dishes on towers becomes a very expensive task or if you have to do a non-penetrating roof mount skid, the cost difference between the sleds is big. So we have to take in more than the cost of the radios, licenses, leases and dishes but put together the total cost because if you are hanging BIG dishes youre going to dig deeper into your pocket. Sorry I missed you at the show, Im on baby watch so when she saw wireless beer and gear she called foul and took away my kitchen pass L. Dustin Jurman From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:26 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performingunlicensed solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb Air Rate transmits on V-pol 150 Mb Air Rate transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a theoretical path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of real-world performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Travis Microserv Charles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles.We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop.Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop?Thanks,Bobby BurrowEast Texas Rural Netwww.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Charles, Your point is well demonstrated, except 6' Dish: +34 dBi Not sure what dishes you are talking about, You can get 34 dbi out of an Andrews 3 footer. With 6 foot you should be able to get 37 dbi. Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Charles Wu To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul optionsTravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Tad less wit 2 footers about $17k Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 12:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Travis Microserv Charles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles.We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop.Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop?Thanks,Bobby BurrowEast Texas Rural Netwww.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Yeah, I got tha info too, they were going to shake down the licensed market... got info that it would be before next year. Maybe q3 /q4 Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:51 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options A Trango sales person mentioned to me that they were thinking about offering a licensed product. If the price is like the rest of their products that could change things quite a bit. -Matt G.Villarini wrote: Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
harris dragonwave (we've got that at EC) stratex microwave networks (???) ceragon And there's always google: http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8oe=UTF-8q=licensed+microwave Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Bobby Burrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:21 AM Subject: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.4/282 - Release Date: 3/15/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
snip I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? /snip Hi Bobby, From reading your post, I could surmise (to your detriment) that you missed the WiNOG conference in Austin last week. One licensed manufacturer was actually offering a show special for a FREE 100 Mb upgrade (e.g., buy the radio at the 50 Mb price but get a 100 Mb radio) to show attendees (this is worth thousands of dollars per link). That said, now that you've listened to my snide remark -- I'm actually going to provide some useful information (consider it the cost of free but useful advice =) To go 9-17 miles, you will have to use either the 6 or 11 GHz frequencies...FCC Part 101 stipulates a minimum dish size of 4' for 11 GHz, and 6' for 6 GHz -- the first question you must ask yourself is whether this doable for your towers/rooftops? Anyone who tells you that 18 GHz (which allows for a 2' dish size) will do the link for has no idea what they're talking about. I would recommend reading the following article put out by Broadband Wireless Magazine a few years ago helping WISPs understand Point-to-Point Licensed Links http://www.shorecliffcommunications.com/magazine/volume.asp?Vol=39story=365 If you have any additional questions, feel free to ping me offlist -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bobby Burrow Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:21 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.4/282 - Release Date: 3/15/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Matt, If this is true, they are at least a year away. Travis Microserv Matt Liotta wrote: A Trango sales person mentioned to me that they were thinking about offering a licensed product. If the price is like the rest of their products that could change things quite a bit. -Matt G.Villarini wrote: Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Travis Microserv Charles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.4/282 - Release Date: 3/15/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally less than 45Mbps licensed. -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
