Nathan, We moved to SA 1 SSF 3 on all our 2.3 gear and seem to get 7-10Mbps upload on a 10Mhz channel. SA2 SSF 0 was not good @ 10Mhz. Uplink will create a house of cards for performance in LTE…does not matter whom the manufacturer is. Unfortunately, as others here on the list, there is a National provider here in Canada whom has dictated (forced) the SA2 /SSF 0…I wish they would get with the program!
Cheers, ______________________________ Andreas Wiatowski | CEO Silo Wireless Inc. Email [email protected] 19 Sage Court Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA) Tel +1.519.449.5656 Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free +1.866.727.4138 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nathan Anderson Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 6:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Telrad] Issues Less-than-perfect trunking of S1 traffic between the Compacts and the EPC can definitely cause performance issues...we have the scar tissue to prove it. So I wonder if Justin and Matt are actually talking about different issues, or if Justin is experiencing both (double whammy). If the backhauling between Compact and EPC is in good shape, you should not see a dramatic difference in measured performance between local EPC and centralized EPC. I am glad to see this discussion taking place, though, because we have been seeing similar things with upload performance recently. It doesn't seem to be as bad if we simply crank up the upload AMBR value, which had led me to wonder if perhaps the problem was with how the EPC is queueing or limiting traffic (thus some of my posts a couple of weeks back). I will have to run some additional tests to see if we also see a correlation between Compacts that have a higher CPE count vs. those with a lower number of clients. My hunch is that the problem could be at least band-aided over if we used subframe profile 1, but that assumes that sf 1 works and we have also been burned by that in the past. It is reassuring to know that others who are experiencing this are in communication with Telrad already and that it is being worked on, so I await further updates with bated breath. -- Nathan From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthew Carpenter Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 8:26 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Issues Are two EPC are located at the Datacenter. None of our eNB are located in the same location as the Datacenter. I mostly use iperf from the UE back to the Datacenter for a good speedtest. I know customers use speedtest.net<http://speedtest.net> (we have a speedtest.net<http://speedtest.net> service in our Datacenter also). Results between iperf and speedtest.net<http://speedtest.net> are very close to the same. I have neve taken a EPC out to the tower where a eNB is located. Packages we sell on LTE are 5,10,15,20. Most are on the 10 or 15 Mbit plan. Upload is 1 or 2 mbit and most are on the 1 Mbit. So you are saying that the S1 tunnel between the EPC and eNB could be causing an issue? I have not really seen any speed problems until we got to around 25-30UE’s on a eNB, at that point I have been unable to get the upload speeds. You would think on a 80x10 plan (for us only to test with), and the eNB only moving small amount of data I should be able to 60x7, but I only see around 14Mbit x 600K. Matt Carpenter On Nov 16, 2016, at 10:13 PM, Skywerx Support <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: What about on say for example speedtest.net<http://speedtest.net/> with a UE connected to and eNB where the EPC is located vs a UE connected to an eNB that is not. We are putting 80 UE's on our eNB's with no problem. Performance is always there but we do see a difference with web based speedtests when the eNB's are not at the EPC site. -- Justin Davis COO SkyWerx Industries, LLC On Nov 16, 2016, at 9:06 PM, Matthew Carpenter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: We have a new eNB with only 3 UE’s on it, speed tests (iperf) this evening are 63x7.5 4x4TM4 Mode and 2/0 frame config. If I run a iperf on a UE connected to a eNB with 40+ UE’s then I find the download is in the 14-18Mbit range, but the upload is 300-600K. Checking the eNB in Breezeview it shows very little usage at the time I tested. I need to check all eNB if see if they exhibit this same upload speed issues. From little rumblings in the Service Dept I think I will find they all do this. Nick is working on this and I am sure he will come up with a solution soon. Matt Carpenter On Nov 16, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Skywerx Support <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: We have two 2020 centralized also with 8 eNB talking to one and 7 eNB to the other. Are you seeing similar throughout on all eNB's that are not located where the EPC's are? -- Justin Davis COO SkyWerx Industries, LLC On Nov 16, 2016, at 7:28 PM, Matthew Carpenter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Two Centralized EPCs. Right now they are 1010RPL (2020L), but we are software upgrading them to the 2020CS this week. Matt Carpenter On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Skywerx Support <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Matt, Are you using site based or centralized EPC? Thanks -- Justin Davis COO SkyWerx Industries, LLC On Nov 16, 2016, at 4:43 PM, Matthew Carpenter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: From what I have seen running 4573: 1. 4x4TM4 is working good. I have 2 eNB’s using it with good speeds through trees. In one location I saw 63Mbit x 7.3Mbit and a CINR of 27. UBNT 5ghz at this same location was around 79db and we would not install. 2. Better performance. Jury is still out on this one. Like a few of you have stated the Upload speeds are not where they should be 2/0 config and only 1mbit of upload and I only see 700-800K on iperf test. 3. There are some timer changes that extend the amount of time a action happens. Stable, with 7000 and 8000’s both working good, except for the speed issues that I stated above. Telrad support is working on them now. Matt Carpenter Amarillo Wireless On Nov 16, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Ian Fraser <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: No release notes that I find (?) So what's the benefit ? -- Ian Fraser goZoom.ca<http://gozoom.ca/> Inc. 195 Libby's Rd. McNab-Braeside K7S0E1 877(613) 622 0093 ext 21<tel:%28613%29%20622%200093%20ext%2021> On 16/11/2016 4:39 PM, Jeremy Austin wrote: On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Ian Fraser <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I'm still on 4013. Has 4573 fixed anything for anyone ? Like the high upload utilization ? I'm using sf2/ssf0. Changing subframe is not an option for me - I need to co-exist with a another provider who will never change. 4573 seems fairly stable for us with 7ks running .105 and 8ks. Didn't fix the upload KPI or (as far as we can tell) performance. -- Jeremy Austin (907) 895-2311 (907) 803-5422<tel:%28907%29%20803-5422> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Heritage NetWorks Whitestone Power & Communications Vertical Broadband, LLC Schedule a meeting: http://doodle.com/jermudgeon _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad -- Matthew Carpenter 806-316-5071 office 806-236-9558 cell [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BxDRq5UV7HPOaEM4LXVaVnk5cWM&revid=0BxDRq5UV7HPOTDdiVjM0TXRIc3ZzMXVUVDdDVjBiaFU0bHJNPQ] _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad _______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
_______________________________________________ Telrad mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
