Thanks Nick!
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:06 PM Nick Dewar <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey All,
>
> Firmware status update is now posted on the forum.  This is the best place
> to have constructive dialogue and I encourage all Telrad customers to
> follow each topic.  This is where I intend to provide all progress updates
> going forward.  Any questions posted on this forum will be addressed by
> Telrad and open for community discussion.
>
>
> https://telradsupport.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/115005879348-Firmware-Update
>
> Many of the issues discussed here on wispa list are related to the beta
> process and are addressed in my forum update
>
> Skywerx (Justin) has deployed the first of the LTE in a box (embedded EPC
> Compact) as of recently.  The network to date is exactly the same product
> deployed throughout North America
>
> Regards,
> Nick
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of [email protected]
> Sent: March 14, 2017 10:35 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Telrad Digest, Vol 29, Issue 14
>
> Send Telrad mailing list submissions to
>         [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of Telrad digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Uplink throughput again (Adam Moffett)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:34:24 +0000
> From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
> To: [email protected], "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <em8679b033-89ac-40f8-bcbc-4ea296edaf0c@techlaptop1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> We've had EPC crashes, but I haven't gotten to the bottom of any of them.
> I rebooted and moved on with the day because I have a full time job outside
> of troubleshooting Telrad gear.....I made sure there's a serial cable
> connected now so I can hopefully get some info out of it next time.
>
> >Data corruption for user traffic going through the EPC
> >
> I have not noticed this one....or I didn't know what I was seeing if I
> did.  What are the symptoms?
>
> In addition to Nathan's list:
> * 10 second cycle to traffic through the EPC.  This is reproducible even
> with a single UE in a lab setup, and it's clearly tied to a process in the
> Breezeway2020.  There's a dip in throughput every 10 seconds, and it gets
> worse with more UE.  When it gets extreme you can see air link utilization
> flatten out at 65-75% as your eNB cycles between full throughput and zero
> throughput.
>
> * UE getting stuck at MCS4....apparently until an S1 reset.  This may or
> may not be the same throughput issue that you guys were talking about
> earlier in the thread.
>
> These two are both known by Telrad and being worked on.
>
> * Saturating the upload on an eNB can cause CQI timeouts which makes UE
> disconnect from the eNB.  The customer is down for 1-2 minutes.  This is
> the main reason not to use configuration 2.
> This one (I was told) is not a bug, but simply part of how LTE functions.
> I'm skeptical of that explanation, but nevertheless if you're having better
> performance & reliability on configuration 1 this might be why.
>
> The point being that we're not having problems because we're dumb, we're
> having problems because the product has a few problems.  Justin, if you're
> not seeing these issues, maybe you're using different equipment (embedded
> core as someone said?), or maybe you'd see them if you go looking for them.
>
> After migrating about 1/3 of our Wimax to LTE we now have about 400 LTE UE
> in service.  Now we're in a holding pattern.  I know we'll move forward
> with the rest of the migration, but I think I'm waiting for 6.6M first.
>
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Nathan Anderson" <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Sent: 3/14/2017 5:43:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
>
> >There really isn't much for me to add to Jeremy's excellent response.
> >
> >
> >
> >As far as what could be different with regard to the specific issue we
> >were talking about here?  So many things.  You could be running a
> >different software release...only people who have been wrestling with
> >(Telrad's acknowledged) issue with uplink performance likely are using
> >bleeding-edge eNB code to deal with it.  You could be running a
> >different configuration that is not affected, or not affected as
> >noticeably.  We use 15MHz channels.  I'd guess not very many others do,
> >and until recently, different channel widths required some special
> >tweaks elsewhere in the config in order to get acceptable performance,
> >which tells you something.  We also currently use subframe profile 1,
> >but before the latest CPE7000 firmware version, we *couldn't*, because
> >of bugs in the CPE firmware that just absolutely killed performance
> >with that configuration under some circumstances.
> >
> >
> >
> >Just because your particular configuration does not trigger some of
> >these bugs does not mean that they don't exist, and I don't think it is
> >fair or accurate for you to compare the issues being discussed here to
> >the "OMG whye cain't I do 100 megawattbits on me neg85
> >Ubiquitay!!!!!111!!one!!" crowd.
> >
> >
> >
> >In fact, over the last 3 months or so, the majority of our problems
> >have been traced back to the EPC and have absolutely zero to do with
> >RF.  Here are some of the issues we have dealt with there, some of
> >which are finally fixed, and some of which are not...granted, some of
> >these (especially towards the bottom) are on account of us running
> >prerelease code, but at this point, because the fixes for the crashers
> >we found on 6.6 haven't been backported to 6.6, we are stuck between a
> >rock and a hard place and forced to play beta tester on our production
> >network (!!!!):
> >
> >
> >
> >* The RADIUS/AAA (external HSS) client in the EPC crashing (causing the
> >whole EPC to reboot itself)
> >
> >
> >
> >* The switch FPGA dying/resetting for several seconds at a time
> >(causing the RADIUS client to crash, causing reboot...beautiful domino
> >effect!)
> >
> >
> >
> >* The switch FPGA dying/resetting for several MINUTES at a time (first
> >release we got as a fix for this made the problem worse instead of
> >better)
> >
> >
> >
> >* Dedicated bearers getting carte blanche on the uplink (100%
> >reproducible within 5 minutes of trying to use the feature...how did
> >this manage to ship?)
> >
> >
> >
> >* SGW process on the EPC crashing in a similar manner to RADIUS client
> >
> >
> >
> >* Broken eNB tracking (gets confused about which eNB has which IP
> >address; may be related to SGW issue: I suspect a linked list is
> >getting clobbered in memory)
> >
> >
> >
> >* Data corruption for user traffic going through the EPC (it seemingly
> >throws out and recomputes the TCP payload checksum, making it silent
> >but deadly!)
> >
> >
> >
> >Also, if I may (since I'm on the subject of frustrations, and I don't
> >know where else to put this): why does every little config change
> >(e.g., TFTP server? Really??) on either the Compact or BreezeWay
> >require a full system reboot to be applied?  I mean, what year is this?
> >
> >
> >
> >-- Nathan
> >
> >
> >
> >From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> >Behalf Of Jeremy Austin
> >Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 11:56 PM To:[email protected]
> >Subject: Re: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
> >
> >
> >
> >Justin,
> >
> >
> >
> >"What's Different" is an excellent question; I can't speak for others
> >on this list.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different (in my case) is that we start from the assumption that
> >our experience should be as positive as yours. Success stories are
> >great. How a company handles success stories... they print a presser.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that we start from the assumption that if there
> >were a problem with performance, it was *our* oversight or failure, not
> >Telrad's. We jump through prescribed troubleshooting hoops, repeatedly.
> >We invent new tests when necessary.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different? Telrad's initial assumptions about our network and RF
> >conditions prove consistently false. We schedule many complete system
> >outages, and (working hand in hand with Telrad) discover Telrad
> >hardware failure modes that (guess what) nobody has ever seen before.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that we have had a non-zero percentage of failed
> >Telrad equipment, and Telrad has RMAed, and we have not complained.
> >That can happen to anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that Telrad has eventually and repeatedly confirmed
> >that we have done everything right: that our network is intelligently
> >designed and built. ("His parents were poor but honest.")
> >
> >That our customers could not be better installed with attention to
> >signal and conditions.
> >
> >That poor performance is not, I repeat not, due to our incompetence,
> >our environment, our customers, or our network -- in fact, not due to
> >one single thing *under our control*.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that we have repeatedly exhausted the abilities of
> >the North American support crew -- terrific as they are -- not because
> >we were asking dumb questions, but because the answers have not yet
> >been found.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that Ubiquiti won't send you an engineer to check
> >your stuff out. Telrad's commitment to support is real, if spotty. We
> >had a truly enjoyable time spending three days with Guy Shahak from
> >Israel. We learned a great deal. He came ready to help, and earnestly
> >believed that he would fix all problems. And guess what -- we stumped
> >him too.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that if there were any thing or things that I -- or
> >the entire engineering resources of Telrad that have been brought to
> >bear on this -- could do to find, fix, and permanently stop the
> >whack-a-mole process -- *it would be done by now*.
> >
> >
> >
> >What's different is that I do not assume that *my* experience
> >invalidates yours. I would hope you could extend the same courtesy to
> >me. Telrad knows, at least by now, that "Works for me!" or "Works in
> >the lab!" does not guarantee 100% success. We too added upwards of 40
> >UEs a month, until we were forced to stop.
> >
> >
> >
> >How a company handles failure: that is telling.
> >
> >
> >
> >I apologize for the length of this, and I appreciate your feedback. The
> >list needs more success stories. I hope to be one of them soon.
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Skywerx Support
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >The Telrad Wispa forum is starting to remind me of the Ubiquiti forum.
> >The same exact people posting with the same exact issues.  But only
> >like three people!!!  Issues like why can't I put 80 people on a Rocket
> >M5, or how do I configure a Rocket M5?Why does service suck on my
> >access points? Oh wait, they all have -81 signals.
> >
> >We have deployed over 700 UE's on 16 eNB's.  Adding around 40 new UE's
> >per month and at least 1 new eNB per month.  It's our fastest growing
> >product with the least amount of tech support calls offering speeds
> >anywhere from 3 Mbps to 30 Mbps on the LTE network.
> >
> >What's Different?
> >
> >--
> >Justin Davis
> >COO
> >SkyWerx Industries, LLC
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 9, 2017, at 5:01 PM, Steve Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 3/9/2017 4:53 PM, Jeremy Austin wrote:
> > >> I have been fairly quiet on list about our outstanding issues,
> > >> thinking that they would be better solved by superior
> >troubleshooting
> > >> and Telrad engineering than by social engineering.
> > >
> > > You are certainly not alone.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Telrad mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
> >_______________________________________________
> >Telrad mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Jeremy Austin
> >
> >
> >
> >(907) 895-2311
> >
> >(907) 803-5422
> >
> >[email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >Heritage NetWorks
> >
> >Whitestone Power & Communications
> >
> >Vertical Broadband, LLC
> >
> >
> >
> >Schedule a meeting: http://doodle.com/jermudgeon
> ><http://doodle.com/jermudgeon>
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/private/telrad/attachments/20170315/a8498b04/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Telrad mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
>
>
> End of Telrad Digest, Vol 29, Issue 14
> **************************************
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp
> Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
> viruses.
>
> ************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Telrad mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
>
_______________________________________________
Telrad mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Reply via email to