Hello, 
Thank You for the interest in my problem.
Yes I am feeding the signal into both RX2 ports. I have just repeated the same 
thing symmetrically for TX/RX ports and the distortion was present again.

Kind regard,
Marcin Wachowiak

-----Wiadomość oryginalna-----
Od: [email protected] <[email protected]> 
Wysłano: Tuesday, 3 August 2021 19:48
Do: [email protected]
Temat: USRP-users Digest, Vol 132, Issue 8

Send USRP-users mailing list submissions to
        [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe 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 USRP-users digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Optical SFP+ adapters for N321 (Vladica Sark)
   2. Re: One RX channel of B210 presents distorted signal from splitter
      (Marcus D. Leech)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 17:39:36 +0200
From: Vladica Sark <[email protected]>
Subject: [USRP-users] Re: Optical SFP+ adapters for N321
To: Michael Dickens <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Hi Michael,

Thanks for informing us about this. I would be happy to test it. I am in the 
moment on vacation, but next week I will find some time to test it.

Best regards,
Vladica


On 03.08.21 17:17, Michael Dickens wrote:
> Hi Vladica & the USRP community - For those of you who have White 
> Rabbit equipment, you can download brand new hot off the buildbots WR 
> FPGA images (WX and XQ) for your N3x0 or N32x here < 
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1y-AJA2ZBaHgwyRCiOfatfAyLSX0t1G
> 7l?usp=sharing 
> <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1y-AJA2ZBaHgwyRCiOfatfAyLSX0t1
> G7l?usp=sharing>> . Note that these are for UHD 4.1.0.X -- UHD public 
> GIT master; GIT branch UHD-4.1, or 4.1.0.0 or 4.1.0.1 releases. I've 
> tested these FPGA images on N310 revision 5 and 7, and N320 (current 
> revision); just up through "benchmark_rate" when specifying 
> "time_source=sfp0" and multiple channels, both on the USRP and remote 
> to a host ... all works fine! Thus, I wanted to get the FPGA images 
> out to customers for testing / evaluation ... If you do so, I'd love 
> to hear of your successes / issues! - MLD
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 2:01 PM Vladica Sark <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Rob,
>
>     Thanks for this useful information.
>     According to Michael it should be fixed mid/late July 2021, so pretty
>     soon. Meanwhile I can only switch back to X310 probably, and see
>     if it
>     works there.
>
>     Let's hope it would be fixed soon.
>
>
>     BR,
>     Vladica
>
>
>     On 12.07.21 17:47, Rob Kossler wrote:
>     > Hi Vladica,
>     > From the 'changelog', it appears that N321 support began with
>     release
>     > 3.14.  But, at that point I believe that WR was already broken. 
>     So, I
>     > think that there is no solution to your problem other than to
>     wait for
>     > Ettus to fix the WR issues.  However, WR has been broken for a
>     while
>     > (note user-list posts from last fall Sept  & Dec) so I don't
>     know when
>     > this will be working again.
>     > Rob
>     >
>     >
>     > On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 10:26 AM Vladica Sark
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     >     Hi Michael,
>     >
>     >     I obtained the necessary SFP+ optical adapters and now I am
>     trying to
>     >     put uhd 3.13.1.0 on the N321s in order to use the WR
>     synchronization.
>     >     Unfortunately, when I update the sd card image with 3.13.1.0
>     the N321
>     >     boots but the SFP0 and SFP1 do not go up. When I try to run
>     >     uhd_find_devices, on a terminal using the USB port it says
>     no UHD
>     >     devices are found.
>     >
>     >     I believe that the right FPGA image should be put on the
>     FPGA, but
>     >     the
>     >     ways described in Knowledgebase are not working.
>     >
>     >     Is there a way to put the version 3.13.1.0 on the N321? I
>     have tried
>     >     version 4.0.0.0 and it is working fine, but WR is broken.
>     >
>     >     BR,
>     >     Vladica
>     >
>     >
>     >     On 22.06.21 21:31, Michael Dickens wrote:
>     >     > I'm using primarily FS adapters, cables (single and multi
>     mode),
>     >     and
>     >     > fiber connectors (to allow multiplexing lanes). The adapters I
>     >     bought
>     >     > were "generic" and had to be tweaked using an FS BOX to be
>     fully
>     >     > compatible with Intel or Mellanox NICs. This tweaking
>     seems to have
>     >     > helped a lot with the 100 Gb interface (E810); the 10 Gb
>     >     interfaces do
>     >     > not show much benefit to be manufacturer specific --
>     though I'm
>     >     sure
>     >     > it doesn't hurt! I have not tried a multi-mode to single mode
>     >     splitter
>     >     > / joiner, but I'd suppose they do exist & if anybody here
>     has had
>     >     > experience that would be useful to hear about! I hope this is
>     >     useful!
>     >     > - MLD
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 10:05 AM Vladica Sark
>     >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     > <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>>>
>     >     wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     >     Hi Michael,
>     >     >
>     >     >     Thanks for the answer. For now for the data I am using DAC
>     >     cables,
>     >     >     but
>     >     >     we would need larger distances, i.e. 50+ meters, and for
>     >     this I would
>     >     >     need fibers for both WR and data.
>     >     >
>     >     >     Is there also some optical multiplexer for these
>     wavelengths, in
>     >     >     order
>     >     >     to use a simplex fiber, for both WR and data?
>     >     >
>     >     >     BR,
>     >     >     Vladica
>     >     >
>     >     >     On 22.06.21 15:41, Michael Dickens wrote:
>     >     >     > Hi Vladica - I've tested a variety of fiber adapters and
>     >     cables
>     >     >     with
>     >     >     > no issues (e.g., ZyXEL, FS, Axcen). The primary keys are
>     >     to make
>     >     >     sure
>     >     >     > the various related parameters match up between the
>     >     adapters and
>     >     >     > cables and devices. For example: If the adapter is
>     1490/1310,
>     >     >     then you
>     >     >     > want to make sure the cable is for the same
>     wavelengths. Same
>     >     >     for the
>     >     >     > fiber polish and other parameters (single / dual
>     fiber ; .
>     >     Some are
>     >     >     > easier than others, none of this is too difficult
>     luckily!
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     > For short distances, a DAC cable will work for all
>     of the
>     >     N320/N321
>     >     >     > SFP interfaces.
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     > At the moment, WR support is being fixed for UHD
>     3.14.0.0 to
>     >     >     current.
>     >     >     > If you -require- WR support -right now- you can use UHD
>     >     3.13.1.0
>     >     >     while
>     >     >     > we're working out how to fix WR for newer UHD. We expect
>     >     the fix
>     >     >     to be
>     >     >     > available to customers sometime in mid/late-July
>     (2021); once
>     >     >     the fix
>     >     >     > is determined and verified we will commit it to the
>     various
>     >     >     branches
>     >     >     > of the UHD repository, and it will be available in UHD
>     >     -after- the
>     >     >     > forthcoming 4.1 release. It will be available in the
>     >     public UHD
>     >     >     > repository for folks to use to patch UHD between
>     releases.
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     > I hope this is useful! - MLD
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 6:19 AM Vladica Sark
>     >     >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>     >     >     > <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>>>
>     >     >     wrote:
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >     Dear all,
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >     I would like to use N321 with WRS 3/18 which
>     uses optical
>     >     >     cables. I
>     >     >     >     would like to use also for the 10 Gbit SFP1
>     optical SFP+
>     >     >     transceiver.
>     >     >     >     Do you have some recommended optical SFP+ adapters,
>     >     duplex and,
>     >     >     >     preferably, simplex?
>     >     >     >     The idea is to use a duplex monomode fiber, one
>     fiber for
>     >     >     the 10 Gbit
>     >     >     >     data and one fiber for WRS synchronization.
>     >     >     >     They would be connected to 10 Gbit switch or QNAP
>     >     >     Thunderbolt to SFP+
>     >     >     >     adapter, so they do not have to be Intel.
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >     Best regards,
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >     Vladica
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     >  _______________________________________________
>     >     >     >     USRP-users mailing list --
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>     >     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>>>
>     >     >     >     To unsubscribe send an email to
>     >     > [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>     >     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>>>
>     >     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     _______________________________________________
>     >     USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >     To unsubscribe send an email to
>     [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >     <mailto:[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     >
>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2021 13:48:17 -0400
From: "Marcus D. Leech" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USRP-users] Re: One RX channel of B210 presents distorted
        signal from splitter
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
        boundary="------------040402040901010904020401"

On 08/03/2021 11:08 AM, Marcin Wachowiak wrote:
> Hello,
> The signals provided at the input have quite low power, far below the 
> threshold of -20dbm. ( I don't know the exact values but I 
> additionally even added a 30dB attenuator for safety) What I also 
> found out is that the distortions are dependent more on the setting of 
> the RX, TX gain than the value.  During live testing I observed the 
> this harmonic distortion at one channel only, and after increasing the 
> TX or RX gain it disappeared  (what is visible in the new videos):
> usrp_b210_strange_harmonic_distoriton.mp4
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hYHfI_oXke5K9PGTz-R88n-DNfaiJUYP/vie
> w?usp=drive_web>
> usrp_b210_strange_harmonic_distoriton_2.mp4
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/15bq0hmUJFLWskA8qb7w_7-EXPF3oGv7Y/vie
> w?usp=drive_web>
> Kind regards,
> Marcin Wachowiak
Right because distortion in RF components isn't going to start occurring at a 
uniform level over each discrete device--there will be variability.

Are you using the same (RX2) antenna inputs in each case?  At high gain levels 
it doesn't take much to drive things into non-linear operation.


>
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 at 18:57, <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Send USRP-users mailing list submissions to
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>     To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or
>     body 'help' to
>     [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>     You can reach the person managing the list at
>     [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>     When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>     than "Re: Contents of USRP-users digest..."
>
>     Today's Topics:
>
>        1. Older B100 and associated Daughter cards. (Guy Mengel)
>        2. Re: Older B100 and associated Daughter cards. (Richard Stanley)
>        3. One RX channel of B210 presents distorted signal from splitter
>           (Marcin Wachowiak)
>        4. Re: One RX channel of B210 presents distorted signal from
>     splitter
>           (Marcus D. Leech)
>
>
>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     Message: 1
>     Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2021 09:47:18 -0400
>     From: Guy Mengel <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Subject: [USRP-users] Older B100 and associated Daughter cards.
>     To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     Message-ID: <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; markup=markdown
>
>     Hi All,
>     I am finally going to get started using an older B100 USRP with
>     the LFTX, LFRX, WBX daughter boards.  I purchased these from a
>     well known amateur radio op in January of this year. I had played
>     with it for a short time on Ubuntu 18.04 with the older
>     unsupported Python2 interface, this was a start. Then the Covid
>     Pandemic hit.
>     Well, I am now back.
>     Are there any users in the group using the B100 USRP with the
>     LFTX, LFRX, WBX daughter boards using a newer Ubuntu 20.04 with
>     updated Python 3.X with GNURADIO?  I wanted to see if there were
>     any still using this older SDR.  My plans are to experiment with
>     it and create a rig to be used at HF and possibly UHF to microwave
>     down the road.
>
>     I would also like to have pointers too!
>
>     Thanks!
>     Guy Mengel N1GMM
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Message: 2
>     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 10:37:14 -0400
>     From: Richard Stanley <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Subject: [USRP-users] Re: Older B100 and associated Daughter cards.
>     To: Guy Mengel <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     Message-ID: <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=us-ascii
>
>     (Resent to include mailing list)
>
>     Hi Guy,
>
>     I've recently used B100s with the LFRX, BasicRX, and (EOL) TVRX2
>     with the latest UHD and GNU Radio 3.8 on Ubuntu 20.04.
>
>     A challenge for me with the LFRX/TX and BasicRX/TX was finding the
>     correct sub-device specification as they can acquire/transmit an
>     IQ pair or real-valued signals. In addition, I required a Hilbert
>     transform to convert real-valued samples in baseband to complex
>     for some processing in GNU Radio for Rx. There are a lot of
>     questions about these daughtercards in the mailing list archive
>     and often the questions seem to be about sub-device specification
>     and real-valued versus IQ.
>
>     Enjoy the B100!
>
>     HTH,
>     Richard
>
>     On Aug 2, 2021, at 09:47, Guy Mengel <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi All,
>     I am finally going to get started using an older B100 USRP with
>     the LFTX, LFRX, WBX daughter boards.  I purchased these from a
>     well known amateur radio op in January of this year. I had played
>     with it for a short time on Ubuntu 18.04 with the older
>     unsupported Python2 interface, this was a start. Then the Covid
>     Pandemic hit.
>     Well, I am now back.
>     Are there any users in the group using the B100 USRP with the
>     LFTX, LFRX, WBX daughter boards using a newer Ubuntu 20.04 with
>     updated Python 3.X with GNURADIO?  I wanted to see if there were
>     any still using this older SDR.  My plans are to experiment with
>     it and create a rig to be used at HF and possibly UHF to microwave
>     down the road.
>
>     I would also like to have pointers too!
>
>     Thanks!
>     Guy Mengel N1GMM
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Message: 3
>     Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 18:37:08 +0200
>     From: Marcin Wachowiak <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Subject: [USRP-users] One RX channel of B210 presents distorted signal
>             from splitter
>     To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     Message-ID:
>            
>     <caofh71xdrz7a+xu89t-6gewy4aa_hmnfb+-0aege6y-f4zv...@mail.gmail.com 
> <mailto:caofh71xdrz7a%2bxu89t-6gewy4aa_hmnfb%[email protected]>>
>     Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>             boundary="000000000000d8512b05c8962e2b"
>
>     Hello,
>     I am working on a phase coherent application using USRP B210. As
>     the phase
>     difference between RX channels of B210 is relatively stable I
>     wanted to see
>     how it behaves across the whole frequency range. I performed some
>     measurements and unfortunately for some frequencies I observed strange
>     distortions. The setup consists of a TX USRP, RF splitter, matched
>     cables
>     and a second USRP with both RX channels connected to the splitter.
>     Screams documenting the distortions:
>     
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1DkjrVKz3ywv3ZE0eS1UYeCMTtQwL3Du8?usp=sharing
>     The received sine wave should have quite similar shape and spectral
>     properties across both RX channels of USRP.
>     What I observe instead is a symmetrical harmonic tone at one of
>     the RX,
>     when the other does not record it.
>     There are also random distortions in one of the RX channels
>     looking as if
>     the sine signal was split and shifted at some point in time (looks
>     like a
>     some sort of buffer issue)
>     This kind of distortion for some settings persists for some is not
>     present
>     or occurs regularly.
>     To provide some illustiation I attach recordings and screens of the
>     registered distortions.
>      usrpb210_sine_rx_distoriton2.mp4
>     
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Hif0dZY2Ah7ipC13nfudhoK5HD0JeM9M/view?usp=drive_web>
>      usrpb210_sine_rx_distoriton.mp4
>     
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/13niyBdl6H4w0Akdf28KeontnZKUsCUaW/view?usp=drive_web>
>
>     I tried to debug this problem but it appears to be related to
>     sample rate,
>     TX tone frequency, carrier frequency and gains. (I checked dynamic IQ
>     imbalance or gain controls and changing of the parameters did not
>     affect
>     anything)
>     There are now underflow/overflow flags present while I run the
>     flowchart.
>     The signal that is provided to both RX is identical ( RF
>     mini-circuits RF
>     splitter), and any outside interferences are limited as the whole
>     setup is
>     connected via concentric cables. I tried to set the number of
>     receive and
>     sent frames to 1024 to ensure continuity, but that didn't help.
>     It is strange that for some frequencies this phenomenon occurs
>     while for
>     others the phase difference variance is very low and there are no such
>     distortions.
>     Could You please explain the cause or propose some kind of
>     solution to this
>     issue?
>
>     Kind regards,
>     Marcin Wachowiak
>     -------------- next part --------------
>     A message part incompatible with plain text digests has been
>     removed ...
>     Name: not available
>     Type: text/html
>     Size: 4104 bytes
>     Desc: not available
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Message: 4
>     Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2021 12:39:31 -0400
>     From: "Marcus D. Leech" <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Subject: [USRP-users] Re: One RX channel of B210 presents distorted
>             signal from splitter
>     To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     Message-ID: <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>             boundary="------------050204020106080302070102"
>
>     On 08/02/2021 12:37 PM, Marcin Wachowiak wrote:
>     > Hello,
>     > I am working on a phase coherent application using USRP B210. As
>     the
>     > phase difference between RX channels of B210 is relatively stable I
>     > wanted to see how it behaves across the whole frequency range. I
>     > performed some measurements and unfortunately for some
>     frequencies I
>     > observed strange distortions. The setup consists of a TX USRP, RF
>     > splitter, matched cables and a second USRP with both RX channels
>     > connected to the splitter.
>     > Screams documenting the distortions:
>     >
>     
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1DkjrVKz3ywv3ZE0eS1UYeCMTtQwL3Du8?usp=sharing
>     > The received sine wave should have quite similar shape and spectral
>     > properties across both RX channels of USRP.
>     > What I observe instead is a symmetrical harmonic tone at one of the
>     > RX, when the other does not record it.
>     > There are also random distortions in one of the RX channels
>     looking as
>     > if the sine signal was split and shifted at some point in time
>     (looks
>     > like a some sort of buffer issue)
>     > This kind of distortion for some settings persists for some is not
>     > present or occurs regularly.
>     > To provide some illustiation I attach recordings and screens of the
>     > registered distortions.
>     > usrpb210_sine_rx_distoriton2.mp4
>     >
>     
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Hif0dZY2Ah7ipC13nfudhoK5HD0JeM9M/view?usp=drive_web>
>     > usrpb210_sine_rx_distoriton.mp4
>     >
>     
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/13niyBdl6H4w0Akdf28KeontnZKUsCUaW/view?usp=drive_web>
>     >
>     > I tried to debug this problem but it appears to be related to
>     sample
>     > rate, TX tone frequency, carrier frequency and gains. (I checked
>     > dynamic IQ imbalance or gain controls and changing of the
>     parameters
>     > did not affect anything)
>     > There are now underflow/overflow flags present while I run the
>     > flowchart. The signal that is provided to both RX is identical ( RF
>     > mini-circuits RF splitter), and any outside interferences are
>     limited
>     > as the whole setup is connected via concentric cables. I tried
>     to set
>     > the number of receive and sent frames to 1024 to ensure continuity,
>     > but that didn't help.
>     > It is strange that for some frequencies this phenomenon occurs
>     while
>     > for others the phase difference variance is very low and there
>     are no
>     > such distortions.
>     > Could You please explain the cause or propose some kind of
>     solution to
>     > this issue?
>     >
>     > Kind regards,
>     > Marcin Wachowiak
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     What are your signal levels going into the RX USRP?
>
>     They need to be well below -20dBm or so to protect against
>     non-linearity, and even then, that's awfully loud.
>
>
>
>
>     -------------- next part --------------
>     A message part incompatible with plain text digests has been
>     removed ...
>     Name: not available
>     Type: text/html
>     Size: 6081 bytes
>     Desc: not available
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Subject: Digest Footer
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     End of USRP-users Digest, Vol 132, Issue 2
>     ******************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

-------------- next part --------------
A message part incompatible with plain text digests has been removed ...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 24310 bytes
Desc: not available

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]


------------------------------

End of USRP-users Digest, Vol 132, Issue 8
******************************************
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to