I have 2x links at -78 and so Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon Hi, Don't you have to have like a -65 or better signal to get 2x rate? Travis Microserv Gino A. Villarini wrote: >Not the case, 14 mbps is 2x mode, but the only reason for all your Sm's >would be a 1x would be cause they are old radios (p7,p8) or you have very >poor links ... > >Gino A. Villarini >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. >tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Travis Johnson >Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:03 PM >To: WISPA General List >Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon > >So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only >running at 1x rate? > >Travis >Microserv > >Mike Bushard, Jr wrote: > > > >>Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's. >> >>With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High >>Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need >>the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM. >> >> >>To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb >>Aggregate. >> >>Mike Bushard, Jr >>Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>Behalf Of Travis Johnson >>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM >>To: WISPA General List >>Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon >> >>Another quick question... >> >>If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy >>SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be >>limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)? >> >>Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular? >> >>Travis >>Microserv >> >>Anthony Will wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>>Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind >>>you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has >>>traditionally understated there spec sheets. The GPS is what sets the >>>timing for the AP's. The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all >>>SM's registered to them. So how it works is that all AP's on channel >>>1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced >>>to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same >>>time. Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature >>>set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and >>>AP to a BH or AP. The lag that is introduced by having to transmit >>>that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is >>>the only time that distance can come into play. The application this >>>is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to >>>have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower. >>> />SM >>>GPS -->AP#1 / >>> \ >>> \>SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) -->AP#2 >>>-->SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) -->AP#3 (this AP will be out of >>>sync with AP#1) >>> >>>Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long >>>for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to >>>propagate the timing signal. But if you put a GPS sync generating >>>device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough >>>timing with AP#2 that they all would get along. >>> >>>One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the >>>area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost >>>of the GPS synchronizing items. Also again as for the distance >>>statement. 6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced. >>>believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good >>>enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6" away from it. The two AP's >>>that are back to back share the same channel so that when they >>>transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other >>>as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other. >>>The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity >>>to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without >>>self interference. If long range rural deployments are the plan then >>>GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the >>>same equipment and configuration in the area. So a Moto advantage >>>cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP >>>bandwidth available to it. If more is needed you can place the towers >>>with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a >>>possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a >>>given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate >>>clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same >>>tower. I can't write out whats in my head on this.... getting a >>>little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over >>>the phone and explain it. Send me an email to anthonyw (at) >>>broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a >>>call. >>> >>>Anthony Will >>>Broadband Corp. >>> >>>Travis Johnson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI. >>>> >>>>What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile >>>>range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, >>>>causing self-interference, correct? >>>> >>>>Travis >>>>Microserv >>>> >>>>Anthony Will wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Answers in-line >>>>> >>>>>Travis Johnson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>>I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can >>>>>>compare for myself... >>>>>> >>>>>>Trango 2.4ghz: >>>>>>5Mbps auto ratio >>>>>>8 non-overlapping channels >>>>>>10mhz spectrum per channel >>>>>>-90 Receive level >>>>>>15 mile range (without a grid) >>>>>>External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna >>>>>>$879 AP (WISP price) >>>>>>$479 SU (WISP price) >>>>>> >>>>>>Canopy 2.4ghz (regular): >>>>>>7Mbps fixed ratio >>>>>>3 non-overlapping channels >>>>>>20mhz spectrum per channel >>>>>>-86 Receive level >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>5 mile range (without a dish) >>>>>>$902 AP (reseller price online) >>>>>>$490 SU (reseller price online) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>I am guessing your quoting single prices here. Now that maybe >>>>>viable for this discussion but realistically if a WISP is not >>>>>financially able to purchase in 25 packs they likely are very >>>>>underfunded. So that the information is available a 25 pack of the >>>>>"Classic" 2.4 ghz Canopy units is $6709 so if you break that down to >>>>>single price that is about $269ea + $50 for reflector for a total of >>>>>$319ea. http://www.doubleradius.com It is possible to get them >>>>>cheaper then this but you will have to deal with co-op's or ebay.com >>>>>Also I would never install a unit with a 60* pattern (Trango or >>>>>Canopy). Just include the$50 for a reflector or stinger from >>>>>http://www.wirelessbehive.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Based on the information from Mike, I could not use Canopy. In >>>>>>several areas, I have 4-5 towers located within 5 miles of each >>>>>>other.... how do I do that with Canopy? With Trango, I use a >>>>>>different channel for the sector pointing toward another tower >>>>>>(frequency planning and coordination is very important) and >>>>>>everything works great. Is there a solution for this with Canopy? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>This is where GPS sync comes in. You can point two different tower >>>>>locations on the same frequency at each other and they will not >>>>>interfere with each other. This is how it is possible to do a 6 AP >>>>>cluster on one tower with only 3 non overlapping channels. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Also, by using only a 10mhz spectrum per channel, Trango's channel >>>>>>1 and channel 8 are actually outside the reach of Canopy and 802.11 >>>>>>(for the most part) and thus can almost always be used in a noisy >>>>>>environment. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>Remember with Canopy you generally don't have to avoid >>>>>interference. Find the cleanest channel and 90% of the time you >>>>>will be the few db louder then the noise that you need to make a >>>>>viable link. >>>>> >>>>>Anthony Will >>>>>Broadband Corp >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Travis >>>>>>Microserv >>>>>> >>>>>>Mike Bushard, Jr wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, >>>>>>>IS CANOPY. >>>>>>>We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They >>>>>>>all fell of >>>>>>>the face of the earth. >>>>>>>We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE >>>>>>>and more >>>>>>>on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for >>>>>>>Horizontal >>>>>>>and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really >>>>>>>wish someone >>>>>>>would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated >>>>>>>antenna) >>>>>>>with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync. >>>>>>>If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different >>>>>>>channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have >>>>>>>speed of >>>>>>>light issues from tower to tower. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, >>>>>>>yes. You >>>>>>>just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this >>>>>>>mean I >>>>>>>recommend it, NO. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so >>>>>>>many AP's in >>>>>>>a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At >>>>>>>least we know >>>>>>>there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns..... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is >>>>>>>900 that >>>>>>>will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor >>>>>>>was >>>>>>>lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a >>>>>>>long ways. >>>>>>>It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>YMMV. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Mike Bushard, Jr >>>>>>>Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>>>>>Behalf Of Matt Liotta >>>>>>>Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM >>>>>>>To: WISPA General List >>>>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Patrick Leary wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp >>>>>>>>you are >>>>>>>>doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and >>>>>>>>sold to be >>>>>>>>primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp >>>>>>>>network >>>>>>>>of any scale that did not require GPS. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have >>>>>>>some Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS a problem. >>>>>>>Granted we don't have a large amount of pmp, but I would certainly >>>>>>>like to understand any future pain before we experience it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-Matt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
