Eje, >The way DFS is designed in MT it will never be > able to get certified.
Pleasse elaborate, thats a strong statement. If it were true it would means that the DFS limit was hardware or 802.11a protocol based, because software ALWAYS has the option to be changed and modified to meet a specific requirements. I agree that MT's current DFS2 support would not pass FCC certification. But I don't see why it couldn't be expanded to be certifiable. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eje Gustafsson" <[email protected]> To: "'WISPA General List'" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] is this router overloaded? > And 5.2 is not allowed for outdoor usage. So Franks unit is an indoor unit > I > would suspect he is suffering from multipath reflections. > > Besides on the radar stuff.. The way DFS is designed in MT it will never > be > able to get certified. First of it must continuously look for and detect > radar not just when it first enable the interface. Secondly it at least > did > a horrible job in actually detecting radar signatures. > > Besides 5.2 is not part of the band you can use even with a certified > radar > detecting device. > > / Eje > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Dennis Burgess - LTI > Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 3:32 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] is this router overloaded? > > Part of the 5.2 band. All of the radar patters are in MT, just not > certified. > > * ----------------------------------------------------------- > Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer > WISPA Board Member - wispa.org <http://www.wispa.org/> > Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services > WISPA Vendor Member* > *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net > <http://www.linktechs.net/> > */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* > <http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp> > > The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the > Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended > only > for the person(s) or entity/entities to which > it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. > Any > review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any > action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other > than > the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you > received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > > > > > > Gino Villarini wrote: >> 5180.....hmmm!!! >> >> Not to bust anyones head but you are using an uncertified device on an >> illegal channel >> >> Sent from my Motorola Startac... >> >> >> On Apr 20, 2009, at 3:20 PM, "Josh Luthman" >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Gino - Top right corner. >>> >>> Did the CPU just jump or has it casually been like that? >>> >>> I've never had 5 radios in any board, I don't know if that would >>> cause a lot >>> of usage or not. Most any MT box I've seen is <5% CPU. A lot of >>> NAT as was >>> mentioned would be the first place I'd look. >>> >>> Josh Luthman >>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>> 1100 Wayne St >>> Suite 1337 >>> Troy, OH 45373 >>> >>> Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. >>> --- Henry Spencer >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Kevin Neal <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Is this doing any NAT? Is connection tracking enabled? Do you >>>> have all >>>> unneeded packages disabled? We have a few RB600's out there and >>>> they do >>>> fine for the most part, we don't do any wireless on the 600's and >>>> all of >>>> them have the 564 daughterboard in them. >>>> >>>> -Kevin Neal >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:wireless- >>>> [email protected]] On >>>> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser >>>> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 12:50 PM >>>> To: 'WISPA General List' >>>> Subject: [WISPA] is this router overloaded? >>>> >>>> I have a RB600 here that I've taken a screenshot of. No interfaces >>>> are >>>> bridged, everything is routed and I'm noticing some lag in the >>>> traffic that >>>> passes though this device during peak use. I suspect that the 41 >>>> RIP routes >>>> might have something to do with it as actual throughput isn't that >>>> much >>>> sometimes topping out around 8Mbps. Just want to hear from others >>>> and if >>>> there is any suggestions on how I might speed this up let me know. >>>> CPU >>>> usage >>>> on it is around 40-50%. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kurt Fankhauser >>>> WAVELINC >>>> P.O. Box 126 >>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820 >>>> 419-562-6405 >>>> www.wavelinc.com >>>> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
