In their defense, they were very clear about the impact of changes in cnmaestro to the grants during the cbrs training. I dont know if that is stressed in the online training or not
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:50 PM David Coudron <david.coud...@advantenon.com> wrote: > Things have been fairly klunky for us as well. We see issues with the > sync between the AP and cnMaestro getting broken every once in awhile. > Basically, you have to make changes to information and wait for a day > before changing again, or it seems to mess things up. Even simple changes > like editing the name of the AP cause a complete re-register, which was a > surprise to us. Unfortunately the Cambium support group doesn’t know > anything about cnMaestro’s CBRS, so there is really no help available that > we have been able to find. The support line points us at the RTMs, but > not sure that is going to work well. No word from them yet. > > > > The higher transmit power has helped some of our poorer links quite a bit, > so that is definitely a plus. > > > > Regards, > > > > David Coudron > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of * Mark Radabaugh > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 26, 2020 12:43 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [ External ] Re: Cambium LTE > > > > Not too many. > > > > A few bugs in the beta code for the AP’s, nothing really a show stopper. > SM upload rate limit when in NAT mode appears to be broken, but works > properly in bridge mode. We are seeing AP’s rebooting somewhat randomly > on the beta code when NOT running in CBRS - i.e. they have the beta code > loaded but are not switched to CBRS operation yet. I don’t think we have > seen any crash reboots on the AP’s with beta code that ARE running in CBRS > mode though. > > > > Grants / SAS / CNMaestro don’t seem to have many issues. Things are > still a bit klunky and having to deal with CPAS more often that I would > expect is a nuisance but it’s functional. > > > > Mark > > > > On Feb 26, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > wrote: > > > > So you're running this CBRS with the open spectrum, right? Have you seen > any issues in the 2 weeks? > > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:45 AM Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: > > 30Mhz at +49dBm versus 20Mhz at +40dBm. Some of the improvement in > airtime obviously comes from the wider channel size but the bigger change > was the higher power and quieter spectrum moving everyone into 6x/8x > modulation. > > > > Mark > > > > On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > What's the actual TX power in that case before and after? I thought the > number I had heard for CBRS was 47db EIRP in a 20mhz channel... although I > have no idea where that number came from, so it could very well be wrong . > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:26 AM Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: > > Way more than 5db, 10dB is more realistic. This is a typical customer > off a 450m 3.65 CBRS AP running at full power: > > > > <PastedGraphic-1.png> > > > > Even more interesting: > > > > <PastedGraphic-2.png> > > > > This shows frame utilization of the 450m before and after the switch to > CBRS. The higher power and cleaner spectrum greatly increased the > modulation of the customers resulting in greatly reduced airtime > utilization. > > > > Mark > > > > On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:14 AM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > It's a 5-6db increase, if I remember correctly, so that could certainly be > enough to make the difference in a lot of cases. > > > > Of course there's also the fact that half of the people running Baicells > radios with sectors are probably already running (illegally) at that power > level anyway... > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 7:50 AM Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > > Is the CBRS power that much higher where a 450 at CBRS power makes up for > the lack of nLOS capability as compared to LTE on NN? > > > > Obviously LTE at CBRS power would be that much better, but maybe it's a > good fit where people need just a little more nLOS capability than 450 > provides and the extra power gets that for them. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Matt Mangriotis via AF" <af@af.afmug.com> > *To: *"AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> > *Cc: *"Matt Mangriotis" <matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> > *Sent: *Tuesday, February 25, 2020 3:59:25 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [ External ] Re: Cambium LTE > > I completely understand your skepticism Ken. However, Cambium did design > the 3 GHz 450m with every intention of being able to support a transition > to LTE (specifically, as a RRH with cnRanger). The intent is for this > device to be a fully capable 8x8 MU-MIMO. Yes, you’ve got that right > though, you’ll need new CPE devices and a BBU for each sector. > > > > We don’t have a target date when this will be developed yet… right now, > we’re focused on getting the cnRanger CBRS 2x2 RRH and High Gain Cat 6 CPE > devices out in August! > > > > With respect to NLOS coverage, I will agree that 450 is not quite on par > with some of the things that LTE brings to the table (regarding range and > the ability to maintain the downlink). However, with the increased power > limits of CBRS, the 450m does an admirable job. In fact, in comparing > equipment cost and performance, I would suggest that the 450 platform > outperforms anything out there. That is, it’s less expensive to get > bandwidth where it needs to be (at a higher rate, and to more customers). > If the customer density can support the cost of cnMedusa, you’re going to > be better off from total cost of ownership (both CapEx and OpEx) > perspective. > > > > The new 3GHz 450b High Gain has 29 dBm Tx Pwr, and a 20 dBi dish > integrated antenna… this is pretty impressive for CBRS CPE equipment (most > of the high gain/high power LTE stuff I see is only going to be 23 dBm Tx, > plus 15 dBi antenna). > > > > There are several customers out there that have done these comparisons… > hopefully, they can chime in. > > > > Matt > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof > *Sent:* Monday, February 24, 2020 7:06 PM > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* [ External ] Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE > > > > You should probably talk to someone at Cambium, unless someone here has > already done that. There was talk 1-2 years ago about 450m is software > defined so maybe they could use it as a remote radio head with their > cnRanger LTE BaseBand Unit (BBU). It has been pretty quiet since then, but > I haven’t been able to make it to the shows. > > > > Without an update directly from the horse’s mouth like Matt at Cambium, or > some kind of announcement, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Back in 2018 it was > in the realm of “it would be nice”. That’s pretty tentative. Plus you’d > still have to buy the BBU and new CPE, so it doesn’t sound like a huge > savings anyway, still 2/3 of a forklift upgrade. I mean, if it turned out > that the 3 GHz cnRanger RRH was literally a 450m, that would probably be > the best case, but how likely do you think that is? > > > > This is just my personal speculation, if it’s an important part of a > decision you’re making now, you probably need to get hold of your Cambium > regional sales manager, or the 450 or cnRanger product manager. If you’re > going to WISPAmerica, you can probably do it there. > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie > *Sent:* Monday, February 24, 2020 6:03 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE > > > > So the 450M is supposed to be LTE upgradable? > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 3:45 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Something aboit the medusa top can be used with cnranger potentially with > a fiber run and a software update > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, 3:38 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In my opinion, 450 is better than Baicells or Telrad LTE at everything > except NLOS performance. > > ....Except that NLOS performance is so useful that one can be tempted to > ignore all of the other features of the 450. I do understand that tradeoff > because I've had to make it myself. > > > > On 2/24/2020 4:30 PM, David Williamson wrote: > > 450 3.65Ghz vs. Baicells 3.65Ghz LTE = no comparison. All but one of the > 450 APs are already removed from our network. I am just trying to > determine if the SMs will be usable on Cambium LTE once they roll it out, > or if it will require a completely different SM. > > > David > > > > *From:* AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>] *On > Behalf Of *Jason McKemie > *Sent:* Monday, February 24, 2020 4:28 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE > > > > Why are you getting rid of 3.65 Cambium in favor of LTE? > > On Monday, February 24, 2020, David Williamson < > dwilliam...@customcomputersva.com> wrote: > > Will the Cambium 3.65 LTE have a completely new SM or will it use the > existing 450SM's? Trying to determine if I should keep our 450SM's or just > go ahead and sell them to one of our secondary market distributors along > with our 450 AP's. > > Thanks! > > David Williamson > > > -----Original Message----- > From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 1:57 PM > To: af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LTE > > I think I heard next quarter for the 3.5. > > On 2/24/2020 1:48 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote: > > 3.5 isn’t available yet. > > > > I believe that 2.5 can be purchased. > > > > Jeff Broadwick > > CTIconnect > > 312-205-2519 Office > > 574-220-7826 Cell > > jbroadw...@cticonnect.com > > > >> On Feb 24, 2020, at 12:44 PM, Avatar Davis <acd...@mail.harvard.edu> > wrote: > >> > >> Does anyone have experience with Cambium LTE? I am highly > dissatisfied with my current manufacturer and was wondering if anyone had > experience using/demoing their product line. Cambium products seem > consistently good in my experience. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> AF mailing list > >> AF@af.afmug.com > >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Cb86add20912747adc42b08d7b98f079e%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637181896280372524&sdata=sDEJMwg%2FrUeE9YW6GqIDR1XzERRWkE%2F6XePPnWoPmRg%3D&reserved=0> > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Cb86add20912747adc42b08d7b98f079e%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637181896280382518&sdata=pP5xMGSatWmczFjAPjC1wEXnNEcBOceklsDEIeHxs6c%3D&reserved=0> > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Cb86add20912747adc42b08d7b98f079e%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637181896280382518&sdata=pP5xMGSatWmczFjAPjC1wEXnNEcBOceklsDEIeHxs6c%3D&reserved=0> > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Cb86add20912747adc42b08d7b98f079e%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637181896280392515&sdata=%2BbZTwYPdzPsYWDRGoWDCC16Kx5oRKh7VKuFLS8xZ%2Bek%3D&reserved=0> > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > <https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faf.afmug.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Faf_af.afmug.com&data=02%7C01%7Cmatt.mangriotis%40cambiumnetworks.com%7Cb86add20912747adc42b08d7b98f079e%7C0e263e36340946228ac818d993e76eb6%7C0%7C0%7C637181896280392515&sdata=%2BbZTwYPdzPsYWDRGoWDCC16Kx5oRKh7VKuFLS8xZ%2Bek%3D&reserved=0> > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
