What are you replacing? PMP320?
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > we are taking the power hit on the 450i for most of our APs for the > pricebreak. we have 20 some APs to replace in the next month or so, so that > kind of forces that. Im looking forward to there we have the Medusas along > with the Is to see what the performance differences are > >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:58 PM Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: >> Both 450i and 450m can run in CBRS. Only the Medusa can go to high power. >> >> Mark >> >>> On Feb 26, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Jason McKemie >>> <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote: >>> >>> What APs are you using 450M, or 450i as well? I'm wondering if the 450i can >>> do the same power output. >>> >>>> On Wednesday, February 26, 2020, Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: >>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The Brothers WISP >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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] 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 >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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
