[189332] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: B5-Lite
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Tue May 17 11:32:06 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <1579626430.368062.1463497602871.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 11:29:57 -0400
To: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I=E2=80=99m seeing -61 (63/67 V/H) with floor at -101 right now with the =
XW PowerBeam 400 w/ 40mhz. The speeds are =E2=80=9COk=E2=80=9D but =
getting beyond 60Mb/s is hard as the CPU maxes in a bridged setup. =
Doesn=E2=80=99t seem to have any issues with the wireless rate during =
load, so perhaps it=E2=80=99s not doing offload to the chipset right? =
The goal is to improve capacity in the interim while some strategic =
fiber is deployed for some areas. A pair of B5s or AF5X would likely =
work out but would rather spend that on fiber.
- Jared
> On May 17, 2016, at 11:06 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
>=20
> I think there is some information missing on your longer link. Did you =
still have appropriate signal? Was there noise?=20
>=20
> I have a B5 link that's about 2 miles that's rocking full data rate =
and a B5c one that's going about 4 miles at full data rate. My 8 mile =
B5c link is less than full data rate due to interference.=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----=20
> Mike Hammett=20
> Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
> http://www.ics-il.com=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Midwest Internet Exchange=20
> http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
>=20
>=20
> ----- Original Message -----
>=20
> From: "Hal Ponton" <hal@buzcom.net>=20
> To: "Matt Hoppes" <mattlists@rivervalleyinternet.net>=20
> Cc: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 7:31:10 AM=20
> Subject: Re: B5-Lite=20
>=20
> We've deployed 2 B5 links into production, the newer firmware seems to =
have fixed the issues we saw in the links when we first tested them.=20
>=20
> We have a very rural customer where two hops are needed around the =
site. We're lucky in that we had two 80MHz channels free. We see around =
350Mbps both ways actual throughput on both links.=20
>=20
> However, these links are short est. 200mtrs when we had tested these =
on longer links their performance was awful, on a 40MHz channel we saw =
20Mbps.=20
>=20
> For our longer links that need a bit more throughput than a Rocket M5 =
we either use Licensed radios or the AF5X which works very well.=20
>=20
> Regards,=20
>=20
> Hal Ponton=20
>=20
> Senior Network Engineer=20
>=20
> Buzcom / FibreWiFi=20
>=20
>> On 14 May 2016, at 11:07, Matt Hoppes =
<mattlists@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote:=20
>>=20
>> Jared - why not go to Ubiquiti AC gear if you need some more speed =
and something more modern?=20
>>=20
>>> On May 14, 2016, at 01:43, Eric C. Miller <eric@ericheather.com> =
wrote:=20
>>>=20
>>> B5c is the only product that I've had much success with from Mimosa.=20=
>>>=20
>>> The B5Lite is a cheap plastic shell and, and it performs like it =
too.=20
>>>=20
>>> If you have UBNT gear now, Mimosa is a good next step, but I'd =
strongly recommend that you stear away from the lite and go with the =
B5c. We use them with rocket dishes. You just need the RP-SMA to N =
cables.=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Eric Miller, CCNP=20
>>> Network Engineering Consultant=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> -----Original Message-----=20
>>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared =
Mauch=20
>>> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 7:06 PM=20
>>> To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>=20
>>> Subject: B5-Lite=20
>>>=20
>>> Anyone deployed this radio in production in the US? I=E2=80=99m =
curious to hear from people who are using it, looking at replacing some =
UBNT hardware with it on some PTP links, going from the M-series class =
devices to something more modern.=20
>>>=20
>>> Thanks,=20
>>>=20
>>> - Jared=20
>=20
