From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com (mail-pj1-x1033.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36BE23B29D for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 09:43:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id q9-20020a17090a178900b00212fe7c6bbeso6073665pja.4 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 06:43:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lQeNRb/PQsBtSlSCl8D2MowR3f03/MKWzU7abCydNk0=; b=Q6Sbxe0/vGgvgi7beFL9GRxTgYOJ0iHrSI/oCwQR5BNxYYG1s86yrdREEMJ9YS6kFG RzpZiBWQno/VKLSlBNzb+j7y4PAgFTZMNLD/eotkq7Vu7uxXj0rQGWYZFKJ9LxE+D13y K9u5lYXmr+waUHsbjEcxHQ/UCeDSPD1hQuuw1Kb2kJrJwVtzqsxEJZsK10BFl//dg5du WHRUAri7qFftPSwb9o5/TSDioAe7ITykvqvZkOINBMrVPmr9S0kb2u3KzObGAHWBO+HT 7Ul2Qesw8UXdnq6+dpwkU0QoMrJwHZuUU9u8PixLgQ5N/rYnBQFtMn9g3pOwuZg8kW7z E1Mg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lQeNRb/PQsBtSlSCl8D2MowR3f03/MKWzU7abCydNk0=; b=3aNY8MW00hBFTDGOkqwO4AE5ldPcG8k7OvCLCiBX3DzD5go23hRQ7nSSBsEPlxRFDY KuyIvDoHLYCBFfoW0MbI/+bN+IgODzDlRwTVcaeyAP1CUc86MO3yU2tTBvCZuFgNytGJ tYXFjNiJQkmCS+lCJ0m9LgIDbxMa4e6YRdrAQAucNtAZLMk5OZN9jfxawClTKSQKhT7l 5eAkggnfteNWmm+WFfyOSU3R92OhBhjYXuDk/e6FvuUu6tMbfKfCYh7nhJnvDp7/6KwO E8nlUqDUi+02ocZZepKS0XJ7LZog6Q76/tufRwaZDNHSQEK2Gc/avGgokppaEuN1FdW4 zBvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1fMXwM2jLmvjH7pIsyD6rQkW2I2ILwThCK2rWQSRKKeR4JOGZm 68I8PO+hdKd9TnZ3oVPInKPQfvNiWdvnNVvVq2mJUfAk X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7tJ0duWAUdTJMtCApZlhdIQo4QZhBATK42UPk5uAAmNP6IB9e79GXTxvRQ/eLN4fVhk1ZiOSR7byxBam9wdx0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7792:b0:182:9404:f226 with SMTP id o18-20020a170902779200b001829404f226mr39317907pll.76.1666705425797; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 06:43:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1840c985e8a.10a591cd51731229.8068763504739272117@phillywisper.net> In-Reply-To: From: Herbert Wolverson Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 08:43:34 -0500 Message-ID: Cc: libreqos Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d995fb05ebdc1886" Subject: Re: [LibreQoS] Rain Fade (was Ack-filtering) X-BeenThere: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Many ISPs need the kinds of quality shaping cake can do List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 13:43:47 -0000 --000000000000d995fb05ebdc1886 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I figured LTU was in trouble when they promised the moon, took years to deliver anything, features kept dropping off the list and they went on a posting spree of how MU-MIMO couldn't work outdoors. Glad we stayed away from that one; it looks like Ubiquiti are quietly dropping it and going 802.11AX, which has the important features they dropped (OFDMA with tiny sub-channels, in particular). We have a bunch of 450m "medusa" running here (all 3ghz CBRS). Once we found the magic combination of 5ms frames, GPS (via a SyncBox Junior), and LTE Co-Existence Mode 2 (we have a lot of T-mobile in the area) it's been pretty awesome. Top speeds aren't all that amazing (you can get 100 mbps out of it), but it'll get 75 Mbps through some maple trees at 8 miles - and that's really useful. Grouping has improved a bit in recent firmwares, but still falls apart completely if you have more than 3-4 SMs who show up as "not eligible" in sounding statistics. You have to watch the spatial utilization from time to time to make sure you haven't flooded one of the sub-channels. Overall, though - we've been really happy with it. We haven't loaded one much about 30 subscribers yet, and tend to use it as a "5.x Ghz didn't work here" - but it really pushes the bits with 28 SMs at 8X and a couple of not-so-great ones. The UI is funny. Many, many years ago we had Motorola WiMAX (the carrier grade stuff that still had "clearwire" baked into the UI). The UI was absolutely terrible. I'm pretty sure the Motorola group who developed it went on to the Canopy group, because it's just like being back on that system... (I poked around in one of their EMS management scripts and found a hundred lines of x=1; y=1; x=y; y=x-y; etc. with a comment at the end /// This should help my LoC count). I hope Cambium didn't keep that bit. :-| We shied away from LTE, WiMAX burned a hole in our heads and our pockets! On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:25 AM dan via LibreQoS < libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > LTU.. huge potential but majorly flawed product line. We've stopped all > LTU deployments because every site we built we'd watch the modulations > slide down over time. Every new netgear router in a neighborhood > (practically...) takes modulations down a step. Too many mornings hunting > for a new usable channel because of a new source of noise and > LTU's inability to cope with it at all. We have mixed sites with airmax > and LTU and the airmax outperforms the LTU because of these issues. We > even see more rain fade on LTU than airmax because it's so bad with > multipathing. Any fresnel infraction and LTU degrades at 2-3x the rate > that airmax does. > > Wave's 16 client limitation is a challenge, looking forward to the mesh > units (omni). We don't have any saturated APs yet but I'm sure that's > coming. Doing a 6 AP 180 degree deployment next week and hoping to get > near 100 subs directly off of that in ~2 months. > > I'm holding some of that AX gear in hand... no AP to compare against > though :/ High hopes considering what we get out of force 4xx which is > 'plain' AX. I don't know how soon we'll see something, zero FCC leaks on a > new AP so kinda waiting on that. > > I sht on ubiquiti a lot, mostly because the company likes to pull the rug > on customers and leave them with obsolete hardware and perpetual bugs, and > doesn't seem to ask any operators what we need, and the list goes on. That > said, it's far faster and easier to deploy ubiquiti gear than anything > else. Installers love it. The price is great. If UI drops a 4x4-8x8 90 > degree AX AP we will almost certainly go that route over cambium. > > I've run or am running most brands out there with few exceptions. > Frankly, we're getting just as good or better performance out of ubiquiti > gear that cambium and have a lower failure rate. > > We also run Baicells LTE in CBRS, and 450i/450m in CBRS and we're getting > more data through the LTE product than the cambium in nLoS. In LoS 450i > delivers about 50% more and latency is half. HATE the 450i/450m > interface. 1995. finicky products as well, mumimo only working with many > subs and evenly spread over a 90 degree arc which rarely fits our > deployments. 450 gear is a huge letdown for us. 450m can deliver really > well if conditions are right, but if they're not then it's a huge expense > for little gain. > > Have held out hope that Mikrotik would show up to the AX race but nothing > really there. I have a decent sized single radio mesh network on Mikrotik > Omnitiks that is working really well. Using some wireless wire shots to > shorten mesh paths up a bit. Sell 25Mbps plans off those in a low income > area. It's a wave1 AC wireless driver so some pitfalls there, but their > newer drivers don't support 802.11s or WDS yet so can't upgrade. Would > really love to find a dual radio openwrt AX box to run batman-adv on for a > dual radio mesh but haven't found such a thing yet. > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 6:43 PM Mark Steckel wrote: > >> Dan, >> >> Really appreciate the detailed breakdown of the various vendor gear. Very >> helpful. >> >> We started Airmax AC, dabbled with LTU but don't trust it enough to >> really deploy. Waiting for things to shake out a bit before we build out >> broadcast on a new major site. (There is 200 units in the building and >> people are switching from Comcast to us in droves, so can wait on the >> broadcast equipment.) >> >> Have deployed some of the gen 1 Wave APs using AF50-LR as CPEs. Not as >> big a fan as you yet. Finally received a couple of the new gen2 Wave APs. >> planing to deploy them in the next couple of weeks along with Wave CPEs. >> Cautiously optimisitc. >> >> My biggest concern about the Wave APs is the current limit of 16 clients. >> Hopefully Ubnt will increase this to 32, other wise will have to think >> about a lot more micro-pops. >> >> Any insight into Ubnt's new Airmax AX line? >> >> We have 3.3 km AF11 link that has been rock solid for 3 years. Signal >> hovers around -35 dBm. This past May, an insane storm* just massively >> dumped rain for 8 minutes. Never seen anything like it. The rain caused 34 >> dBm of fade. even so, the link stayed up and the signal recovered quickly. >> A typical heavy storm usually causes only about 5 dBm of fade. >> >> Mark >> >> >> * Mid-Atlantic coast >> >> >> >> ---- On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:25:10 -0400 *dan via LibreQoS >> >* wrote >> --- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> How bad are y'all's gear doing with rain fade on various techs and >> bands? in 08, in nica, I'd go from a working 70 db 10 mile shot to >> nothin at 5ghz when it rained, and I just laughed at the people trying >> to deploy 60ghz - but times change. I see a vendor trying to ship 60 >> with *really good antennas* into the office market... >> >> big question to ask when so busy, please ignore me. >> >> >> I have extensive testing with almost every gear out there. >> >> 5Ghz, no appreciable fade in snow or rain. Longest shot on network right >> now is 26 miles on AF5xHD 5Ghz on 2' dishes and we push a solid 300Mbps >> across this with zero fade. Actually gets a tiny bit better in the rain, >> ie it is technically fading a bit but so is all the noise so it's a minor >> improvement. >> >> I have 2x 7 miles force 425 links that are pushing 550Mbps. And a 10 >> miles force 400c on 2' ubiquiti dishes that pushes 940 unidirectional in >> 80Mhz. No rain fade. Lots of af5xhd and force4x links in different >> distances. We even mix in some LTU PtMP as PTP for price, ie LTU AP <> >> LTU-LR or LTU-Pro for PTP. Works well enough though this product is >> susceptible to noise more than any other we use. >> >> Cambium 60Mhz cnwave is fantastic, legit 120 meters per link node to node >> or small CPE, 500M to big CPE, about 300 to the not-quite-released mid >> CPE. Pushing 1.7Gbps FDX on against my preseem box and my m2 macbook with >> nperf UDP. >> >> Ubiquiti gigabeam line, <1km ok, <800m even better. AF 'LR' and 'XR' >> rock solid at 2km, up to about 5km until they're down too much to be >> usable. Always backed up by a 5Ghz radio. >> >> Ubiquiti Wave, legit AP<>CPE out 2km and never fails over. 4km w/ wifi6 >> failover. Fantastic product... probably the one to beat. >> >> Mikrotik 60Ghz 'ay about 200m on AP to small CPE, 500m AP to nRay. Can >> get a little more but it's really close and rain fade gets you. These have >> 'ac wireless backup in them so we can EASILY push 300m on the small and >> 800m on the nRay knowing we have about 4 hours a year in 5Ghz failover. >> >> Basically, and MIMO 5Ghz, 6Ghz, or 2.4Ghz product isn't going to >> noticably fade. MOST fade in these bands is actually thermal ducting >> 'turning' the beam off aim. >> >> 60Ghz should be considered 2 separate bands. channels 1-4 are short >> range, <1km in PTP, <300m in PtMP if you want to have links stay up. >> channels 5,6 are 2-3x longer. Unfortunately, only ubiquiti really playing >> in this space right now, mikrotik's channel 5 support is at a lower output >> power so it's 'ok'. Tachyon coming into this space as well, but unproven >> and AFAIK zero beta deployments. >> >> 5Ghz <=200M service plans today with a well built network and good >> AP/Antenna choices, <=500Mbps with WiFi6 tech. technically a bit more, but >> with reasonable ratios this is about right >> 6Ghz <=900Mbps plans on live beta users. OFDMA+MUMIMO is really >> delivering here. >> 60Ghz 'low' band cambium, 1.7Gbps legit across the mesh, twice that with >> upcoming channel bonding. base CPE 1Gbps port, mid 2.5gbps port, long >> 10Gbps port(s). Build out model here is for 'In the rain' so no effective >> fade if built right. if built wrong, fade to death. >> 60Ghz 'high' band ubiquiti wave. <=800Mbps. Technically a bit more but >> I haven't convinced a Wave AP to a Wave LR to do it. I can however get 2 >> customers/radios up to 1.5Gbps across the AP. Plan with built in fade and >> intentional fail to 5Ghz beyond 2km. Acceptable in Montana. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LibreQoS mailing list >> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > LibreQoS mailing list > LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos > --000000000000d995fb05ebdc1886 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I figured LTU was in trouble when they promised the m= oon, took years to deliver anything, features kept dropping off the list an= d they went on a posting spree of how MU-MIMO couldn't work outdoors. G= lad we stayed away from that one; it looks like Ubiquiti are quietly droppi= ng it and going 802.11AX, which has the important features they dropped (OF= DMA with tiny sub-channels, in particular).

We hav= e a bunch of 450m "medusa" running here (all 3ghz CBRS). Once we = found the magic combination of 5ms frames, GPS (via a SyncBox Junior), and = LTE Co-Existence Mode 2 (we have a lot of T-mobile in the area) it's be= en pretty awesome. Top speeds aren't all that amazing (you can get 100 = mbps out of it), but it'll get 75 Mbps through some maple trees at 8 mi= les - and that's really useful. Grouping has improved a bit in recent f= irmwares, but still falls apart completely if you have more than 3-4 SMs wh= o show up as "not eligible" in sounding statistics. You have to w= atch the spatial utilization from time to time to make sure you haven't= flooded one of the sub-channels. Overall, though - we've been really h= appy with it.=C2=A0 We haven't loaded one much about 30 subscribers yet= , and tend to use it as a "5.x Ghz didn't work here" - but it= really pushes the bits with 28 SMs at 8X and a couple of not-so-great ones= .

The UI is funny. Many, many years ago we had Mot= orola WiMAX (the carrier grade stuff that still had "clearwire" b= aked into the UI). The UI was absolutely terrible. I'm pretty sure the = Motorola group who developed it went on to the Canopy group, because it'= ;s just like being back on that system... (I poked around in one of their E= MS management scripts and found a hundred lines of x=3D1; y=3D1; x=3Dy; y= =3Dx-y; etc. with a comment at the end /// This should help my LoC count). I hope Cambium didn't keep= that bit. :-|

We shied away from LTE, WiMAX burne= d a hole in our heads and our pockets!

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:2= 5 AM dan via LibreQoS <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
LTU.. huge potential but = majorly flawed product line.=C2=A0 We've stopped all LTU deployments be= cause every site we built we'd watch the modulations slide down over ti= me.=C2=A0 Every new netgear router in a neighborhood (practically...) takes= modulations down a step.=C2=A0 Too many mornings hunting for a new usable = channel because of a new source of noise and LTU's=C2=A0inability to co= pe with it at all.=C2=A0 We have mixed sites with airmax and LTU and the ai= rmax outperforms the LTU because of these issues.=C2=A0 We even see more ra= in fade on LTU than airmax because it's so bad with multipathing.=C2=A0= Any fresnel infraction and LTU degrades at 2-3x the rate that airmax does.=

Wave's 16 client limitation is a challenge, looking forward to = the mesh units (omni).=C2=A0 We don't have any saturated APs yet but I&= #39;m sure that's coming.=C2=A0 Doing a 6 AP 180 degree deployment=C2= =A0next week and hoping to get near 100 subs directly off of that in ~2 mon= ths.

I'm holding some of that AX gear in hand... no AP to compar= e against though :/=C2=A0 High hopes considering what we get out of force 4= xx which is 'plain' AX.=C2=A0 I don't know how soon we'll s= ee something, zero FCC leaks on a new AP so kinda waiting on that.

I= sht on ubiquiti a lot, mostly because the company likes to pull the rug on= customers and leave them with obsolete hardware and perpetual bugs, and do= esn't seem to ask any operators what we need, and the list goes on.=C2= =A0 That said, it's far faster and easier to deploy ubiquiti gear than = anything else. Installers love it.=C2=A0 The price is great.=C2=A0 If UI dr= ops a 4x4-8x8 90 degree AX AP we will almost certainly go that route over c= ambium.

I've run or am running most brands out there with few ex= ceptions.=C2=A0 Frankly, we're getting just as good or better performan= ce out of ubiquiti gear that cambium and have a lower failure rate.

= We also run Baicells LTE in CBRS, and 450i/450m in CBRS and we're getti= ng more data through the LTE product than the cambium in nLoS.=C2=A0 In LoS= 450i delivers about 50% more and latency is half.=C2=A0 HATE the 450i/450m= interface.=C2=A0 1995.=C2=A0 finicky products as well, mumimo=C2=A0only wo= rking with many subs and evenly spread over a 90 degree arc which rarely fi= ts our deployments.=C2=A0 450 gear is a huge letdown for us.=C2=A0 450m can= deliver really well if conditions are right, but if they're not then i= t's a huge expense for little gain.

Have held out hope that Mikr= otik would show up to the AX race but nothing really there.=C2=A0 I have a = decent sized single radio mesh network on Mikrotik Omnitiks=C2=A0that is wo= rking really well.=C2=A0 Using some wireless wire shots to shorten mesh pat= hs up a bit.=C2=A0 Sell 25Mbps plans off those in a low income area.=C2=A0 = It's a wave1 AC wireless driver so some=C2=A0pitfalls there, but their = newer drivers don't support 802.11s or WDS yet so=C2=A0can't upgrad= e.=C2=A0 Would really love to find a dual radio openwrt AX box to run batma= n-adv on for a dual radio mesh but haven't found such a thing yet.
On Mo= n, Oct 24, 2022 at 6:43 PM Mark Steckel <mjs@phillywisper.net> wrote:
Dan,

Really appreciate the detailed breakdown of the var= ious vendor gear. Very helpful.

We started Air= max AC, dabbled with LTU but don't trust it enough to really deploy. Wa= iting for things to shake out a bit before we build out broadcast on a new = major site. (There is 200 units in the building and people are switching fr= om Comcast to us in droves, so can wait on the broadcast equipment.)

Have deployed some of the gen 1 Wave APs using AF50-= LR as CPEs. Not as big a fan as you yet. Finally received a couple of the n= ew gen2 Wave APs. planing to deploy them in the next couple of weeks along = with Wave CPEs. Cautiously optimisitc.

My bigg= est concern about the Wave APs is the current limit of 16 clients. Hopefull= y Ubnt will increase this to 32, other wise will have to think about a lot = more micro-pops.

Any insight into Ubnt's n= ew Airmax AX line?

We have 3.3 km AF11 link that h= as been rock solid for 3 years. Signal hovers around -35 dBm. This past May= , an insane storm* just massively dumped rain for 8 minutes. Never seen any= thing like it. The rain caused 34 dBm of fade. even so, the link stayed up = and the signal recovered quickly. A typical heavy storm usually causes only= about 5 dBm of fade.=C2=A0

Mark


* Mid-Atlantic coast



---- On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:25:10 -0400 dan via LibreQoS <libreqos@li= sts.bufferbloat.net> wrote ---






How bad are y&#= 39;all's gear doing with rain fade on various techs and
bands? in 0= 8, in nica, I'd go from a working 70 db 10 mile shot to
nothin at 5= ghz when it rained, and I just laughed at the people trying
to deploy 6= 0ghz - but times change. I see a vendor trying to ship 60
with *really = good antennas* into the office market...

big question to ask when = so busy, please ignore me.


I have e= xtensive testing with almost every gear out there.

5Ghz, no apprecia= ble fade in snow or rain.=C2=A0 Longest shot on network right now is 26 mil= es on AF5xHD 5Ghz on 2' dishes and we push a solid 300Mbps across this = with zero fade.=C2=A0 Actually gets a tiny bit better in the rain, ie it is= technically fading a bit but so is all the noise so it's a minor impro= vement.=C2=A0=C2=A0

I have 2x 7 miles force 425 links that are pushi= ng 550Mbps.=C2=A0 And a 10 miles force 400c on 2' ubiquiti dishes that = pushes 940 unidirectional in 80Mhz.=C2=A0 No rain fade.=C2=A0 Lots of af5xh= d and force4x links in different distances.=C2=A0 We even mix in some LTU P= tMP as PTP for price, ie LTU AP <> LTU-LR or LTU-Pro for PTP.=C2=A0 W= orks well enough though this product is susceptible=C2=A0to noise more than= any other we use.

Cambium 60Mhz cnwave is fantastic, legit 120 mete= rs per link node to node or small CPE, 500M to big CPE, about 300 to the no= t-quite-released mid CPE.=C2=A0 Pushing 1.7Gbps FDX on against my preseem b= ox and my m2 macbook with nperf UDP.

Ubiquiti gigabeam line, <1km= ok, <800m even better.=C2=A0 AF 'LR' and 'XR' rock soli= d at 2km, up to about 5km until they're down too much to be usable.=C2= =A0 Always backed up by a 5Ghz radio.

Ubiquiti Wave, legit AP<>= ;CPE out 2km and never fails over.=C2=A0 4km w/ wifi6 failover.=C2=A0 Fanta= stic product... probably the one to beat.

Mikrotik 60Ghz 'ay abo= ut 200m on AP to small CPE, 500m AP to nRay.=C2=A0 Can get a little more bu= t it's really close and rain fade gets you.=C2=A0 These have 'ac wi= reless backup in them so we can EASILY push 300m on the small and 800m on t= he nRay knowing we have about 4 hours a year in 5Ghz failover.

Basic= ally, and MIMO 5Ghz, 6Ghz, or 2.4Ghz product isn't going to noticably= =C2=A0fade.=C2=A0 MOST fade in these bands is actually thermal ducting '= ;turning' the beam off aim.

60Ghz should be considered 2 separat= e bands.=C2=A0 channels 1-4 are short range, <1km in PTP, <300m in Pt= MP if you want to have links stay up.=C2=A0 channels 5,6 are 2-3x longer.= =C2=A0 Unfortunately, only ubiquiti really playing in this space right now,= mikrotik's channel 5 support is at a lower output power so it's &#= 39;ok'.=C2=A0 Tachyon coming into this space as well, but unproven and = AFAIK zero beta deployments.

5Ghz <=3D200M service plans today wi= th a well built network and good AP/Antenna choices, <=3D500Mbps with Wi= Fi6 tech.=C2=A0 technically a bit more, but with reasonable ratios this is = about right
6Ghz <=3D900Mbps plans on live beta users.=C2=A0 OFDMA+MU= MIMO is really delivering here.
60Ghz 'low' band cambium, 1.7Gbp= s legit across the mesh, twice that with upcoming channel bonding.=C2=A0 ba= se CPE 1Gbps port, mid 2.5gbps port, long 10Gbps port(s).=C2=A0 Build out m= odel here is for 'In the rain' so no effective fade if built right.= =C2=A0 if built wrong, fade to death.
60Ghz 'high' band ubiquiti= wave.=C2=A0 <=3D800Mbps.=C2=A0 Technically a bit more but I haven't= convinced a Wave AP to a Wave LR to do it.=C2=A0 I can however get 2 custo= mers/radios up to 1.5Gbps across the AP.=C2=A0 Plan with built in fade and = intentional fail to 5Ghz beyond 2km.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Acceptable in Montana.
=


=C2=A0
________________________= _______________________
LibreQoS mailing list
LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net=
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos


_______________________________________________
LibreQoS mailing list
LibreQo= S@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos --000000000000d995fb05ebdc1886--