[LibreQoS] Rain Fade (was Ack-filtering)

dan dandenson at gmail.com
Tue Oct 25 09:58:35 EDT 2022

LTE is our primary '5Ghz didn't work' and 450i/450m the secondary.
primarily due to cost.  Baicells UI has zero advantage on Cambium's lol.
 But I can push 50Mbps through a -80 RSSI every day and nothing else can do
that (short of Tarana...)

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:43 AM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS <
libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> 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 at 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 <mjs at phillywisper.net>
>> 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
>>> <libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net <libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net>>*
>>> 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 at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
>>> _______________________________________________
>> LibreQoS mailing list
>> LibreQoS at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
> _______________________________________________
> LibreQoS mailing list
> LibreQoS at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/libreqos/attachments/20221025/f38d3f75/attachment.html>

More information about the LibreQoS mailing list