[LibreQoS] 10G radios Was: Rain Fade (was Ack-filtering)

Wed Oct 26 11:02:22 EDT 2022

Similar rules here (Montana), local gov can't be involved in internet
delivery per state rules.  Closest they can get is lease conduit.

I also run into a CenturyLink/Lumen issue in that for a small town I pull
off of a 1Gbps Lumen port and I've been asking for 10G and they 'cant' but
the reality is that they are running all 1G SFP ports on a 12 strand stub
and have just 3 open (and I took one) and refuse to put 10-40Gbps modules
in despite their equipment on both sides supporting it with a number of
spare SFP+ and QSFP ports.  I know the local tech so I rode along with him
and we checked it out.  This is why big corps with effective government
backed monopolies are fundamentally bad.

As far as Siklu's performance, I have a 4km that has never dropped but it's
modulated down to around gig in the heaviest rain we saw that caused all
the floods up here.  It's performance is within 1dB of their link
calculator.  Has AF5xHD backup and that's never been used.  One VERY
important thing to remember about Siklu is that they are quite happy to
pitch you really hard on 3 9's service as good.  REAL happy.   20km on
80Ghz?  Oh yeah, that's no problem at all it'll be so amazing with a 80/11
pairing and AF11 as the backup link.  You'll be 10G for like, 360 days a
year like a BOSS.  Only 5 entire days of accumulated outages and *7%*
capacity.  No problem I guess, I'll just throw a cake shaper on that
haha..   But the link calc is spot on :)

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 7:02 AM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS <
libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> Siklu tells us that their prices have gone up, especially if you need the
> larger dish. They quoted us $9k for a link (I'll let you know how it
> performs if the client goes for it).
>
> We keep getting large circuits recently, because "planning" in Missouri
> isn't really a thing. This client built a 3,000 bed luxury apartment
> complex for students, including fiber rings and infrastructure that deliver
> really high-speed connectivity to 9k jacks. Once they finished
> construction, they decided to order some connectivity. If they'd done their
> homework, they might have noticed that CenturyLink's entire available
> capacity to that neighborhood is... 1 gbit/s. On a single cable! So they
> bought it, and unsurprisingly it's not enough - lots of unhappy students.
> Then CL lost a legal battle with the city (it turns out they haven't paid
> for any of their aerial fiber runs in the last 5 years!), began the
> Lumen/Quantum Fiber/Titan/Whatever The New Name Is shell-game to try and
> avoid paying (they lost similar lawsuits elsewhere) and are quoting "we can
> add some bandwidth by 2025" currently). They are *also* suing to keep an
> exclusivity agreement that includes that part of town, preventing anyone
> else from laying fiber in the meantime!
>
> The really irksome part? There's really high capacity city-owned fiber
> right there, and the state government prohibited the city from connecting
> any private companies to it - even as transit to a private ISP. :-/
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 11:09 PM dan via LibreQoS <
> libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Siklu is great, service and support are ok.  Aviat is also great, a bit
>> more money, but better support via their reps. One issue with siklu that
>> aviat doesn’t have is that siklu support is all in Israel so you have some
>> delays but it’s manageable.  8010 is really hard to beat.  Also? Siklu
>> pairs up with a dual band dish so you can slap on an Af5xhd or force 400c
>> and pass that through the siklu for hitless failover.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:29 PM Mark Steckel <mjs at phillywisper.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> ---- On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 22:22:04 -0400 dan via LibreQoS  wrote ---
>>>  >
>>>  > As far as FSO, interesting but 80Ghz is basically better in every way
>>> and those radios are coming down in price pretty quickly.   10Gbps FDX link
>>> on siklu 8010 is under $6k if you have a good rep.
>>>
>>> Do you have any experience with Aviat or other 80 GHz radios? Planning
>>> to purchase some links in the next few months and I'm look for unbiased
>>> info.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  > On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Dave Taht dave.taht at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>  > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 4:25 PM dan dandenson at gmail.com> 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 APCPE 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.
>>>  >
>>>  >  Thx for such a deep dive! How about Tarana?
>>>  >
>>>  >  How does "Terragraph" derived tech tie back into shipping products?
>>>  >
>>>  >  I've been involved with a bunch of other highly speculative
>>>  >  technologies over the years.
>>>  >
>>>  >  # Free space optics
>>>  >
>>>  >  Koruza showed promise at one point: http://www.koruza.net/
>>>  >
>>>  >  Google's been trying to line up folk for this for a while:
>>>  >
>>>  >  https://x.company/projects/taara/
>>>  >
>>>  >  # Radios
>>>  >
>>>  >  ... I appreciate the data on all these radios, their relative
>>>  >  performance and range. This stuff needs to  end up in
>>>  >  a wiki chart somewhere. ?
>>>  >  ... but it's not knowing the buffering on em that bugs me the most.
>>> :/
>>>  >  Got all kinds of measurement tools for that
>>>  >
>>>  >  crusader, in particular, is coming along.
>>>  >  packet caps from iperf sessions...
>>>  >  flent to a raspi on the other side of the link...
>>>  >
>>>  >  # Still a hardware guy at heart
>>>  >
>>>  >  Back in 2013 I had thought hard about entering the market for radios
>>>  >  in the 11ghz (and wispa just freed up a lot of space in the 10? or
>>> 12?
>>>  >  band for future use) licensed spectrums, but I couldn't stomach
>>>  >  working with qualcomm again. I have some hope a mediatek might get
>>>  >  into that, and I could work with them.
>>>  >
>>>  >  anyone got devices that can use channel 172 yet? That just got freed
>>> up too.
>>>  >
>>>  >  >
>>>  >  >
>>>  >  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >  --
>>>  >  This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
>>>  >
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXtz
>>>  >  Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>>>  > _______________________________________________
>>>  > 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/20221026/0b83a948/attachment.html>