Hi,

I got an e-mail from WI with a link to some customer story or something like that. It would be nothing special, but the text describes the connection of 2x2 that can exceed 300Mbps. As far as I know 300Mbps is the theoretical max I can get from MIMO 2x2.

http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... enna-.html

It's made using MT stuff, with RouterOS, do you MT guys think it's possible ?

Company from Poland. I think that it's only advertsite.
300Mbps of TCP, UDP?

it is a translation mistake. The pictures clearly show the speed to be 298Mbits. The text which says "speed over 300Mbit" should say "speed of 300mbit"

it is a translation mistake. The pictures clearly show the speed to be 298Mbits. The text which says "speed over 300Mbit" should say "speed of 300mbit"

True... but it's shown Tx/Rx Rate of 320mbps...

But doesn't matter, theoretical max is 300

it is a translation mistake. The pictures clearly show the speed to be 298Mbits. The text which says "speed over 300Mbit" should say "speed of 300mbit"

True... but it's shown Tx/Rx Rate of 320mbps...

But doesn't matter, theoretical max is 300

Nope.. It is completely possible if you have hardware strong enough with 60 MHz channel (30+30MHz) to make 350 Mbit.. The Link speed would be 450Mbit.. Unfortunately the hardware which is made by MikroTik and which can do this is (RB9XX) not supported from MikroTik ROS to do this.. (What a shame)

The mentioned test is UDP. I can clearly say, it can be done by TCP if MikroTik will make driver for special channels as it was by AR92XX chipset family.
On 7XX platform with ROS6 you can do about 270Mbit, but CPU bunches 100pcnt.

it is a translation mistake. The pictures clearly show the speed to be 298Mbits. The text which says "speed over 300Mbit" should say "speed of 300mbit"

Fancy below 300Mbps

it is a translation mistake. The pictures clearly show the speed to be 298Mbits. The text which says "speed over 300Mbit" should say "speed of 300mbit"

True... but it's shown Tx/Rx Rate of 320mbps...

But doesn't matter, theoretical max is 300

Nope.. It is completely possible if you have hardware strong enough with 60 MHz channel (30+30MHz) to make 350 Mbit.. The Link speed would be 450Mbit.. Unfortunately the hardware which is made by MikroTik and which can do this is (RB9XX) not supported from MikroTik ROS to do this.. (What a shame)

The mentioned test is UDP. I can clearly say, it can be done by TCP if MikroTik will make driver for special channels as it was by AR92XX chipset family.
On 7XX platform with ROS6 you can do about 270Mbit, but CPU bunches 100pcnt.

This is not true. For 450Mbit link speed you have to have 3 chains. This has nothing to do with power of hardware, but with 802.11n 2x2 standards. Please refer to the 802.11n data rates table here. You will see that with two chains, 300Mbit is maximum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1 ... Data_rates

I have 450 with two chains!

I have 450 with two chains!

Give us some more details about this setup

Just 30 + 30 MHz channel width.

Just 30 + 30 MHz channel width.

What devices do you use on both ends?

You can use Advanced Channels in RouterOS to achive the same setup, but 30+30 is not by 802.11n standard, which I was talking about above.

This is not true. For 450Mbit link speed you have to have 3 chains. This has nothing to do with power of hardware, but with 802.11n 2x2 standards. Please refer to the 802.11n data rates table here. You will see that with two chains, 300Mbit is maximum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1 ... Data_rates

I am concerned about such poor knowledge of MikroTik staff of your own hardware and ROS abilities, but I am not that surprised, because poor knowledge ever was the biggest preacusion of any progress. That is may be the reason and explanation, why you dont support special channels on 9XX (AR93XX family), which is nearly twice CPU powerful as 7XX platform. I can make yu sure. your hardware can do with 2X2 MIMO easy 450link speed within 60MHz channel. If you dont know I can show you easily..

This is not true. For 450Mbit link speed you have to have 3 chains. This has nothing to do with power of hardware, but with 802.11n 2x2 standards. Please refer to the 802.11n data rates table here. You will see that with two chains, 300Mbit is maximum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1 ... Data_rates

I am concerned about such poor knowledge of MikroTik staff of your own hardware and ROS abilities, but I am not that surprised, because poor knowledge ever was the biggest preacusion of any progress. That is may be the reason and explanation, why you dont support special channels on 9XX (AR93XX family), which is nearly twice CPU powerful as 7XX platform. I can make yu sure. your hardware can do with 2X2 MIMO easy 450link speed within 60MHz channel. If you dont know I can show you easily..

Insider, please read my post more carefully. 802.11n standard allows 300Mbit for two chains. This is a fact. You can use custom channels, but it is against the standard. It is possible in RouterOS to use advanced channels (30MHz or other) to achieve this, but this is outside of 802.11n standards. Ropeba shows a good example how to do this, if you don't have to follow standards and regulations.

Just 30 + 30 MHz channel width.

What devices do you use on both ends?

You can use Advanced Channels in RouterOS to achive the same setup, but 30+30 is not by 802.11n standard, which I was talking about above.

Stop it Normis, it looks silly. NV2 is not 802.11n anymore as well, Nstreme even tho, MikroTik showed, that he can do it.. Do it further! I was so disapointed when I found new RB9XX do not support what AR92XX family did.. Thats it. When we can estimated drivers for 9XX for super channel width?

You can test it on complete AR92XX family (RB7XX, R52n)

Your complaint was too vague and mentioned "not strong hardware" which is very misleading. If you are complaining about "advanced channel support" in AR93xx then it is a completely different question.

Insider, please read my post more carefully. 802.11n standard allows 300Mbit for two chains. This is a fact. You can use custom channels, but it is against the standard. It is possible in RouterOS to use advanced channels (30MHz or other) to achieve this, but this is outside of 802.11n standards. Ropeba shows a good example how to do this, if you don't have to follow standards and regulations.

Only the guy who still speaks about N standard is your self. It is not cas if this is the standard or not. This is the case I am pulling over the MikrTik 350Mbit + on TCP.. But I dont have no AR92XX hardwra which is powerfull enough to do it.. Help us buddy!

Currently RouterOS has Advanced channel support only for AR92xx chipsets cards. It is specified in the documentation:
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Wi ... re_support

AR93xx/AR95xx are newer chipsets and they uses different driver. Currently we haven't made support for Advanced channel feature for those chipsets. We will look if we could add support for them in future.

But I dont have no AR92XX hardwra which is powerfull enough to do it.. Help us buddy!

You can use RB800 board and use AR92xx mini-pci wireless card and you will be able to get such speeds.

Your complaint was too vague and mentioned "not strong hardware" which is very misleading. If you are complaining about "advanced channel support" in AR93xx then it is a completely different question.

Cmon! It is still the same case.. We are making advanced radio relays on your hardware. We chose the 751G platform beacause of Gbit ethernet. The 100CPU is about 230Mbit in 40MHz in standard with 5,2x ROS or 248Mbit with ROS6. If I am using your 60 MHz channel it connect with 450Mbit, but CPU is already "full" on 270 Mbit because it clock is on 400MHz. So if it is not "not strong hardware" if it is misleading, than what is the problem.

Currently RouterOS has Advanced channel support only for AR92xx chipsets cards. It is specified in the documentation:
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Wi ... re_support

AR93xx/AR95xx are newer chipsets and they uses different driver. Currently we haven't made support for Advanced channel feature for those chipsets. We will look if we could add support for them in future.

Look fast as you can - it will be outbreaking news for your platform

But I dont have no AR92XX hardwra which is powerfull enough to do it.. Help us buddy!

You can use RB800 board and use AR92xx mini-pci wireless card and you will be able to get such speeds.

Pfffff..
mini-PCI? Do you know what is capacity of PCI bus ? This is PCI-E era speed.. let this count your HW staff. Not good idea.

I didn't expected that anyone would create our test as fuss

I need to ask our technicians how did they do it. In the future we plan to repeat that test using these antennas -> http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... -24hv.html or it's 6 GHz version better -> http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... -24hv.html on longer distance (around 2,5km). We will share the test results, it's an installation for one of our customers.

Regarding the standards 802.11n offers 2x2 MIMO and MCS15 -> 300Mbps, but MikroTik with it's configuration offers more, it's a fact, but it's not clear 802.11n...

Dear all.
Can someone explain me, how to setup 60ghz channels on any RBxx with any AR92xx on any ROS???

Dear all.
Can someone explain me, how to setup 60ghz channels on any RBxx with any AR92xx on any ROS???

Maybe this can help you:
http://translate.google.pl/translate?hl ... 0%2F497%2F

Dear all.
Can someone explain me, how to setup 60ghz channels on any RBxx with any AR92xx on any ROS???

Write to support@wireless-instruments.com, this is an e-mail to our technicians which have done this test, they will explain you what to do. I don't want to make a mess, they did, so they will explain to anyone interested

This is possible, and a nice feature. a 60Mhz channel at nv2, give me 80mb/s TCP instead of about 25mb/s on a 20 km link. (180 mb/s at udp)

I can do it as described in this link http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... enna-.html , but what about possible controll of the telecomm agency ? 60 MHz channel isn't the standard of 802.11n ! Won't it bring problems to the WISP ???? What about legality of this solution ?

I can do it as described in this link http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... enna-.html , but what about possible controll of the telecomm agency ? 60 MHz channel isn't the standard of 802.11n ! Won't it bring problems to the WISP ???? What about legality of this solution ?

Can you specify channeling on ISM band ? Or where it is written you have to use some specific channel spacing? 60MHz is nothing else than 3x20MHz. Nstreme and NV2 is not 802.11N either and who cares ?

I can do it as described in this link http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... enna-.html , but what about possible controll of the telecomm agency ? 60 MHz channel isn't the standard of 802.11n ! Won't it bring problems to the WISP ???? What about legality of this solution ?

Can you specify channeling on ISM band ? Or where it is written you have to use some specific channel spacing? 60MHz is nothing else than 3x20MHz. Nstreme and NV2 is not 802.11N either and who cares ?

So... Can you take all range of 5,1-5,9 GHz ? It's k x 20MHz

The regulations concerns only the EIRP then ?

I can do it as described in this link http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... enna-.html , but what about possible controll of the telecomm agency ? 60 MHz channel isn't the standard of 802.11n ! Won't it bring problems to the WISP ???? What about legality of this solution ?

Can you specify channeling on ISM band ? Or where it is written you have to use some specific channel spacing? 60MHz is nothing else than 3x20MHz. Nstreme and NV2 is not 802.11N either and who cares ?

So... Can you take all range of 5,1-5,9 GHz ? It's k x 20MHz

The regulations concerns only the EIRP then ?

I dont know speciality of your country, but for example in CZ, there is just specification of ETSI norm, channel band and max EIRP power, thats it.. Just do what you can do.
It is not matter of channeling 20MHz, but it behaves almost the same, so if you will count correct channel center frequency it will behave same way.. Ok you will not hear beacons of other spots, so it will be more messy, but there is now law break.

But I dont have no AR92XX hardwra which is powerfull enough to do it.. Help us buddy!

You can use RB800 board and use AR92xx mini-pci wireless card and you will be able to get such speeds.

Pfffff..
mini-PCI? Do you know what is capacity of PCI bus ? This is PCI-E era speed.. let this count your HW staff. Not good idea.

Mmmmmm?...........What's wrong with PCI bus?
PCI 32bit theoritical bandwidth is ~127.2 MB/s.
Let's say that in real world is ~100MB/s - thus 100MB/s x 8 = ~800Mbps and theoritical OVER 1Gbps speed.
800Mbps Bandwidth ISN'T ENOUGH for you?......

Please be carefull of what you write.

Thanks.

Mmmmmm?...........What's wrong with PCI bus?
PCI 32bit theoritical bandwidth is ~127.2 MB/s.
Let's say that in real world is ~100MB/s - thus 100MB/s x 8 = ~800Mbps and theoritical OVER 1Gbps speed.
800Mbps Bandwidth ISN'T ENOUGH for you?......

Please be carefull of what you write.

Thanks.

Ok, now count timing of 33MHz bus and 800MHz CPU and memory, look at architecture of PPC. Go ahead You will getsomething bellow 400Mbit buddy.

Could you be more specific please to understand it?
Thanks.

Of topic but one question.

Are you satisfied with MAX -20dB sidelobs that you have in your site's frequency extenders?

https://916992e1-a-e52a456c-s-sites.goo ... 120315.jpg

Could you be more specific please to understand it?
Thanks.

It is complete off topic, it belongs to HW section, but everybody from HW dep. of MT know what I am talking about.. Second problem is shared PCI bus, so full thruput I can give only on 2 PCI connectors.

Yes that's why I wrote "off topic"...

Ahhh........so you're not.

Of topic but one question.

Are you satisfied with MAX -20dB sidelobs that you have in your site frequency extenders?

[img][https://916992e1-a-e52a456c-s-sites.goo ... 120315.jpg[/img]

Depends who asks Can you do better? Go for job in Qualcomm then. We cant do more then source gives

I don't know if I could better or not (though I know ), but in my opinion, IF you "start" with a signal "purity" like that, where do you want to go?

I don't know if I could better or not (though I know ), but in my opinion, IF you "start" with a signal "purity" like that, where do you want to go?

What you mean? RPM is suiting ETSI, have you ever seen masks on 5 GHz? It is the same. It is OFDM signal source, cmon. If you will have QAM, then it will be the Class 5+. I cant do anything with quality of source, I can worse it. I can filter it, but why? But this is not the case. Check it here: http://www.cwnp.com/cwnp_wifi_blog/spec ... teference/

Yes we are WAY of topic now....

Can you specify channeling on ISM band ? Or where it is written you have to use some specific channel spacing? 60MHz is nothing else than 3x20MHz. Nstreme and NV2 is not 802.11N either and who cares ?

So... Can you take all range of 5,1-5,9 GHz ? It's k x 20MHz

The regulations concerns only the EIRP then ?

I dont know speciality of your country, but for example in CZ, there is just specification of ETSI norm, channel band and max EIRP power, thats it.. Just do what you can do.
It is not matter of channeling 20MHz, but it behaves almost the same, so if you will count correct channel center frequency it will behave same way.. Ok you will not hear beacons of other spots, so it will be more messy, but there is now law break.

So... if there would be a possibility to set 40-50MHz channel, make 2 together in bonding, then we can get much better throughput in MIMO 2x2... isn't it ?

So... if there would be a possibility to set 40-50MHz channel, make 2 together in bonding, then we can get much better throughput in MIMO 2x2... isn't it ?

Yes, by 40MHz channel and powerfull platform enough it is matter of fact I am doing 248Mbit of NET network thruput. In 60 MHz channel it will be 370Mbit.

So... if there would be a possibility to set 40-50MHz channel, make 2 together in bonding, then we can get much better throughput in MIMO 2x2... isn't it ?

Yes, by 40MHz channel and powerfull platform enough it is matter of fact I am doing 248Mbit of NET network thruput. In 60 MHz channel it will be 370Mbit.

The problem is that as far as I know (but I'm not sure), the maximum channel width is 30 MHz, using channel bonding, we get 60 MHz and that's all we can get in RouterOS. The question is if MT will enable the possibility to operate on 40 MHz channels in the future Anyway, what RB hardware would you use for it ?

We have been working also on different configuration 2 x MIMO 2x2 using 4x4 antenna system -> http://www.wireless-instruments.com/en/ ... 20hvx.html. To make situation clear, it's not MIMO 4x4 We are still working on it... still some problems.

RB9xx is powerfull enough to do it.. With thruput of 248Mbit it uses about 55 % of CPU. it is senseless to use rb800 because of price and form as well..

RB9xx is not compatible for MT mimo 2x2 30mhz + 30mhz

any update on the RB9XX support for the 30+30 ???

Any news regarding this?
AR9300 series (QRT-5) ?
It has enough powerful CPU, gigabit ethernet, 23dBi dualpol antenna and good wlan card.
Made by Mikrotik
60Mhz channel width would be (in theory) 50% more on air rates than current maximum of 40MHz.

Any news regarding this?
AR9300 series (QRT-5) ?
It has enough powerful CPU, gigabit ethernet, 23dBi dualpol antenna and good wlan card.
60Mhz channel width would be 50% more on air rates.

currently this board doesn't support Advanced channels feature.

When can the support be expected

Your best bet is to just use 802.11ac cards with your Mikrotik, however Mikrotik is showing no interest in supporting this. You can get more throughput on same channel sizes, and even use up to 80mhz width with 750/750 air rates, and up to over 500+mb true throughput!

UBNT is already on this and testing units out, looks like they're taking the lead in wireless and leaving Mikrotik in the dust! Sucks because I'd love to see 1ms pings on 802.11ac and 500+ throughput with Nstreme!

i don't believe Mikrotik is just leaving this out...

and if we have products like Sextant we cannot even change the wireless cards... so the best bet would be to wait for Mikrotik to work out something on supporting this.

i think showing faith in a product and its developers definitely pays back.