I was wondering if anyone could help me with this. I work for a WISP and we are constantly having to deal with interference in the 5Ghz band. One way to improve throughput was to implement NV2 on the network, except that this made our average ping time to clients increase drastically from about 5ms to at least 30 or even 40. Is there a way to get the best of both worlds? Low latency and high throughput? Or am I fighting a loosing battle.

P.S buying a licensed band is not an option for me.3
P.S.S Would a noise floor of -102 be better than one of -120 or the other way around?

Thanks for the help

Want you use point to point links or point to Multi points

I read on the forum recently that the newest version(s) of RouterOS 6.x have had some improvements to NV2, particularly with latency. Other people recommend using Nstreme instead for more consistent/lower latency.

Also, a noise floor of -120dBm is better/quieter than -102dBm.

Thanks for the replies. I am using this on point to multi point links. I have one other question though. When doing a frequency usage scan, when i select a channel with a noise floor of -120 and no usage I get worse latency and throughput then when selecting one that has a noise floor of -102 and some frequency usage. Any theories on the matter?

Thanks for the replies. I am using this on point to multi point links. I have one other question though. When doing a frequency usage scan, when i select a channel with a noise floor of -120 and no usage I get worse latency and throughput then when selecting one that has a noise floor of -102 and some frequency usage. Any theories on the matter?

What is the frequency response of the antennas being used, what frequency has -120 and what frequency has -102?
When you say "....worse latency and throughput ..." what is the actual difference.

Nv2 is more stable
See this settings for point to point link.
http://www.wirelessinfo.be/index.php/mi ... /omnitikpp
Is another device but stay the same configuration.