Test is done between the boards - not the perfect I know, but devices are currently in an office with 100mbit/s lan attached.
It's the true, I have both, and mANT is more better made and have better performance.The good choice could be mANT30 instead of Rocket Dish.
Cetalfio
as seen in the wireless nothing changed in rcAnyone tested with v6.19rc versions, any improvements there ?
I did another test with nv2 this morning, got better results, but still unstable throughput. With 802.11 I get very stable speed, but this is just a test, I am not sure that it will manage to stay low latency under thousands of connections.
What's new in 6.19rc12 (2014-Aug-21 11:53):
*) ippool - improve performance when acquiring address without preference;
*) partitions - copying partitions did not work on some boards;
*) bridge - added ~Auto Isolate~ stp enhancement (802.1q-2011, 13.25.5)
*) ipsec - when peer config is changed kill only relevant SAs;
*) vpls - do not abort BGP connection when receiving invalid 12 byte
nexthop encoding;
*) dns-update - fix zone update;
*) dhcpv4 server - support multiple radius address lists;
*) console - added unary operator 'any' that evaluates to true if argument
is not null or nothing value;
*) CCR - improved performance;
*) firewall - packet defragmenting will only happen with connection tracking enabled;
*) firewall - optimized option matching order with-in a rule;
*) firewall - rules that require CONNTRACK to work will now have Invalid flag when CONNTRACK is disabled;
*) firewall - rules that require use-ip-firewall to work will now have invalid flag when use-ip-firewall is disabled;
*) firewall - rules that have interface with ~Slave~ flag specified as in-/out-interface will now have Invalid flag;
*) firewall - rules that have interface without ~Slave~ flag specified as in-/out-bridge-port will now have Invalid flag;
*) firewall - rules with Invalid flags will now be auto-commented to explain why;
*) l2tp - force l2tp to not use MPPE encryption if IPsec is used;
*) sstp - force sstp to not use MPPE encryption (it already has TLS one);
Normis what do you mean "conditions"?zyzelis what are the conditions of the link?
CyberTod did you already install the 8km link ?
sorry, I missed that post. Now I seeNormis what do you mean "conditions"?zyzelis what are the conditions of the link?
CyberTod did you already install the 8km link ?
i wrote before 3 posts what are conditions...
Do you need some additional info?
Sorry Normis,all antennas have better performance in certain frequency. look at the antenna dbi/frequency chart
the best gain is around 54xx
http://i.mt.lv/routerboard/files/sxt-patterns.pdf
802.11ac only works with wireless-fp, there is no other way to use it.Did you try with wireless fp-package??? And the config to allow fast path on wireless, o by the way i noted that you used frecuency scan to get the frecuency of use, the dude have a spectral scan tool that help a lot, maybe you can use instead of frecuency scan from winbox
It will give you a better idea where to put your 80mhz bandwidth. Sorry for my english.
BR
The best that I achieved is the last I posted. Around 300mbit/s :
nv2, 80Mhz clear channel, almost everything else at default.
I'm not making changes anymore to do tests because it is in production for a week.
We had a kernel failure on a SXT AC SA. Sent supout.rif. Now it runs for 6 days.It works well. The speed and latency are stable, but my real traffic is not more than 150Mbit/s.
I had a few kernel failures on the station side, sent a ticket, but so far support did not find something wrong.
How you configured link?I guess it happens very rarely. At least I am not the only one, because support suggested it could be hardware, but I doubt it - I have boards with hardware problems, but they just reboot and the message in log is only "reboot without proper shutdown". The most recent time i had "kernel failure" was on v6.15 and it was fixed in next version and again it happened only on nv2 links on the station side.
I'm wondering if nstreme is good now. I prefer nstreme over nv2 for ptp for low latency.What's new in 6.19 (2014-Aug-26 14:05):
*) wireless - improvements for nv2 and 802.11a
Now this is interesting... I am not a fan of ubnt, so would indeed cheer if it can be proven that mANT30 is better than Rocket Dish. But can we see some real test results? Because opinions based upon some wistful thinking are no good to no one. But if you can show us that these antennas really perform better (show us the differences) I am not to shy to link to this test whenever appropriate just to show that ubnt is not as good a brand as they do want to make people believe.... ("carrier grade" )It's the true, I have both, and mANT is more better made and have better performance.The good choice could be mANT30 instead of Rocket Dish.
Cetalfio
I'm not hateful of ubnt myself, I like their M series APs and CPE quite a lot and am pretty happy with them. I have had great luck with the RocketDish30. That said, nstreme is superior IMHO to airmax for ptp links and I like the idea of a NetMetal5 w/ mANT30 if they are indeed superior to a RocketAC-Lite (or upcoming RocketAC) + RocketDishAC or RocketDish30. Sometimes I feel that I'm 1-2dBm short of advertised gain on the RocketDish and I suspect the feed horn isn't as good as it could be.Now this is interesting... I am not a fan of ubnt, so would indeed cheer if it can be proven that mANT30 is better than Rocket Dish. But can we see some real test results? Because opinions based upon some wistful thinking are no good to no one. But if you can show us that these antennas really perform better (show us the differences) I am not to shy to link to this test whenever appropriate just to show that ubnt is not as good a brand as they do want to make people believe.... ("carrier grade" )It's the true, I have both, and mANT is more better made and have better performance.The good choice could be mANT30 instead of Rocket Dish.
Cetalfio
I'm also interestedWhat is this Antenna - 140 cm parabolic dish - double pol (Manufacturer)