We’re approaching a new analysis project, wich will consist of 200~ nodes on a very interference zone; the links will need low bandwith, but high conectivity rate.
As a first request, we were asked for a WiMax IEEE 802.16e based solution. As an obvious answer we said that we use to work with IEEE 802.11n, and we really trust in that technology.
I’ve readed some documents on the net, like this one
All of them share the same conclussions: WiMax was designed for outdoor, 802.11 for indoor; Wimax could keep a best conectivity rate, at a lower troughput, but, they also say that this bandwidth differences are subjetive, since 802.11 bitrate tends to be reduced on outdoor or exigent scenarios.
I’ve searched on this forum. All the information i found is from some years ago. I also readed a Normis post where he categorically writes MK will no implement WiMax.
Can we ask for expert opinions about this theme?
Could MK give us a better explanation why they didn’t want WiMax before, and now?
802.16e is a wireless protocol which is made for bigger networks compared to 802.11(abgn).
NV2 tries to implement some mechanisms which are defined within 802.16e but not all of them.
But the protocol is only one of your parameters. Other is frequency (licensed/unlicensed/wavelength/allowed tx-power), available locations to mount Basesstations/APs,
needed Bandwidth, price of Basestation, CPEs, USB-Stick coverage needed, …
Thank you, ste.
In our preliminary analysis, almost all the parameters you mention are shared between the two systems -in their own specifications-.
The only point we can argue in the benefit of MK is the price. I’m not sure, but I think there are at least two unlicensed Wimax frequency ranges that can be used here.
This is an industrial grade project. I have the belief that MK with NV2 can handle this. Thats the reason i’m looking for good arguments here.
wimax is an old way to do thing. Now days LTE is the way to go.
wimax freq is not commonly available at open band. Hardware equipment and freq to use is limited, and there should not be a big market for devices using wimax.
If you are able to use “out of band” 2,4 ghz, there are still the possibility to use MT at some of the wimax freq. at least the 2,6 band.
PS! Dot think to much about indoor outdoor 802.11XX . Its fine at both indoor and outdoor use. the nv2, you would not find any Rfc defining. It’s a mikrotik proportary protocol with Bothe benefits and really positive things.
Thank you samsung172 (nice nick!) I hope that the price argument became an important factor for the client.
In fact, I dont worry about outdoor for 802.11. In the past, we’ve done some critical links over ~40 km distance, using 802.11a and nstreme. Recently, we made a nice test over 10 km with two Sextants NV2.
I’ll keep my investigation, order to strengthen up our arguments. It would be nice to hear an Mikrotik official point of view about this theme -Normis maybe?
If you need good coverage for a bigger area wimax has some goodies which help a lot. E.g. pusc cant be done with 802.11.
For wimax you get equipment with beamforming.
But you need exclusive frequencies and good planning.
You need low frequency. In 5ghz you never get indoor coverage.