Page 1 of 1

Super Range 2

Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 9:30 pm
by nazemg
We'r planning a new order from Mikrotik.

Still awaiting the Super Range 2 cards.

Please let us know when they will be available on your site.

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 3:31 am
by stealthwave
I just ordered a RB532 from MT is not selling the SR2 yet only selling SR5 on MT's site. I orded my SR2 from they had some left. Everyone else that showed up on ubiquiti website as a dealer had no cards.

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:35 am
by sacwireless
i had actually received my SR2 yesterday, but just now getting around to testing it today.

i have already sent an email/output to support about this, but so far the SR2 does not work, shows up as "unknown device". tried it in RB230 and Soekris 4511, all running 2.9rc4 with same results

just wanted to check if anyone else has gotten their SR2's yet and if they are seeing the same?

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 5:08 am
by stealthwave
Oh crap! The chipset is the same on SR2 & SR5. MT is selling SR5 on website. I also emailed support and they said it would support it. I would like to know what happens on this ASAP.

Did you try it on the RB532 board?

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 7:54 am
by sacwireless
just tested on RB532, same results:

[admin@RB532] > system resource pci print
0 00:05.0 Atheros Communications, Inc. unknown device (rev: 1) 143
1 00:04.0 Atheros Communications, Inc. AR5212 802.11abg NIC (rev: 1) 142

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 10:49 am
by randyloveless
any body heard any thing good about the sr2 and sr5?

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 2:11 pm
by normis
Looks like the SR card that you have, and the ones that we have, are not the same kind. Ours ( work wery well. We will try to do something about this.

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 6:35 pm
by sacwireless
interesting, yeah i got mine from demarctech. here are the details printed on the chip and board itself:

atheros chip - AR5213A-00, B24187C, 0509, CHINA


UFL AND MMCX connectors

and the board on these ones are black, not that it matters, but thought i should point it out since yours are white/lighter.

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 8:30 pm
by stealthwave
This sucks, I already have the card ordered. I ordered it after I emailed support and asked if SR2 would work. The relie I got from them said yes.

I hope they get this fixed ASAP, sence they said it would.

Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 9:14 pm
by stephenpatrick
I just read a thread on another forum, related to this, quoted here.
Explains the comment from MT saying theirs work, as they are probably a different batch.

Some names removed to avoid offence to MT or those concerned:

The cards in-question are actually built by Ubiquiti. Demarc choose to
take some of the early, pre-production cards, and shipped them. The
rest of us [distributors] waited to see production cards.

My production samples arrived 2 days ago via overnight FedEx from
Taipei. Lets just say there have been "some improvements",
between the pre-production and production cards and leave it at that.

Ubiquiti has slipped the production schedule a couple times. This is
"normal". Nobody likes
the time estimate you give that accounts for only ideal circumstances
("... and if everything goes perfectly..."),
so they ask for the impossible ("... tell us when we can have it,
assuming nothing goes wrong...") and then they
forget the conditional. I'm not saying Ubiquiti *or* Demarc is at-
fault here. You're just suffering with everyone else
who wants the new, latest thing and stands in-line for it.

None of this is from me, and I haven't tested the cards, though hope to soon.


Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 1:07 am
by stealthwave
The card I ordered is from a new shipment. They said this batch just came in this week. Mybe mine will be fine.

Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 1:26 am
by stephenpatrick
Just as a favour,
Can you report back when you test (and everyone else) ?
Knowing they are "good" or any issues would be v. helpful


Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 6:34 am
by sacwireless
yeah mine is probably from that batch, MT has told me they will try do something about it. will be interesting to see if everyone else starts to get theirs from the other vendors and their results. i have good experience usually in the past with demarctech, though lately i have tried to stick to MT / wisp-router / netgate. got some pretty big wireless and hotspot projects coming up that i need to make sure i am covered.


Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 1:30 pm
by Ubiquiti

We do not know how these "pre-production" vs. "production" rumors started. All cards that have been shipped are exactly the same in terms of design.

We were not aware of any compatibility issues, but will work quickly to resolve them.

Please send an e-mail to if you need immediate help/information.


Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 4:44 pm
by stealthwave
Thanks, Ubiquiti!

High Power Cards

Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:56 pm
by markon
:) I am finally back from all the meetings of the California Internet Service Providers Association and am finally back in the LAB.

The CISPA LAB has just finished up it's testing of 4 Atheros Based high power cards (400mw) and will be releasing the results on Monday June 6th.

The board of Directors of CISPA have elected to make this section available to all and I will post the link on monday for this information.

The testing consisted of 30 days in the Lab and 30 days in a Live operations.

So stay tuned to for the GOOD, THE BAD, and THE ULGY

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:39 pm
by jarosoup
Looking forward to this Mark. Thanks in advance for sharing this with everyone :)

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:45 pm
by msolis
Markon, you have news for the new ubiquiti wireless?

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:49 pm
by sacwireless
i still have a no go on the SR2 from Demarctech in 2.9rc5, i have already placed an order for another one from a preferred vendor. hopefully the SR5 i had already ordered awhile back from Demarctech will not have the same problems, should have it by the end of the week to test.

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:38 pm
by hitek146
We received our two SR5 test units yesterday, and I only briefly plugged one in to see if I could notice any differences. Under RC4, the card loaded using the same Atheros driver that was already installed for the CM9 card also present in the unit. It apparently appears to the system as a standard Atheros card, other than the "frequency not in scan-list" error given when trying to select a 2.4GHz band. This makes me wonder if the only difference is the heatsink, but if so, where does the added 2dB of receive sensitivity come from?


Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:43 pm
by phendry
I thought the SR5 was just the same as a CM9 but with a built in amp. We received some earlier in the week and saw an increase of 4dB tx on a 10 mile link but no increase on the rx which would suggest that they don't have any better receive sensitivity over the CM9's.

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:11 am
by marvin
Well anyone had luck with them SR 2 radios? We were about to purchase quite of few of these radios to replace our old outdated 2.4g infrastructure with all new 5.8g infrastructure. Planning to use the new Routerboard 532 with the SR 2 radios.

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:41 am
by phendry
Well you can give it a go but I don't rate your chances as the SR2's are for 2.4Ghz. Maybe worth going for the 5.8Ghz SR5's instead ;)

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:54 am
by sacwireless
well ups just dropped off my SR5 from Demarctech, a quick boot on a rb230 shows that the system does recognize the card and allow me to use it.

so now to wait for an SR2 from wisp-router, should be here tomorrow.

Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:43 am
by sacwireless
well i just got my SR2 from wisp-router, and i can confirm that the card is actually recognized and functioning as it should.

so, now i am a little pissed, there is something definitely not right with the batch of demarctech cards that i got one from. which as much as the rumors flying around about diff batches have been dismissed, i would tend to believe them more so now.

non-working SR2:

2 device="00:10.0" name="unknown device (rev: 1)"
vendor="Atheros Communications, Inc." category="Ethernet controller"
vendor-id="0x168c" device-id="0xff15" irq=11 memory=0xA0010000-0xA001FFFF

working SR2:

2 device="00:10.0" name="AR5212 802.11abg NIC (rev: 1)"
vendor="Atheros Communications, Inc." category="Ethernet controller"
vendor-id="0x168c" device-id="0x0013" irq=11 memory=0xA0010000-0xA001FFFF

working SR5:

2 device="00:10.0" name="AR5212 802.11abg NIC (rev: 1)"
vendor="Atheros Communications, Inc." category="Ethernet controller"
vendor-id="0x168c" device-id="0x0013" irq=11 memory=0xA0010000-0xA001FFFF

only thing that stands out like a sore thumb is the device-id


Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:24 am
by Ubiquiti
Sacwireless --

I guess I have to repeat myself. All the cards in distirbution should work exactly the same.

Unfortunately, the pre-production vs. production rumors were started by a third party who we chose not to do business with. It is not true.

From the looks of your driver read out, this appears to be a card that slipped past our programming line.

Please e-mail us off-line and we will solve the problem ASAP.


Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:28 am
by jimvan
Got this card from wisp-router and installed. All is working fine.
I have a routerboard 230 with 15 dbi omni, you think too much output?