Page 1 of 1

Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:41 am
by normis
http://download2.mikrotik.com/news/news_61.pdf

- NetMetal 5
- mANT30 series
- SXT ac series
- NetBox 5
- mAP2n
- R11e-5HacD
- RB922UAGS-5HPacD
- CRS 8 port series
- Our 802.11ac product test results
Screenshot 2014-08-22 09.41.30.png

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:37 pm
by gius64
Wow, i link NetMetal5 very much!

When will you ship it to distributors?

Do you have any test of it, maybe using your 30dBi antenna?

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:41 pm
by normis
Wow, i link NetMetal5 very much!

When will you ship it to distributors?

Do you have any test of it, maybe using your 30dBi antenna?
last page of the newsletter has an example test with 802.11ac
Netmetal should have similar speed. The 30dBi antenna will not make it go faster, but farther

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 3:42 pm
by karina
Nice. Unfortunately I will never be able to use it. I struggle to find 20mhz clear space let alone 80 :-(

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:08 pm
by gius64
Same issue here :(

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:31 pm
by WirelessRudy
Nice. Unfortunately I will never be able to use it. I struggle to find 20mhz clear space let alone 80 :-(
ac is a new protocol that not only is capable of gaining more speeds by the use of the extra channel bandwidth, it also has interference avoiding technology build in and by making use of the 256QAM rate that even on a 20Mhz channel should give you more throughput.

So, even in congested spectrum situations AC will benefit. Maybe not up to the highest level the technology theoretically promises, but still better than a 'n' radio in the same situation.

What we really need now is a manufacturer that comes with a good, all in one, 3 chain high gain (+28dBi) antenna. Than we are in wifi walhalla! :D (Well, at least for a while.....)

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:48 pm
by bvandenbremt
netmetal 5 looks sweet on that dish.

Mostly curious to try out the mAP2n en the deployment possibilities of the CRS108

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:50 am
by joegoldman
What we really need now is a manufacturer that comes with a good, all in one, 3 chain high gain (+28dBi) antenna. Than we are in wifi walhalla! :D (Well, at least for a while.....)
As far as I understand it, 3rd chain is only really beneficial in PTMP situations (home/office wifi, sector antenna's). I never see such high gain sector antenna's and 3 chains I believe is redundant for PTP links as the 3rd chain would never be used. I could be wrong though.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 11:44 pm
by WirelessRudy
What we really need now is a manufacturer that comes with a good, all in one, 3 chain high gain (+28dBi) antenna. Than we are in wifi walhalla! :D (Well, at least for a while.....)
As far as I understand it, 3rd chain is only really beneficial in PTMP situations (home/office wifi, sector antenna's). I never see such high gain sector antenna's and 3 chains I believe is redundant for PTP links as the 3rd chain would never be used. I could be wrong though.
Well, the top high speeds of 'n' or 'ac' are only achievable in triple spatial streams configurations... you do need a 3rd antenna for that.
Since everybody is looking to transport more and more data day by day while rates are under pressure we all are looking for the most economic high bandwidth backhaul solutions possible. Only 300, 400 or higher Mbps WiFi products can deliver that. So a good all in one 3 chain antenna is definitely something we are waiting for...

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:57 am
by ste
Nice. Unfortunately I will never be able to use it. I struggle to find 20mhz clear space let alone 80 :-(
ac is a new protocol that not only is capable of gaining more speeds by the use of the extra channel bandwidth, it also has interference avoiding technology build in and by making use of the 256QAM rate that even on a 20Mhz channel should give you more throughput.

So, even in congested spectrum situations AC will benefit. Maybe not up to the highest level the technology theoretically promises, but still better than a 'n' radio in the same situation.

What we really need now is a manufacturer that comes with a good, all in one, 3 chain high gain (+28dBi) antenna. Than we are in wifi walhalla! :D (Well, at least for a while.....)
What interference avoidance technology is built into the actual Atheros Wave2 Chipsets?
The standard does not claim higher near/far channel rejection than 11n. The vendors do
not provide this numbers ...

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:37 pm
by WirelessRudy
ac is a new protocol that not only is capable of gaining more speeds by the use of the extra channel bandwidth, it also has interference avoiding technology build in and by making use of the 256QAM rate that even on a 20Mhz channel should give you more throughput.

So, even in congested spectrum situations AC will benefit. Maybe not up to the highest level the technology theoretically promises, but still better than a 'n' radio in the same situation.

What we really need now is a manufacturer that comes with a good, all in one, 3 chain high gain (+28dBi) antenna. Than we are in wifi walhalla! :D (Well, at least for a while.....)
What interference avoidance technology is built into the actual Atheros Wave2 Chipsets?
The standard does not claim higher near/far channel rejection than 11n. The vendors do
not provide this numbers ...
I must say I haven't found the article yet that I red some time ago. But what I can remember was that while ac is using 80 or 160 wide channels, within these it will try to communicate with its other radio on only these channels that are free of signals from other 'legacy' 20/40Mhz channel using radios.
It sort of 'bypasses' these channels to use only the ones with the low noise. And this on a dynamic base.

What I can remember this was one of the mayor advantages of ac if it comes to working in frequency band overlapping circumstances where ac was thus able to choose the best channels available in its spread. Of course this would mean lesser throughput because some spatial stream were rendered 'not usable' but since it happened on a dynamic basis these omitted channels would be used again when the alien radio signals would have gone...

Actually it came with a scheme to show that in a 160Mhz spread where two legacy a (or 40Mhz 'n') channels within this same spread were used by other radios these channels were just not used by 'ac' radio. This would mean a degrease in total maximum throughput for the 'ac' setup but the still usable channels were still able to transport considerably more traffic than a 'n' (or a 'a') radio would be able to. Because it could still use two, three or more usable channels.

Basically in an area where the whole 5Ghz radio spectrum would be used by legacy 'a' or 'n' channels you could still put several 80 or 160Mhz wide channels in the same region and the ac protocol would still be able to deliver more speed than a 'n' would be able to do.

For building backhauls this would be ideal. You could make a 160Mhz bandwidth wide link and if some of the underlying frequencies would see some interferences (at times) these were just not used but the rest of the traffic would still be steered over the other available 'quiet' channels.
We all know that interferences at times are very dynamic too. This way if using a 160Mhz wide channel where at times it 'sees' interferences on two 40Mhz channels we would still have 2 other 40Mhz channels left to transport our traffic. That is still 200% of what a 40Mhz 'n' channel could deliver!

And to be honest, if this would not be the case the whole 'ac' history with its high throughputs and 'the need to have' factor would be an empty air bubble whatsoever. If it wasn't able to use the extra wide channels due overlapping/interferences with other legacy 20 or 40Mhz radios 'ac' would be almost completely useless in the 'real' world..... Spectrum is used and stretched to its extend almost everywhere. It would make no sense to design a new protocol that would not come with one or another system to handle the congested spectrum of nowadays.....

Tonight when I can find some time I will try again to find that specific document.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:43 am
by WirelessRudy
http://www.revolutionwifi.net/2013/03/s ... -with.html

Its not the article I'd remember but it comes pretty much in the direction. Its worth reading for everybody that is thinking of deploying 'ac' in an already used spectrum. Like many of us WISP i'd presume.....

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:46 am
by WirelessRudy
Go google on: "802.11ac co-channel interference" and gets tons of info about 802.11ac and how to deploy and what to guard for. Very interesting reading, before you buy!

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:52 pm
by java016
It's nice that mAP is such a very portable little guy but what is the power output of the radio?
Seems like mAP is only suitable for one room cases.

P.S. In next version of mAP please add battery to increase portability and touch screen for
greater usability :-)

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:43 pm
by jarda
It's 50mW or so. Really weak, but it could be powered from USB port...

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:22 am
by janisk
it is not really weak - it is normal output power for home AP. Most of devices (laptops, phones etc.) will have similar tx/rx signal strength.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:59 am
by npero
Janis is right it is nice power for home use, I have 951G and first thing I do when is install is to lower power to 12dB is quite enough to covert couple rooms in flat.
I don't understand why people want high power device in they living or working rooms :shock:. Just thing using high power device give opportunity much more people to see you signal and my someone of them to try to do something with sniffed packages if have time and resources.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:46 am
by jarda
Not always. Imagine that each amplifier has its distortion. Normally more powerful amplifier used at 1/n of its maximum amplification level gives much less distortion than weak amplifier working on its limits.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 7:13 pm
by berimbau
I would like to know if can i use at NetMetal 5GHz Triple Chain only two chains? Stop one if i do not want.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:16 pm
by honzam
I would like to know if can i use at NetMetal 5GHz Triple Chain only two chains? Stop one if i do not want.
Yes

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:44 pm
by java016
I don't understand why people want high power device in they living or working rooms :shock:
If client have 4 to 6 rooms and 2 floors building then mAP is a little bit weak. It would not bad to have external radio output for antena connection.

Re: Odp: Newsletter 61

Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:59 am
by ohara
If client have 4 to 6 rooms and 2 floors building then mAP is a little bit weak. It would not bad to have external radio output for antena connection.
It is perfect for such location. Because it is so small you can install 2 mAp on each floor and you have good coverage in the whole building.

Re: Odp: Newsletter 61

Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 11:08 am
by java016
If client have 4 to 6 rooms and 2 floors building then mAP is a little bit weak. It would not bad to have external radio output for antena connection.
It is perfect for such location. Because it is so small you can install 2 mAp on each floor and you have good coverage in the whole building.
External antenna would be much cheaper solution.

Re: Odp: Newsletter 61

Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 9:42 am
by normis
If client have 4 to 6 rooms and 2 floors building then mAP is a little bit weak. It would not bad to have external radio output for antena connection.
It is perfect for such location. Because it is so small you can install 2 mAp on each floor and you have good coverage in the whole building.
External antenna would be much cheaper solution.
I don't agree. Phones and small laptops have weak output power and small antennas. It is better to have multiple devices that are close to the clients, than one unit with big antenna somewhere. In such case, the clients that are further away, will see the AP, but will not be able to talk back to it, due to weak transmit

Re: Odp: Newsletter 61

Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:17 pm
by Bergante
I don't agree. Phones and small laptops have weak output power and small antennas. It is better to have multiple devices that are close to the clients, than one unit with big antenna somewhere. In such case, the clients that are further away, will see the AP, but will not be able to talk back to it, due to weak transmit
Moreover, a single far away device forced to use lower speeds will degrade the network for the close high speed clients, because it will use more radio time.

You always want the users to be reasonably close to the APs rather than doing macho-type deployments of far away clients going through stone walls barely achieving connection ;)

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:51 am
by DanH
I'm struggling to understand what's happening there with the mANT30 and the NetMetal5 in the newsletter.

Look closely at the picture. 3 rf cables connected to 2 connection points on a dual pol antenna.

The 2 cables merge into one cable.

So are 2 streams together on 1 polarization and another stream on its own polarization?

How does that work?

I would expect an antenna with 3 connectors and the spatial streams to have equal separation.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:24 am
by CyberTod
I'm struggling to understand what's happening there with the mANT30 and the NetMetal5 in the newsletter.

Look closely at the picture. 3 rf cables connected to 2 connection points on a dual pol antenna.

The 2 cables merge into one cable.

So are 2 streams together on 1 polarization and another stream on its own polarization?

How does that work?

I would expect an antenna with 3 connectors and the spatial streams to have equal separation.
This was discussed in another topic. Look closely and you will see a beam of light coming out from the antenna. It is a drawing - the mANT is dual pol antenna.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 10:15 am
by DanH
So dishonesty then.

Not cool.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 11:31 am
by dohmniq
What about running the triple-chain cards in "3 x 3 : 2" mode - with a dual-polarity dish + another dish nearby. Maybe even 802.11n would benefit from this setup?

I'd be happy to install more antennas to boost reliability and speed of existing connections - the bottleneck is the chip and how many streams it can handle?

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 11:34 am
by janisk
So dishonesty then.

Not cool.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk
how about you go and read some actual information regarding the product.
http://routerboard.com/MTAD-5G-30D3

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 12:49 pm
by DanH
So dishonesty then.

Not cool.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk
how about you go and read some actual information regarding the product.
http://routerboard.com/MTAD-5G-30D3
I had read all of that yes and the RB info too. That's why I was so confused by the 3 cables, knowing that that specific dish can only do 2 spatial streams, I would expect to see 2 rf jumpers only.

If you want to advertise that the RB can do 3 spatial streams, make the dish in the picture non descript so as not to create confusion.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:54 pm
by AndrewKazalia
Practical tests by other vendors have shown there is zero benefit in point to point configuration with 3rd RF chain. 3rd chain will either be effectively identical to one of the other two (if same polarisation) or a combination of the other two (if a different polarisation), so its not possible to send any additional information. To use a 3rd (or 4th) stream you need strong multipath to decorrelate the streams.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:06 am
by syadnom
What about running the triple-chain cards in "3 x 3 : 2" mode - with a dual-polarity dish + another dish nearby. Maybe even 802.11n would benefit from this setup?

I'd be happy to install more antennas to boost reliability and speed of existing connections - the bottleneck is the chip and how many streams it can handle?
The issue is that the +1 dish has to be located at least a few feet away before you can get any useful isolation, then the losses for a few feet of cable start to matter. You could do a H+V Pol dish and a diagnol polarization on the +1 dish if you could get a good N-Type connector and 6' cable. I've seen it done, you can pull of 3x3 MIMO PTP, *but* you self interfere more so lose modulation speed. Your 20Mhz 2x MCS8 link (~156Mbps) is very likely to only be a 20Mhz 3x MCS4 for 117 or MCS4 for 156.

This is really an antenna/feed horn design issue. A 3D parabola (dish) increases gain on circular polarization. H and V pol are just two angles of circular polarization as far as the dish is concerned. You really need to have 3 antenna surfaces, 3 2D parabolas (sqaure, but to a parabola in a specific polarization) set at 0, 45, and 90 (note other side is at 0, 90, 135 aka mirrored). This will increase cross polarity isolation by something like 6dBm, but makes for a much larger antenna 'array'. Alternatively, a sophisticated feed horn with 3 polarities and shielding for each. much harder to make due to the geometry of such a thing.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 4:09 pm
by m4rk0
Hello,

I've 2x NetMetal5 + 30 db Antenna.

I'm trying this on 32km long link and I can't get CCQ, link disconnecting every 5-10 seconds with message "extensive data loss" AND/OR "connected, wants bridge. reassociating"... Signal ~ -50/-50

Any tips?

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:36 pm
by SalimLeb
Wanna ask about the water proof for SXTG-5HPacD.
Water resistance of the device is questionable.

1- what is the best way to cover it/ protect it in a very bad conditions
2- where is the grounding cable place, note that it is totally different than other SXT devices.. others SXT have a clear installation guide how to do so.

Re: Newsletter 61

Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:04 pm
by WirelessRudy
Wanna ask about the water proof for SXTG-5HPacD.
Water resistance of the device is questionable.

1- what is the best way to cover it/ protect it in a very bad conditions
Put a plastic back over it! lol

Under normal conditions the SXT's are good enough protected against water ingress. But in very wet or moistures or close to sea (salt!) conditions this is indeed not the best antenna to use.
You're better off buying the routerboards alone and a 3rd party antenna that will do a 100% watertightness closure.

I am in Spain where we have only occasional rain storms with sometimes a rain front. Most of the time we don't have a lot of wind combined with rain (which might drive water into the shell) and I never had water ingress issues. I have SXT's running now for 3, 4(?) years and they are still ok.

On a whole, I have had other type of antennas wit routerboards that did become soaking wet in an rain storm but they just kept on working. Pure rain water doesn't do a lot of damage to a board as long as there is not shortcut created between parts... and it has to be occasional off course. Otherwise rust will do the damage after a while....