Community discussions

 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:26 am

Just recently found out the new NV2 developments in sync and up/download ratio distribution. So decided to do some tests in the field since this is what we have been waiting for!

Well, don't work well.
Setup:

One tower, two SXT SA5 (SXT G-5HPnD r2) as AP some meter separated on same mast. Both looking in their own direction so their spread is sort of side by side.
Both by short ethernet cable connected to an Omnitik that serves as powersupply/controller (and in case of need a spectral scanner since 'ac' units still can't do that...)
Same Omnitik also serves one QRT-ac for backhaul.

ORT, Omnitik and both SXT's all in the same IP network. All fully bridged.
Clients of both AP's mainly SXT's lites 'n' protocol with a single 'ac' unit and 2 or 3 911's-5Hnd in a box)
All clients connect with at least -65dBm or better.
All clients have an pppoe-client on the wlan1 interface for client authentication.
All clients have an vlan on the wlan1 with dhcp-client for local P2MP network for easy telnet and bandwidt test etc.
DHCP server sits on same vlan interface of the QRT so network speedtests (tcp, 1 stream) can be made to the QRT to test the download traffic between this QRT via de Omnitik (has weak cpu) and the SXT-SA. So we can test the 'real' network download speed.

Both SXT-SA's are in 20/40MHz eC, nv2 protocol and all further paratmeters the same except the SSID off course.
ALL units are upgraded to ROSv6.40.1 before tests.
We used the Omnitik to make a spectral scan to pick the frequencies with lowest interference from other Wifi. (All 5Ghz band!)
Both SXT-SA's have their own working channel. AP-A has 5465 and AP-B has 5575 and according Omnitik both have -70 - -75 as background noise.
Frequency spacing between both is therefore 70Mhz

First we do the test as stand alone AP's.
On both AP's we pick a client for the test and run the tcp bandwidth test to the QRT with 1 chain.
On both AP's we reach speads of about 40 to 50Mbps download. (Not at the same time, first client of AP-A, then client of AP-B)

Then we setup AP-B as sync master with sync secret as per wiki (https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:N ... ronization)
We then also setup AP-A as sync slave according same manual and make sure the channel width and freq. parameters are now the same as with AP-B
Still, all other parameters of the wireless are the same on both AP's apart from the SSID.
We'd pick the AP-B as master since according the spectral scan of the omnitik is has a slightly less noisy environment and it also has more clients (16) associated.
We disable and enable the AP-B, but this time in the NV2 sync setting.
We monitor the log wireless debug file (according same Wiki) to see if the slave tries to sync. And yes the attempt is shown.
We monitor with the interface monitor (/int wi monitor wlan1) on AP-A to see if the sync takes place. Yes, it showing it is in sync with the mac address of the wlan1 of the master.
When we change some parameter in the AP-B-master (download ratio or tdma period size) we see the slave immediately takes same setting.
Conclusion 1)
The sync works and takes place. Good!
But CCQ's of several CPE's show lower values or are more fluctuating as before like the connection rates are not as stable as in 'stand-alone'. Eyebrow is raised.. :?

So lets do a bandwidth test from the same clients as before to the same QRT with the same parameters.
BIG disappointment! Maximum we can squeeze out of the tests is 5-8Mbps in download! These units did do almost 50Mbps before!
Spectrum is the same but now all on the AP-B's frequency.
There is hardly any other traffic from clients around. Less then 4Mbp. aggregated (excluded the speedtest traffic for this test)

Conclusion 2)
The sync is not working in respect of sharing frequency on the same tower. Network speed collapses.
In fact, if both AP's are working in standalone mode, but on the same frequency I get better speeds than in full sync mode! How is that possible!?!

Other weird event:
On AP-A we have two clients that will not connect to their designated AP when it runs in AP-sync-slave mode.
They will associate when AP-A is in stand-alone mode but same frequency as AP-B (so a loooot of interference) but they will NOT associate the moment the AP goes into slave sync mode!
These two clients are just the same SXT's lites 'n' type as all the others with exactly the same config as all the others (apart from some client depending variable like PPPoE authentication and name.

So why would these two clients not associate to the AP in sync mode where in normal mode they have no issue. Both have signals in the -64 region but I have two others that are actually showing -65 to -66 and they connect fine in both modes.....
Conclusion 3)
The sync is not working for all clients units.

Overall conclusion:
Back to the drawboard. I tried several variables that can be changed in the wireless settings. We checked the 'connect to' lists and 'access lists' over and over again to no avail.
My initial enthusiasms for the nv2 sync has turned 180 degrees in a disappointment..

I was about to cancel my 200 Mimosa client order but I am happy now I didn't.
I hope Mikrotik finds a solution before we are forced to upgrade more of our P2MP networks. Or does is show again that cheap can't do the same as expensive?
Is hoping that my present 800 mikrotik clients network could be upgraded to a fully syncd and download ratio configured network for free indeed a free ride on a pink cloud that drops you the moment you wake up?
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:52 am

Other question I have in regard of the sync. but more the download ratio settings:

1. Does it indeed work on the AP only? No need to have the CPE's upgraded? It looks like not but I'd always like the confirmation from some higher ranked MT technician!

2. Is there a minimal signal strenght or s/n ratio on the CPE requered to get it to work? If one station is on a very low conn. rate it might disrupt the up/down ratio to such extend it becomes a mess?

3. In the following scenario: Link1-node-link2-node-AP and ratio is going to be used on all PtP and PtMP networks; should they all be the same? Should the both links have the same ratio in the same direction? I'd presume 25/75 u/d on link1 in direction of AP should pair with 25/75 u/d on the link2 in the same direction. If link 2 would be 75/25 we are asking for issues?
The AP should then also be configured to be 25/75 u/d in the direction of the clients? A different setting like 40/60 or 50/50 or variable or 75/25 would not be recommendable imho?

4. If in the same setup, but with 2 AP's at the end, both the AP's would be in sync with eachoter (and thus the same ratio) this ratio has to be the same again in the same flow direction as on the links..

5. If we now the backhaul 1 and 2 would like to sync with the 2 AP's we have to set them into the same frequency as the both AP's. But which backhaul units now have to be actually be sync slave?
I would argument the remote units. Since the flow toward clients have to be in sync in the same direction. But that would mean that the remote 'slave' units have to arrange the sync over the wireless?
(There is no more cable connection between remote backhaul unit and tower.)

6.Using dl-ul unequall ratio in two or more consecutive backhauls is not recommended? Since both link will not be synchronised their send/receive ratio will be off phased and in fact decrease the total backbone capacity.

7. Since the same as 6 also counts for a backhaul link connected to a tower that has one of more AP's that have un-equal UL/DL ratio set and this backhaul cannot be syncd by to the tower AP's it is not recommended to use the UL/DL ratio on the backhaul.

Conclusion:
Since sync on backhauls is not possible, and UL/DL ratio is also not recommended for backhaul if in use in combination with AP or other backhaul the use of this new NV2 feature is only for PtMP network.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:06 pm

....................................................
I was about to cancel my 200 Mimosa client order but I am happy now I didn't.
I hope Mikrotik finds a solution before we are forced to upgrade more of our P2MP networks. Or does is show again that cheap can't do the same as expensive?
Is hoping that my present 800 mikrotik clients network could be upgraded to a fully syncd and download ratio configured network for free indeed a free ride on a pink cloud that drops you the moment you wake up?
Was that Mimosa AP's or Clients and how do they compare performance wise?
 
Lakis
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:10 am

WirelessRudy it rely sucks when u have new non working future :)
NV2 sync just doesn't work for me too, I would love to know how MT technicians perform their test in what scenario NV2 sync should work.
Also since implementing "download ratio settings" NV2 become 'weird' in some way I wrote same posts about that but it seems no one care.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:10 am

....................................................
I was about to cancel my 200 Mimosa client order but I am happy now I didn't.
I hope Mikrotik finds a solution before we are forced to upgrade more of our P2MP networks. Or does is show again that cheap can't do the same as expensive?
Is hoping that my present 800 mikrotik clients network could be upgraded to a fully syncd and download ratio configured network for free indeed a free ride on a pink cloud that drops you the moment you wake up?
Was that Mimosa AP's or Clients and how do they compare performance wise?
CPE's.
We are in the process of replacing Mikrotik SXT for Mimosa.
In the meantime I 'played' again with two Mikrotik SXT-ac units to see if the sync would work. Another tower this time. These two are completely working in oppostite direction and have no only 1 meter back to back separation but are also 2 meters separated in the vertical. But yeah, running a scan on both shows it 'sees' the other with some -50 of signal still...
Both their clients are at distance but still on both ends clients will 'see' opposite AP that faces away with anywhere between -70 to -90's.
The SXT's just radiate signal in all directions... and when used in sync mode, the capacity for the clients goes down....
All we might try now is to replace both SXT's for Netmetals combined with RF-Element domes or carrier class sector..... but not today...

In regard of the change from Mikrotik SXT to Mimosa, it is a hell of a puzzle to find a working frequency that is stable for the Mimosa. They finally have the 5Ghz granulation working so we can move the working band to our liking but the spectrum is so full we still have problems finding free 40Mhz channeal let alone 80Mhz.

And the compulsory DFS channels are a pain..... I don't know what they'd exactly pick up but the Mimosa AP swaps channels at times due the Radar detection (from where? There is no Radar to be found here!). Now this would not be such a problem if the CPE's would follow quickly. But the new channel of use will be 'radar' tested too and only after that the CPE's are allowed to 'talk' to the AP. That can take up to 15 mins. During all that the clients have no internet!

Since the DFS only works on one of the Mimosa AP's (I have 3 working and running now) I developed a theory that it are air-planes that give the problems. Since the Radar only is detected sometimes, sometimes a whole day nothing.... it cannot be a typical Weather radar beam (Rain detection radar) since that works 24/24.
But we are in the flight path of descending planes going to a nearby busy airfield.
On google I found that some plane can have installed approach/weather/ground detection radar devices that are sending a strong powerful beam straight forward and down from a plane that can work in the 5Ghz range.
This could explain the random occurrence. It would be a relative narrow beam, but with high density and energy, that only at occasions just happens to run straight over my AP....

The flight path is only used in certain wind directions at the airfield and since planes still fly from wherever they came towards the approach radio beacon and they are still at some 3000 feet above us but descending it could be that only some planes with a specific radar frequency in a specific flight path will have its radar bundle hitting our Mimosa.... lucky me.. :?
Otherwise I can't explain the random, and at times non existing, DFS mode kick-in from the Mimosa.

I already asked them to make something like an 'override' (= illegal, but what the hack, I need to make money here..) button. But they consider themselves very law abiding and are not even willing to consider to have such an option afraid as they are they might loose CEE certifications...... :(

But just tonight I have swift the working frequency some 150Mhz lower after re-arranging some frequencies of my other towers and see it that will improve things.

Capacity wise, when it all runs, the Mimosa is outperforming the Netmetals in both amount of connected devices as well as top speeds by at least 200%. So in that respect I am happy.....
(I can connect up to 70 clients to a Mimosa and have several units run at 30Mbps downloads and a total throughput over the Mimosa AP with some 150-180Mbps. Try that with a Netmetal!
And we are still in CSMA mode though! We still have 40% SXT-ac's to swap.)
When we have replaced all CPE's for the C5's I am going to test the Mimosa tdma with 60 clients.
And when that is done we are going to do a full CPE swap from a second Mimosa AP and make it run in full sync with the first sharing the same frequency and in a 80Mhz channel.
If that is all going to work I am a happy man!
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:53 pm

And the compulsory DFS channels are a pain..... I don't know what they'd exactly pick up but the Mimosa AP swaps channels at times due the Radar detection (from where? There is no Radar to be found here!). Now this would not be such a problem if the CPE's would follow quickly. But the new channel of use will be 'radar' tested too and only after that the CPE's are allowed to 'talk' to the AP. That can take up to 15 mins. During all that the clients have no internet!

Since the DFS only works on one of the Mimosa AP's (I have 3 working and running now) I developed a theory that it are air-planes that give the problems. Since the Radar only is detected sometimes, sometimes a whole day nothing.... it cannot be a typical Weather radar beam (Rain detection radar) since that works 24/24.
But we are in the flight path of descending planes going to a nearby busy airfield.
On google I found that some plane can have installed approach/weather/ground detection radar devices that are sending a strong powerful beam straight forward and down from a plane that can work in the 5Ghz range.
This could explain the random occurrence. It would be a relative narrow beam, but with high density and energy, that only at occasions just happens to run straight over my AP....

The flight path is only used in certain wind directions at the airfield and since planes still fly from wherever they came towards the approach radio beacon and they are still at some 3000 feet above us but descending it could be that only some planes with a specific radar frequency in a specific flight path will have its radar bundle hitting our Mimosa.... lucky me.. :?
Otherwise I can't explain the random, and at times non existing, DFS mode kick-in from the Mimosa.

I already asked them to make something like an 'override' (= illegal, but what the hack, I need to make money here..) button. But they consider themselves very law abiding and are not even willing to consider to have such an option afraid as they are they might loose CEE certifications...... :(

But just tonight I have swift the working frequency some 150Mhz lower after re-arranging some frequencies of my other towers and see it that will improve things.
You maybe right about aircraft triggering the DFS scan, why aircraft would even consider using frequencies in (or in close proximity) to a unlicensed band defies logic?
Capacity wise, when it all runs, the Mimosa is outperforming the Netmetals in both amount of connected devices as well as top speeds by at least 200%. So in that respect I am happy.....
(I can connect up to 70 clients to a Mimosa and have several units run at 30Mbps downloads and a total throughput over the Mimosa AP with some 150-180Mbps. Try that with a Netmetal!
And we are still in CSMA mode though! We still have 40% SXT-ac's to swap.)
When we have replaced all CPE's for the C5's I am going to test the Mimosa tdma with 60 clients.
And when that is done we are going to do a full CPE swap from a second Mimosa AP and make it run in full sync with the first sharing the same frequency and in a 80Mhz channel.
If that is all going to work I am a happy man!
It that performance Mimosa AP to Mimosa CPE or Mimosa AP to Mikrotik and is that AC or N ?
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Sep 28, 2017 3:03 pm

It that performance Mimosa AP to Mimosa CPE or Mimosa AP to Mikrotik and is that AC or N ?
First what we did is setup one Mimosa A5 and just transferred a mix of SXT-Lite 'n' and some 711 board radios to it. In the end we'd had 60 clients to that tower and one by one they all worked fine.
I've done some speed tests in 20/40Mhz setups and could get up to 30Mbps to several clients. Even when tried 3 or 4 at the same time. (And the rest was still just 'consuming' internet at times...)

Then we started to change all the Mikrotiks into SXT-ac units. These have faster CPU's, the possibility of working in 80Mhz and some other advantages of the 'ac' protocol including the higher mcs rates.
By now we could even hook up to almost 70 clients and the average speeds in tests was higher again, up to 35-40Mbps for a couple of clients at the same time or 60-70Mbps indiviual tests (still the rest of the network was 'using' internet)

Now we are replacing all Mikrotik units for the Mimosa C5's since afteral, we are still working in csma mode only. (tdma is not interchangeable between the two brands).
Also the SXT's are still plastic housed radio's with only 16dBi gain where the C5 is 20dBi.
The C5 comes with several (theoretical) advantages towards the SXT and some disadvantages:
+1 Higher gain means smaller beam. Thus better isolation from other wifi sources. And radio's on both end can set to work with less power since the antenna physics compensate this.
+2 The C5's are metal coated internally. So better isolation again from unwanted wifi signals.
+3 The C5's have embedded spectral scan option that works while you don't loose the connection towards that unit. (Something we'd really miss on Mikrotik SXT devices)
+4 The C5's have auto power output reducing. Meaning that if the antenna is very close to an AP it knows and the output power will be automatically reduced not to bombard the AP with its high signal.
+5 They can have their exact location (lat/long) set and both the AP and CPE can now calculate the best ack. time (csma requirement) between them.

-1 Access to the C5's is webbased which I hate. No IP connectivity means no access. If the browser has issues you have issues in reaching the CPE. etc.
-2 No special management program like winbox. I am going to miss that! (For instance without winbox at the client's installation we cannot do a remotely initiated speedtest to test the link anymore....
-3 Price. I think some 80€ of a CPE is pretty expensive. Especial if you'd consider you need a special 48V adapter for the power supply. We choose to give all new Mimosa users also a new G2 (Mimosa's Wifi router which so far outperforms ANY other router I have tried before. VERY GOOD!). But the combined C5 + G2 make the hardware cost some 135€. You can do 2, 2,5 Mikrotik clients with TP link wifi for that.....
-4 DFS mode compulsary. No way to escape that. And that can give big problems.... like I wrote.
-5 The managment software of the Mimosa still has several small issues that should be improved. In that respect ROS is a much more mature system (with a whole lot more options!) then the Mimosa OS.

The biggest advantage we are trying to get with Mimosa in stead of using Mikrotik is that we have now have 6 AP's in a dense housing estate serving some 200 clients.
And from this place we also have 6 back-hauls leaving to several remote locations and we have some 4 small AP's from competitors in the same estate and 3 or 4 distant AP's aimed at us. Plus some back-hauls from the competition shooting towards our estate. In other words, the frequency band is heavily used!
Our contracts we'd issue are 20Mb max but several clients won't even get that due limitations of the Mikrotik AP's capacity or just plain inteferences.

With Mimosa the aim is now to serve the same amount of clients with 4 or 5 AP's that each can have at least 20% more clients as a Netmetal and still deliver more speeds to the clients and having higher throughput over the AP's (A Netmetal with 40 associated client won't give me more then 50-60Mbps aggregated. Same clients (still SXT-'n') on the Mimosa A5 tried and I could already push up to 180Mb aggregated! (20Mhz channel width).)

By rearranging some frequencies I relatively 'freed' a 80Mhz channel and one 40Mhz channel where now two of my Mimosa AP's are working. As soon as all clients are replace to Mimosa C5 we are going to try their tdma system and see how much we can achieve with that. The next step thereafter will be to have the two AP's sync'd and work in the same frequency. If that works we actually 'freed' 40Mhz and by shifting some of our other radio's working ranges we will start putting the last two to be replaced AP's also in that radio band in full sync with each-other.

Some guys in the US are already working with up to 7 or 8 AP's in one 80Mhz channel with several hundreds of clients in full sync and are delivering 150 up to 250Mbps contracts to their clients.....
The system is aimed to beat fibre and that is exactly what they do with it!

I am merely going to avoid fibre coming to us.. to expensive for us as a small business and if I can outdo the present fibre competition with wireless why not!
Ok, it still has to proof itself.... but I have the feeling we are on the good track...
We are just deciding do we offer 50Mbps or straight away 100Mbps to our clients! :D
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:20 pm

....................................
I am merely going to avoid fibre coming to us.. to expensive for us as a small business and if I can outdo the present fibre competition with wireless why not!
Ok, it still has to proof itself.... but I have the feeling we are on the good track...
We are just deciding do we offer 50Mbps or straight away 100Mbps to our clients! :D
While speed is very important I think a more deciding factor longterm for retaining residential customers (which makes up 90+% of our customers) will be cost effective media content delivery, that is who can give streamed sports and movie channels, etc plus broadband in a inclusive price?

Already we have seen this happening as sports channels offer their TV channels with broadband plus streamed content available in a bundle price and this where the real challenge lies for WISP's.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:54 am

While speed is very important I think a more deciding factor longterm for retaining residential customers (which makes up 90+% of our customers) will be cost effective media content delivery, that is who can give streamed sports and movie channels, etc plus broadband in a inclusive price?

Already we have seen this happening as sports channels offer their TV channels with broadband plus streamed content available in a bundle price and this where the real challenge lies for WISP's.
Well, our market is still 60% foreigners. 85% of these are British. That national content cannot be legally served by us. Our Spanish clients have little demand for streaming TV and we even get little requests for phone calls. Triple play that is big in 'cable world' is not that big in rural Spain. Most people have their mobile and can pick their standard TV by free digital terrestrial. Any provider offering triple play has a price tag at least twice as high as ours.
We do offer the other stuff but our strategy is more in supplying high speed stable internet for the same prices as the competition does for low to medium speed.

Two nights ago I changed the first full Mimosa AP with 38 clients to its proprietary protocol and wow, that rocks... I was already impressed by its csma protocol but now with tdma signal levels increased, quality of the links increased and I hardly see any more interference.
The less interference issues is probably also to do with the somewhat higher gained CPE's and the shield they have. All levels of CPE's to the AP and vice versa are better then -50dBm so I could set the noise filter to -54dBm which means any other signal not stronger then that gets filtered out as well.
We still have to swap some 25 clients on another tower and then hope to swap that P2MP to tdma as well and then try to sync it with that first AP. It that works I can move some of my other radios away towards the 'freed' frequency of No.2 Mimosa AP to create an even lower noise around the now combined 80Mhz (yes, it works on 80Mhz wide band now!) range of use!

Clients of the Mimosa now still get only 25 or 30Mbps but we are waiting for an upgrade of our backbone and then we are going to offer 50 for standard and 100mb for high profile contracts....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
karina
Member
Member
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:19 am

While speed is very important I think a more deciding factor longterm for retaining residential customers (which makes up 90+% of our customers) will be cost effective media content delivery, that is who can give streamed sports and movie channels, etc plus broadband in a inclusive price?

Already we have seen this happening as sports channels offer their TV channels with broadband plus streamed content available in a bundle price and this where the real challenge lies for WISP's.
Well, our market is still 60% foreigners. 85% of these are British. That national content cannot be legally served by us. Our Spanish clients have little demand for streaming TV and we even get little requests for phone calls. Triple play that is big in 'cable world' is not that big in rural Spain. Most people have their mobile and can pick their standard TV by free digital terrestrial. Any provider offering triple play has a price tag at least twice as high as ours.
We do offer the other stuff but our strategy is more in supplying high speed stable internet for the same prices as the competition does for low to medium speed.

Two nights ago I changed the first full Mimosa AP with 38 clients to its proprietary protocol and wow, that rocks... I was already impressed by its csma protocol but now with tdma signal levels increased, quality of the links increased and I hardly see any more interference.
The less interference issues is probably also to do with the somewhat higher gained CPE's and the shield they have. All levels of CPE's to the AP and vice versa are better then -50dBm so I could set the noise filter to -54dBm which means any other signal not stronger then that gets filtered out as well.
We still have to swap some 25 clients on another tower and then hope to swap that P2MP to tdma as well and then try to sync it with that first AP. It that works I can move some of my other radios away towards the 'freed' frequency of No.2 Mimosa AP to create an even lower noise around the now combined 80Mhz (yes, it works on 80Mhz wide band now!) range of use!

Clients of the Mimosa now still get only 25 or 30Mbps but we are waiting for an upgrade of our backbone and then we are going to offer 50 for standard and 100mb for high profile contracts....
Thanks for excellent post Rudy. Sounds almost too good to be true. What is the main reason you think the mimosa can give so much more aggregate throughout. Software or hardware. How do the netmetal hardware specs compare with the mimosa ap you are using


Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
karina
Member
Member
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:29 am

I have tried the sync feature and it failed just like you said. I tried the downlink ratio at 60% and soon discovered that client upload was more than halved at busy times. I believe this feature set is definitely a work in progress. Surprised it is bundled in the current release at this stage of its development. Maybe Mikrotik needed a few real world testers.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:14 pm

The difference between MT's Netmetal and the Mimosa is many:

The CPU of a netmetal is 720Mhz where the cpu's (yes, they have two.) running on Gigahertz speeds and from a different architecture too.
The OS is different too.
The chipset from MT is also different then what Mimosa uses. I have to look up what they actualy were but I have been reading before (independent resources and test panels) that the chipset of Mimosa is outdoing the Atheros in use but Mikrotik, Ubiquity etc. a lot. Mimosa chipset is just much better.
Mimosa had built their radio's (chipset, OS etc.) completely new from zero with only one thing in mind; Make use of the full capabilities embedded in the new ac protocol with one goal only; beat fibre in roll outs.
So it has to be a system capable of delivering very high througput combined with relative low costs.
Off course everybody will always say fibre is better, but when its stripped from the grants given by authorities its costly.
One of the disadvantages of fibre is in the cost/deployment ratio. You need a lot of customers in a relative short range to justify and earn back the investments.
With a wireless system that is much more easy to achieve and if the speeds to the customer can be 100Mb or higher why roll out any fiber?

In my country many areas will never see fiber or when its there comes with prices we can easily undercut and thus still have a market to make money...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:29 pm

The chipset from MT is also different then what Mimosa uses. I have to look up what they actualy were but I have been reading before (independent resources and test panels) that the chipset of Mimosa is outdoing the Atheros in use but Mikrotik, Ubiquity etc. a lot. Mimosa chipset is just much better.
Mimosa had built their radio's (chipset, OS etc.) completely new from zero with only one thing in mind; Make use of the full capabilities embedded in the new ac protocol with one goal only; beat fibre in roll outs.
The Chipset used by Mimosa is a standard chipset from Quantenna. Just a chipmaker like Atheros. Not special designed for Mimosa and found in some other wlan APs. With the B5 we've seen it is not great with interference rejection. So using wide channels you need good separation from your own gear and from other APs (and you trash the band). Not bad but not that great as their marketing.
Their Omni Solution (which are 4 singlepol sectors in fact) is nice designed.
Using Atheros a lot can be done. You see this with epmp and the ubiquities. What I find most promising at the moment is the combination of shielding, antenna design, RF filtering and gps sync you see with the prism station. And a second wireless card just for scanning in background (Great tool). For ptp in 5GHz yo cant beat the Airfibers at the moment and they make an announcement soon ... And guess what is synccompatible ... To bad MT never decided to put more money/people in their wireless hardware department. But this is a business decision I cant appraise.
We stay with MT for routing/MPLS. Wireless is always a mix of vendors as no one is good with every aspect/frequency.
 
User avatar
karina
Member
Member
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:18 pm

The chipset from MT is also different then what Mimosa uses. I have to look up what they actualy were but I have been reading before (independent resources and test panels) that the chipset of Mimosa is outdoing the Atheros in use but Mikrotik, Ubiquity etc. a lot. Mimosa chipset is just much better.
Mimosa had built their radio's (chipset, OS etc.) completely new from zero with only one thing in mind; Make use of the full capabilities embedded in the new ac protocol with one goal only; beat fibre in roll outs.
The Chipset used by Mimosa is a standard chipset from Quantenna. Just a chipmaker like Atheros. Not special designed for Mimosa and found in some other wlan APs. With the B5 we've seen it is not great with interference rejection. So using wide channels you need good separation from your own gear and from other APs (and you trash the band). Not bad but not that great as their marketing.
Their Omni Solution (which are 4 singlepol sectors in fact) is nice designed.
Using Atheros a lot can be done. You see this with epmp and the ubiquities. What I find most promising at the moment is the combination of shielding, antenna design, RF filtering and gps sync you see with the prism station. And a second wireless card just for scanning in background (Great tool). For ptp in 5GHz yo cant beat the Airfibers at the moment and they make an announcement soon ... And guess what is synccompatible ... To bad MT never decided to put more money/people in their wireless hardware department. But this is a business decision I cant appraise.
We stay with MT for routing/MPLS. Wireless is always a mix of vendors as no one is good with every aspect/frequency.
I agree with AF for ptp unbeatable. PTMP is not so good. I have too much invested in MT to think about changing. We are a lot better now than we were a few years ago but still need much improvement to compete with fiber on speed alone. Mikrotik have not being releasing much on NV2 for a while. I can only hope that means things are in the pipeline. On average my NV2 APs have 40 clients. The aggregate max throughout of the AP is around 30 to 40 megs. the clients are allowed 12 megs each. All works ok and not many complaints, however, this will not be any good for much longer as more and more bandwidth is required for steaming TV services. Come on MT it's a race against time now but I have faith in you.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:07 am

................
So it has to be a system capable of delivering very high througput combined with relative low costs.
Off course everybody will always say fibre is better, but when its stripped from the grants given by authorities its costly.
One of the disadvantages of fibre is in the cost/deployment ratio. You need a lot of customers in a relative short range to justify and earn back the investments.
With a wireless system that is much more easy to achieve and if the speeds to the customer can be 100Mb or higher why roll out any fiber?

In my country many areas will never see fiber or when its there comes with prices we can easily undercut and thus still have a market to make money...
Our biggest concern is that over head fibre on both existing telephone + electricity poles is being rolled out and is being done by the national electricity and telephone companies, they in turn can and do sell direct to private households and commercial businesses but also have to make available their network to 3rd party internet suppliers who can then sell to the same markets, for the fibre rollout suppliers its a long term win win scenario for their investment.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:19 am

The Chipset used by Mimosa is a standard chipset from Quantenna. Just a chipmaker like Atheros. Not special designed for Mimosa and found in some other wlan APs. With the B5 we've seen it is not great with interference rejection. So using wide channels you need good separation from your own gear and from other APs (and you trash the band). Not bad but not that great as their marketing.
Their Omni Solution (which are 4 singlepol sectors in fact) is nice designed.
Using Atheros a lot can be done. You see this with epmp and the ubiquities. What I find most promising at the moment is the combination of shielding, antenna design, RF filtering and gps sync you see with the prism station. And a second wireless card just for scanning in background (Great tool). For ptp in 5GHz yo cant beat the Airfibers at the moment and they make an announcement soon ... And guess what is synccompatible ... To bad MT never decided to put more money/people in their wireless hardware department. But this is a business decision I cant appraise.
We stay with MT for routing/MPLS. Wireless is always a mix of vendors as no one is good with every aspect/frequency.
As always because not every network is the same, wireless equipment from a manaufacturer that uses A,B,C labelling might work great at one site but not so good at another, but what I really don't like is when you read on sales brochure "...supporting Multi-User MIMO...." but in tech specs "Multi-User MIMO **" = enabled in future software releases....same for Collocation.....this in my opinion is nothing short of false advertising.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:38 am

I agree with AF for ptp unbeatable. PTMP is not so good. I have too much invested in MT to think about changing. We are a lot better now than we were a few years ago but still need much improvement to compete with fiber on speed alone. Mikrotik have not being releasing much on NV2 for a while. I can only hope that means things are in the pipeline. On average my NV2 APs have 40 clients. The aggregate max throughout of the AP is around 30 to 40 megs. the clients are allowed 12 megs each. All works ok and not many complaints, however, this will not be any good for much longer as more and more bandwidth is required for steaming TV services. Come on MT it's a race against time now but I have faith in you.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
I totally agree and also don't want to switch from Mikrotik but I am somewhat convinced when I read that the same chipset using what appears to be a barebones software can give much higher wireless throughput than Mikrotik wireless can, I also am totally surprised that NV2 always uses 6Mbps for management protocol, I think Mikrotik should also offer customised software for PTP=B, PTMP =A, CPE=C ( it appears to be working for another company) and ROS software that maybe summarised as "one size fits all" is not really the best fit for everyone.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:04 am

The chipset from MT is also different then what Mimosa uses. I have to look up what they actualy were but I have been reading before (independent resources and test panels) that the chipset of Mimosa is outdoing the Atheros in use but Mikrotik, Ubiquity etc. a lot. Mimosa chipset is just much better.
Mimosa had built their radio's (chipset, OS etc.) completely new from zero with only one thing in mind; Make use of the full capabilities embedded in the new ac protocol with one goal only; beat fibre in roll outs.
The Chipset used by Mimosa is a standard chipset from Quantenna. Just a chipmaker like Atheros. Not special designed for Mimosa and found in some other wlan APs. With the B5 we've seen it is not great with interference rejection. So using wide channels you need good separation from your own gear and from other APs (and you trash the band). Not bad but not that great as their marketing.
Their Omni Solution (which are 4 singlepol sectors in fact) is nice designed.
Using Atheros a lot can be done. You see this with epmp and the ubiquities. What I find most promising at the moment is the combination of shielding, antenna design, RF filtering and gps sync you see with the prism station. And a second wireless card just for scanning in background (Great tool). For ptp in 5GHz yo cant beat the Airfibers at the moment and they make an announcement soon ... And guess what is synccompatible ... To bad MT never decided to put more money/people in their wireless hardware department. But this is a business decision I cant appraise.
We stay with MT for routing/MPLS. Wireless is always a mix of vendors as no one is good with every aspect/frequency.
I never stated Mimosa had the Quantenna chipset designed for them. But they were some of the first implementing it in their product line.
But Mimosa also takes a long learning curve in improving their products. When I came across them already 5 years ago the brochure and white papers of their products made me decide they had the way to go forward, especial since in Mikrotik I didn't see any wireless evolution, not even in the pipeline...

Only now, after these 5 years the Mimosa P2MP product seems to reach a fully mature state although I still have some small issues in their csma protocol using. And the management console is not half that developed as that of Ubiquity or Mikrotik just to name the two I am familiar with. But that can be an advantage as well as a disadvantage.

But while waiting for their P2MP product release in Europe I followed every news bulletin and test and forum mentions etc. I could find which made me believe not only their software but also the hardware platforms is just a step forward compared to what we had up to now.

I ran the A5-14 in plain csma mode with 60 associated, real life traffic clients, and could run on several SXT's up to 50-80Mbs each and when testing 6 units at the same time (each was getting less mb's. The worst almost fell idle) could push the A5 up to just a little short of 200Mbps.
I tried to do the same with a Netmetal this A5-14 was replacing (it was still mounted and so I could swap between the MT and Mimosa AP) and with the Netmetal I just could not push any higher then 70-80Mbps aggregated (in csma)
In NV2 I could get even less. Only when I disconnected most of the clients and only left 8 SXT's on the Netmetal I could get each to 50-70Mbps (NV2 mode!) and just by adding more associating clients the thoughput started to drop....

Then we 'played' for about 3 months with a 40-60 clients A5-14 P2MP network (all SXT-ac lites) that performed well wasn't is we had regular "disassociation storms" and the A5 crashed regularly.
I battered Mimosa helpdesk with complaints and although they never seem to have solved the issue their firmware saw regular updates, most of it where indeed improvements...

Later we found that one of the reasons of our regular issue was most probably radar from approaching planes......

Anyway, we swapped to another frequency and we also replaces all SXT-ac's by C5's and since the P2MP is rock solid. Signals improved, quality improved drastic and a stable network.
Clients are on either 20 or 30Mb contracts now but this I will up to 50 and possibly 100 soon. We need to do some speed tests first and are waiting for our backbone upgrade but so far I am very happy with the move..

We also run some B5 links and some Airfibre links. The first are OK, nothing more then that. They do their job but sync on a tower with two of these links is not working. But they are stable and one gives me 400Mb aggregated and the other 100Mb (more interference and also only 20Mhz channel.
The Airfiber X5 links we have do fine too. But if they go down due a power issue they seem to take ages (15-20 minutes!) to get back on line. And their energy output is severe. Even my most distant units from them links 'see' them. On the tower where two of the Airfibre links leave we really needed the highest amount of shielding we could get with 34dBi antenna just to cross 7km's to get a stable link... Now they are stable they do fine...
From the 8 Airfibers out of the box we bought so far one went straight back to the supplier since only one chain worked.
From one of the 4 B5's we bought one had a GPS failure after some weeks and was RMS'd as well.

We also are using one ePMP2000 AP with some ePMP1000's and some Ubiquity because in fact we were winners in draw. This concept works well and we have now 5 clients to it. These are business which we'd offer 50mb simmetric. The clients are happy.
But 5 clients only.... and the eCambium is expensive.
Mimosa is not cheap neither but with some searching on the web I managed to get almost 20% of the price where eCambium has its market pretty well closed. 3% discount on special offers is the best so far.....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:08 am

..., but what I really don't like is when you read on sales brochure "...supporting Multi-User MIMO...." but in tech specs "Multi-User MIMO **" = enabled in future software releases....same for Collocation.....this in my opinion is nothing short of false advertising.
I think they all do this... you have to look deeper and basically buy the product to find out what it really does...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:23 am

One of the reasons I'd go for Mimosa now is not only the specs in the brochures.
There are some of guys in the US that really offer 200 to 300Mbps contract to clients based on a Mimosa P2MP network and these guys are very enthusiast about it.
Mimosa is in fact build to fight with cable operators in outer suburbs of dense populated regions...

Now the market situation is not the same in the Us (less operators = less spectrum usage = less interference) and higher average contract payings (higher ROI rates) but if they can do 200 to 300Mbps, I am confident I should be able to be doing at least half of that....
So far I never heard of any MT or Ubiquity guy doing that......

But I agree, as time advances, the head start Mimosa had is getting smaller and if they don't bring their EU prices down soon they will miss the boat...

Last but not least. On the 60Ghz frontier is also movement. Not only MT has now for very short range some solutions. We have some links of that other 60Ghz hardware supplier running a 150 meter, 300 meter and a 450 meter link. 0-1ms ping even under load and up to 1Gb aggregated throughout. Only in the most heavy rain it drops. Usually we have no power then and it lasts 5 mins or so.....
They come now with a P2MP solution with up to 300 meter range and 2.5Gb aggregate throughput where clients will get up to one Gb...speeds.
I am thinking of having one of these AP's server up to 4 short back hauls to serve even so much Mimosas. I don't see how any fiber solution can beat that in economics....unless with 50+% of grants....

And to put things and needs in perspective. Even now our clients on the Mimosa P2MP solution can have 25Mb of download traffic, I hardly ever see it being used.... Top aggregated throughputs on a 40 client A5-14 I see is some 35-45 Mb's....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:45 am

The chipset from MT is also different then what Mimosa uses. I have to look up what they actualy were but I have been reading before (independent resources and test panels) that the chipset of Mimosa is outdoing the Atheros in use but Mikrotik, Ubiquity etc. a lot. Mimosa chipset is just much better.
Mimosa had built their radio's (chipset, OS etc.) completely new from zero with only one thing in mind; Make use of the full capabilities embedded in the new ac protocol with one goal only; beat fibre in roll outs.
The Chipset used by Mimosa is a standard chipset from Quantenna. Just a chipmaker like Atheros. Not special designed for Mimosa and found in some other wlan APs. With the B5 we've seen it is not great with interference rejection. So using wide channels you need good separation from your own gear and from other APs (and you trash the band). Not bad but not that great as their marketing.
Their Omni Solution (which are 4 singlepol sectors in fact) is nice designed.
Using Atheros a lot can be done. You see this with epmp and the ubiquities. What I find most promising at the moment is the combination of shielding, antenna design, RF filtering and gps sync you see with the prism station. And a second wireless card just for scanning in background (Great tool). For ptp in 5GHz yo cant beat the Airfibers at the moment and they make an announcement soon ... And guess what is synccompatible ... To bad MT never decided to put more money/people in their wireless hardware department. But this is a business decision I cant appraise.
We stay with MT for routing/MPLS. Wireless is always a mix of vendors as no one is good with every aspect/frequency.
I agree with AF for ptp unbeatable. PTMP is not so good. I have too much invested in MT to think about changing. We are a lot better now than we were a few years ago but still need much improvement to compete with fiber on speed alone. Mikrotik have not being releasing much on NV2 for a while. I can only hope that means things are in the pipeline. On average my NV2 APs have 40 clients. The aggregate max throughout of the AP is around 30 to 40 megs. the clients are allowed 12 megs each. All works ok and not many complaints, however, this will not be any good for much longer as more and more bandwidth is required for steaming TV services. Come on MT it's a race against time now but I have faith in you.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
With 12 meg you are fine with MT. Problems start with 20. Customers get this speeds with udp but they complain with tcp. As speedtests are tcp ... I am so bored with this speedtester calls. This problem is for years now and consumed a lot of my time.
This and some towers run out of frequency urged us to move on. We tried epmp but failed due to worse near channel rejection. Had to move on further.
To keep up with bandwidth needs we mix. Short hops we do 60Ghz, mid range is licensed or airfiber. Depends on usage or frequency congestion. Moving backhauls out of 5GHz to make 40Mhz Channels possible. Sync also helps to keep 5GHz usable.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:25 am

With 12 meg you are fine with MT. Problems start with 20. Customers get this speeds with udp but they complain with tcp. As speedtests are tcp ... I am so bored with this speedtester calls. This problem is for years now and consumed a lot of my time.
This and some towers run out of frequency urged us to move on. We tried epmp but failed due to worse near channel rejection. Had to move on further.
To keep up with bandwidth needs we mix. Short hops we do 60Ghz, mid range is licensed or airfiber. Depends on usage or frequency congestion. Moving backhauls out of 5GHz to make 40Mhz Channels possible. Sync also helps to keep 5GHz usable.
Install a Speedtest.net server at your gateway. At least you avoid (inter-)net and backbone delays. Due the lesser hops ping times are also better.
We've been battered by 'speedtesters' in the past wining about low speeds and high pingtimes which was more due saturated backbone, overused internet or saturated speedtest servers. Now we run our own server (free! You only need a good powerfull server) and our clients now (default-)test to our own speedtest.net server. 90% of the complaints vanished....

Second advantage is that running long(er) bandwidth tests on a P2MP network sees jumps up and down in the speed to the client simply due the fact that others have to be served too. With speedtest its a limited time test which usually give better results.
If we sell 20Mb contracts that doesn't mean the client get 20Mb 24/7. It's maximum and with the speedtest you can show the client he gets what he pays for... almost 20Mb. Off course, when he runs a long running download the average will be lower....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:40 am

With 12 meg you are fine with MT. Problems start with 20. Customers get this speeds with udp but they complain with tcp. As speedtests are tcp ... I am so bored with this speedtester calls. This problem is for years now and consumed a lot of my time.
This and some towers run out of frequency urged us to move on. We tried epmp but failed due to worse near channel rejection. Had to move on further.
To keep up with bandwidth needs we mix. Short hops we do 60Ghz, mid range is licensed or airfiber. Depends on usage or frequency congestion. Moving backhauls out of 5GHz to make 40Mhz Channels possible. Sync also helps to keep 5GHz usable.
Install a Speedtest.net server at your gateway. At least you avoid (inter-)net and backbone delays. Due the lesser hops ping times are also better.
We've been battered by 'speedtesters' in the past wining about low speeds and high pingtimes which was more due saturated backbone, overused internet or saturated speedtest servers. Now we run our own server (free! You only need a good powerfull server) and our clients now (default-)test to our own speedtest.net server. 90% of the complaints vanished....

Second advantage is that running long(er) bandwidth tests on a P2MP network sees jumps up and down in the speed to the client simply due the fact that others have to be served too. With speedtest its a limited time test which usually give better results.
If we sell 20Mb contracts that doesn't mean the client get 20Mb 24/7. It's maximum and with the speedtest you can show the client he gets what he pays for... almost 20Mb. Off course, when he runs a long running download the average will be lower....
With nv2 and APs with more than 6-10 connected cpes customers *never* see 20MBit/s tcp even when all other cpes are quiet. This is not a simple bandwidth problem it is how nv2 works, Speedtest.net does 4 tcp-streams so you see a bit more than with a single tcp download/ftp. This got some way better with newer versions but still is not good. With all versions newer than 6.35.4 connection algorithm has changed (silently). If there are more than 2 APs with the same SSID the CPE might not select the AP we direct him with access-lists.
We talked to MT on all of this ...
We design our network so customers see their bandwidth. Of course we oversell but at a rate they usually see their bandwidth.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:22 pm

With nv2 and APs with more than 6-10 connected cpes customers *never* see 20MBit/s tcp even when all other cpes are quiet. This is not a simple bandwidth problem it is how nv2 works, Speedtest.net does 4 tcp-streams so you see a bit more than with a single tcp download/ftp. This got some way better with newer versions but still is not good. With all versions newer than 6.35.4 connection algorithm has changed (silently). If there are more than 2 APs with the same SSID the CPE might not select the AP we direct him with access-lists.
We talked to MT on all of this ...
We design our network so customers see their bandwidth. Of course we oversell but at a rate they usually see their bandwidth.
We'd usually try to keep the network not more then 3 or 4 update versions behind so we should be having new developments relatively soon.
We tried on two towers the new NV2 sync options on SXT-SA 'looking' opposite to eachother and clients at least hundreds of meters away from each other. But the capacity collapsed. Some clients in a town with distance of less then 200 meters would't even connect anymore... and those that did saw very poor CCQ's.
In the open field with bigger distances it was better. Probably due the fact the signals of AP-A clients were much less at the AP-B because the distance was more. But I still lost througput to almost every single client. Off course I could/should have tried to go from 20 to 40Mhz channel width to be used by both AP's in the same freq. and SSID but I still needed to sort out the other channels in use on that tower (in total 12 different channels in use...) which gave me such a headache I just quit that project for now....

One of the things that really went down in the last 2 years is that whatever you change on the config, even comments, makes the radio disassociate. Two or three years ago this wasn't the case, now it is. And lately I even noticed that now, when you just save an edit on one client's access list's comment field, all associated clients are disassociate from the AP!
Since we now also work with wide scan ranges on the CPE's it means that it takes up to a full minute or more before clients are back online! Not happy with that.....

But then again, these Mimosa's or eCambium (of the Airfibers we have) take minutes up to 15 minutes for the Airfiber to get traffic running over them again......

In the 'old' days we could edit whatever I'd liked on client's (or AP's) comment fields and the units just stayed working. Updating not only brings improvements... :-(
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:09 pm

Install a Speedtest.net server at your gateway. At least you avoid (inter-)net and backbone delays. Due the lesser hops ping times are also better.
We've been battered by 'speedtesters' in the past wining about low speeds and high pingtimes which was more due saturated backbone, overused internet or saturated speedtest servers. Now we run our own server (free! You only need a good powerfull server) and our clients now (default-)test to our own speedtest.net server. 90% of the complaints vanished....

Second advantage is that running long(er) bandwidth tests on a P2MP network sees jumps up and down in the speed to the client simply due the fact that others have to be served too. With speedtest its a limited time test which usually give better results.
If we sell 20Mb contracts that doesn't mean the client get 20Mb 24/7. It's maximum and with the speedtest you can show the client he gets what he pays for... almost 20Mb. Off course, when he runs a long running download the average will be lower....
Is there much involved in setting up a speedtest server?
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:15 pm

[quote="WirelessRudyOne of the things that really went down in the last 2 years is that whatever you change on the config, even comments, makes the radio disassociate. Two or three years ago this wasn't the case, now it is. And lately I even noticed that now, when you just save an edit on one client's access list's comment field, all associated clients are disassociate from the AP!
Since we now also work with wide scan ranges on the CPE's it means that it takes up to a full minute or more before clients are back online! Not happy with that.....

But then again, these Mimosa's or eCambium (of the Airfibers we have) take minutes up to 15 minutes for the Airfiber to get traffic running over them again......

In the 'old' days we could edit whatever I'd liked on client's (or AP's) comment fields and the units just stayed working. Updating not only brings improvements... :-([/quote]

Yes. This is really annoying. It is due to the regulations and the vendors which do not take care. MT was forced to enforce dfs but the SW was not prepared for this. Then you see these false positives many vendors have problems with. MT by the way still do not care for ATPC. They go the simple way to turn the power that much down as needed to be compliant. This cuts down usage esp. in the upper 5GHz band with ETSI regulations.
There are a lot of things that can be done to be compliant and offer good links. Eg. a second radio scanning the band to have a place to jump to once a dfs event happens.
And yes. Airfiber have to be backuped by a second link or you never could touch them without killing the link for a long time. Hint: Compare the allowed freqency at the edges of the band. This has to do with out of channel emmissions.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:35 am

Is there much involved in setting up a speedtest server?
No. You need the hardware (A good server will do.) and a pipe (at least 100Mb simmetric I believe.). All info can be found on their website.
We run it on the same server (virtual machine) that also runs virtuals for UserManager and log server. It has to be on 24/7 off course..
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:23 pm

Mimosa product OS & Hardware like microwave product, all process in the level 1(throughput bypass)
Mikrotik product OS when traffic running processor load too high . If setting fast path when throughput up to 80-90%, processor in 40-50%.

e.g:-
Mimosa 5Ghz-AC-80Mhz & Netmetal 5Ghz-AC-80Mhz
Mimosa throughput can up to 700Mbps half duplex. 350Mbps Full duplex ( TCP ) 950Mbps udp half duplex 550Mbps full duplex. ( distance 20KM )
Netmetal 5 throughput only can up to 400Mbps half duplex, Full duplex up to 200Mbps ( TCP) udp half duplex 500Mbps, full duplex 300Mbps. ( distance 5KM ).

Nv2 normally throughput testing both difference, sometime upload higher sometime download higher. ( can try 820.11 ) this more stable & both way testing is balance.
Mimosa throughput testing both way balance.

ps: price difference. 1 unit mimosa can buy few unit NetMetal.
Are these actual throughput figures or just from data sheet spec?

Also what is "..all process in the level 1.."

I can understand part of Mikrotik ROS performance limitations is the fact almost everything is done in software but Mikrotik must be well aware that WISP's are prepared to pay 4~10X++ cost per AP compared with their price and that a market exists for "Professional Products Range" where performance is top priority and not compromised performance to fit the cheap price.
 
nsharma21
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:13 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:20 pm

WirelessRudy it not good i was upset after buying this u have new non working future :)
NV2 sync just doesn't work for me too, would love to know how MT technicians perform their test in what scenario NV2 sync should work.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:30 pm

I tried again. Two AP's on shielded sectors, both facing in almost oposite direction. Both at least 3 meters apart with a tower inbetween. Both all clients at distant and these clients cannot 'see' clients from the other AP since the tower is on a hill and on both sides de clients are low.
Done a scan in one of the AP's and it 'sees' the other with some -75dBm (so far for 100% shielding by shields. such thing just doesn't exist!)

Still in running syncd the CCQ drop and speeds to clients drop too. It just is not working!

So I am also wondering on how these Mikrotik guys do it. We tried now 3 different setups with scenarios where sync could save us spectrum but it just won't work.
Each time the two AP's are connected by ethernet to a switch (in one case both on the ports of a PoE Omnitik) for PoE out but everytime in the same /29 or /28 network. So I would presume the sync over the ethernet should have no issue.

Mikrotik? Any suggestions?
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
Lakis
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:57 pm

Rudy 2x SA distance between 1m protocol 802.11 same channel running better than nv2 sync.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:42 pm

Rudy 2x SA distance between 1m protocol 802.11 same channel running better than nv2 sync.
Ok, let me try to understand what you wrote..

2x SA = 2 x SXT-SA ok

So you are saying that instead of 2 SXT-AC's 1 meter apart from eachother work better with 802.11 in the same channel then when they are in NV2 sync mode?
If that would be the case it would mean the NV2 sync mode is a complete failure..... Why even mention it exists if it doesn't work.

Either I don't understand what you tried to say, or the Mikrotik NV2 sync is a complete failure or needs much better explanations.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
Lakis
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:01 pm

Rudy 2x SA distance between 1m protocol 802.11 same channel running better than nv2 sync.
Ok, let me try to understand what you wrote..

2x SA = 2 x SXT-SA ok

So you are saying that instead of 2 SXT-AC's 1 meter apart from eachother work better with 802.11 in the same channel then when they are in NV2 sync mode?
If that would be the case it would mean the NV2 sync mode is a complete failure..... Why even mention it exists if it doesn't work.

Either I don't understand what you tried to say, or the Mikrotik NV2 sync is a complete failure or needs much better explanations.
Yep 2 units of SXT-SA5 (SA5-AC units are much stronger don't know, noise floor should be bad) as AP on opposite direction 1 meter apart same channel 802.11 mode work better than in nv2 sync mode.

Rudy its not just nv2 sync mode, something is wrong with nv2 protocol in 99% of cases 802.11 (or nstreme for p2p) works far better for me.
Already posted about that
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=127298
 
User avatar
soulflyhigh
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:20 am

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:24 pm

I agree,
Nv2 sync obviously needs more development so it could become something usable.
After that, good documentation/practical user guide would be a next thing to do.

At this moment I don't believe neither will happen anytime soon - but I hope I'm wrong about that.

Otherwise, it shouldn't be in ROS at all because it is just another point of possible issues and added complexity.

Regards,
M.
MTCRE, MTCTCE
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:40 pm

Well, I have to agree with you guys that the basic csma protocol but added with RTS/CTS and fine tuned (set proper distance/acknowledge time) set RTS/CTS to always work and some other minor settings) can/will be better then NV2 or other tdma protocols on the market.
We are already moving a P2MP network to another provider and for the transition had to work for a while with csma + RTS/CTS and the performance was much better then the old Netmetal was able to do in NV2.
Now this new AP has 44 clients in tdma protocol (all new CPE's) and we can do easy 50 or more MB's per client. So yeah, maybe we should proceed with this network move.....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
Zod
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:10 pm

So I am also wondering on how these Mikrotik guys do it. We tried now 3 different setups with scenarios where sync could save us spectrum but it just won't work.
Each time the two AP's are connected by ethernet to a switch (in one case both on the ports of a PoE Omnitik) for PoE out but everytime in the same /29 or /28 network. So I would presume the sync over the ethernet should have no issue.

Mikrotik? Any suggestions?
Simple answer to that. They don't.

From previous posts we have seen that not only do they not understand wireless co-location/self interference - they just don't care.

If they DID care then they would not toss out a kludge like this which is a waste of everyone's time... and I would compare it to Ubiquiti's "AirSync" idea from a couple years ago (and it was an absolute failure too).

What kills me is that MT have products like the RB433 AH - which you can in stall 3 wireless card in. If they can't do GPS sync - the excuse has always been that the interfaces to the board are too slow for sync to work - why can they not at least have the same board sync ? All three of these PCI slots are on the same bus, and CPU. That seems like is should be a fair bit easier to do right ? It won't sync to other provider's on the tower but it would be a LOT better than this NV2 Sync 'solution' that has no hope of ever working.

But Nope - they don't bother because they just don't care.

Maybe Elevate will save us the rest of our MT investment, which for myself is a _LOT_ of money, but in the mean time I have stopped deploying MT on ALL new builds and we have replaced a couple hundred RB411 CPEs and a few dozen RB433AH AP's with Mimosa or Cambium and continue to do so.

Zod
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:49 pm

Sure sync cards on one board should be possible for PPC like RB800 but for MIPSBE i think not. But see funny things use HDX hub/swith & 2x SXT SA + pure 802.11n/ac on this same chanel works better less CCQ drops. I dont know maybe possible make HDX queue on CCR & sync all AP connected directly too CCR. Or better create vpn tunnels between CCR and all CPEs for global synchronization + eg convert data to UDP to eliminate 802.11x/NV2 restrictions.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:19 pm

Maybe Elevate will save us the rest of our MT investment, which for myself is a _LOT_ of money, but in the mean time I have stopped deploying MT on ALL new builds and we have replaced a couple hundred RB411 CPEs and a few dozen RB433AH AP's with Mimosa or Cambium and continue to do so.

Zod
I am awaiting Elevate for over a year now.. works fine for some Ubiquity CPE's we'd happen to have but 99% of my network is MT that really needs updated. Cambium is missing a lot of our money now since stil no elevate for MT. My money is now flowing to Mimosa. And it works GREAT!
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:10 am


.....................

Maybe Elevate will save us the rest of our MT investment, which for myself is a _LOT_ of money, but in the mean time I have stopped deploying MT on ALL new builds and we have replaced a couple hundred RB411 CPEs and a few dozen RB433AH AP's with Mimosa or Cambium and continue to do so.

Zod
Can I ask which is the best Mimosa or Cambium?
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:39 am

Can I ask which is the best Mimosa or Cambium?
Not a lot people will be able to answer that properly. You need to run both systems in a sort of similar setup and environment to make real comparisons.
We have 3 AP's now from Mimosa each with 40+ clients all short distance (500Mtr max) in a high used spectrum where we managed to get 80Mhz relatively 'clean' and although we are not in full sync yet the performance already blows Mikrotik miles behind....
We have one ePMP2000 with beamforming and 3 true eCambium antennas and 2 Ubiquitys with the elevate firmware. They all run at at least 1km, most around 2-3km and they do fine too. We give these clients 40 and 50Mbps simmetric and so far haven't had complaints.

We still have to try Mimosa at bigger distance but Mimosa really likes the higher signal levels for good performance. But this performance in top througputts is higher then even the secs of eCambium.
Price wise Mimosa is more interesting since you can 'shop' around for good deals where eCambium has strickt price policy so hardly any discounts to be found.

I made some investment calcs on Mimosa versus eCambium and found a 40 clients network on one AP would make Mimosa the winner since we also need to buy all new CPE's (like on Mimosa too). Maybe when eCambium comes with elavate firmware for Mikrotik that might tip the balance in case of transition of a network.

But a 'real' comparison on performance differences under the same circumstances I cannot give. Both are fine to good to very good and at least much better then MT. (Sorry guys, but that's the way it is...:-) )
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:27 pm

Can I ask which is the best Mimosa or Cambium?
Not a lot people will be able to answer that properly. You need to run both systems in a sort of similar setup and environment to make real comparisons.
We have 3 AP's now from Mimosa each with 40+ clients all short distance (500Mtr max) in a high used spectrum where we managed to get 80Mhz relatively 'clean' and although we are not in full sync yet the performance already blows Mikrotik miles behind....
We have one ePMP2000 with beamforming and 3 true eCambium antennas and 2 Ubiquitys with the elevate firmware. They all run at at least 1km, most around 2-3km and they do fine too. We give these clients 40 and 50Mbps simmetric and so far haven't had complaints.

We still have to try Mimosa at bigger distance but Mimosa really likes the higher signal levels for good performance. But this performance in top througputts is higher then even the secs of eCambium.
Price wise Mimosa is more interesting since you can 'shop' around for good deals where eCambium has strickt price policy so hardly any discounts to be found.

I made some investment calcs on Mimosa versus eCambium and found a 40 clients network on one AP would make Mimosa the winner since we also need to buy all new CPE's (like on Mimosa too). Maybe when eCambium comes with elavate firmware for Mikrotik that might tip the balance in case of transition of a network.

But a 'real' comparison on performance differences under the same circumstances I cannot give. Both are fine to good to very good and at least much better then MT. (Sorry guys, but that's the way it is...:-) )
Thanks Rudy, our customers from most high sites are between 5-15+Kms AP to CPE, we use 23dB CPE'e for all customers!
Our challenge appears to be somewhat similar to what you have but to add we have also to switch from single polarity which gives us a additional headache;
(1) Do we purchase Mimosa or Cambium CPE's but can they work effectively over 8-18KMs from the AP,
(2) Or simply purchase the higher gain LHG XL HP5 use Mimosa in Interop mode and wait for Mimosa to develop more C range products or for Cambium to finally release "Elevate" so that the LHG XL HP5 could then be used to Cambium AP's.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:14 pm

Thanks Rudy, our customers from most high sites are between 5-15+Kms AP to CPE, we use 23dB CPE'e for all customers!
Our challenge appears to be somewhat similar to what you have but to add we have also to switch from single polarity which gives us a additional headache;
(1) Do we purchase Mimosa or Cambium CPE's but can they work effectively over 8-18KMs from the AP,
(2) Or simply purchase the higher gain LHG XL HP5 use Mimosa in Interop mode and wait for Mimosa to develop more C range products or for Cambium to finally release "Elevate" so that the LHG XL HP5 could then be used to Cambium AP's.
One of the problems I was facing was to find reasonable price 23dBi duo pol antennas to use with C5c devices. But I found some (http://wisnt.com/download/Datasheet/ANG5829-data.pdf) reasonably price that we are about to test.
For distance you also need to work with sector or directional AP antenna's otherwise the CPE will not connect with two chains to a Mimosa Omni. Because in fact a Mimosa Omni has 4 small antenas interios facing in 90 degrees direction. For short range the two side facing antennas always get some signal so the CPE can use always two chains, but on longer distance the side and backwards facing strips will not get the signal from distant CPE and vice versa so you only get one chain.
Hence the use of a A5c with either one 4x4 or two 2x2 Mimo sectors.

The problem with LHG antenna of Mikrotik is, they are very good and cheap, but still only 'n'. Mimosa makes full use of 'ac' protocol and that is not even the case (yet) with eCambium.
We have on Mimosa A5 working in 80Mhz bandwidth and do see the accordingly high mcs rates and many devices. Hence short airtime too for package to clients and thus radio is freed faster to server other clients and thus the overal throughput goes up. I have done tests with 200Mbps aggregated throughput with SXT-ac's already. The Mimosa C5's should do even better but due the OS its more difficult to run bandwidth tests...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
hengst
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:04 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:52 pm

just adding some info for readers here that might be of interest

Syncing Ap radios is not as simple as "turning it on" , whatever brand you are going to use.
also Mimosa isnt the holy grail if the design of the network isnt build for it.

the have very good documentation on that :
http://ap.help.mimosa.co/gps-sync-spect ... e-gigapops

i presume this wont be very different than Mikrotik radios in NV2 sync mode.
 
Lakis
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:35 pm

just adding some info for readers here that might be of interest

Syncing Ap radios is not as simple as "turning it on" , whatever brand you are going to use.
also Mimosa isnt the holy grail if the design of the network isnt build for it.

the have very good documentation on that :
http://ap.help.mimosa.co/gps-sync-spect ... e-gigapops

i presume this wont be very different than Mikrotik radios in NV2 sync mode.
Nice info. My test are already done that way APs are placed on opposite direction.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:13 pm

I work with Mimosa where I for instance have 2 AP's only 250 meters separated from each other and both see each other (but obviously their respective CPE's don't see 'the other' due the different direction they'd pointed at) and all CPE's are only up to 500 meters away from their AP's and it works smooth less.

At another tower in the field I have two Mikrotik devices both with 60 degrees sector pointing in opposite direction from a tower. The tower construction itself and other antennas basically shield them from each other even more. Both have their clients at least 500 away from AP's and because on a landscape elevated hill/ridge the CPE's of both AP's have no way of 'seeing' an CPE of the other AP. Both AP's are in the same /28 network with only a Netonix switch between them.
I followed the MT-Wiki for the setup.
I first worked for both AP's in using the original frequency of "A" and later did the same for "B".
But in both setups the CCQ's from the associated clients in the AP's dropped, and bandwidth tests dropped by some 40-60% compared to working both as separate AP's in their own frequencies.

I have done similar tests on 2 other Mikrotik AP's where sort of the same situation and option for sync exist but in all cases the throughput went down. I didn't see any improvements.

My conclusion:
Not all brands work the same. Real and virtual location of the antena's theory is the same but technology used is definitely not.

Second conclusion: Mikrotik has to do a lot more homework to get the sync working.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
hengst
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:04 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:49 pm

Thnx Rudy, good info. thnks for sharing

i noticed in lab test config with NV2 that you have to set the dynamic download to 80 to achieve good download rates to clients, set to 50 was no good.
did you played with that too ? and what where your experiences.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:44 am

i noticed in lab test config with NV2 that you have to set the dynamic download to 80 to achieve good download rates to clients, set to 50 was no good.
did you played with that too ? and what where your experiences.
I never played with 80 since I'd presume that's too much. I played with 70, 60 and 50 but really its a bit hard to see any differences. To see the effect of these settings you need to monitor multiple clients with some real time high traffic load to see differences between each of the settings. Otherwise you're doing not so much more then guessing...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:53 am

Hi there

I recently attended the Mum, and this was my sole question to Mikrotik staff, which they couldn't answer and just told me to email them. Such a nice product with loads of potential. Unfortunately I think they have no intention of developing the wireless leg of their company.
 
JDSurfnet
just joined
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:49 am

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:54 pm

Unfortunately I think they have no intention of developing the wireless leg of their company.
I think a lot of us feel that way.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Sat Dec 09, 2017 1:35 am

And that's why many of 'legacy' Mikrotik users for wireless are now exploring new manufacture's product lines. We already swapped 15% of our network and nextyear it will be 40 or 50%.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
Cetalfio
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:19 pm
Location: Italy

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 8:31 am

We also have about 3000 MT cpe (SXT, Disc and Sextant) and still expect improvements on the wireless, in the laboratory we have already tested Cambium with really good results.
ROS is a very powerful OS with great potential but we also believe that Mikrotik does not intend to develop this wireless part so all WISPs like us will go to other solutions / brands. Cambium has already announced the time of publication of the Elevate for Mikrotik in 2018, for us it would be really a special thing if MT found new wireless solutions to continue working with their products

http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5 ... 999/page/4

cetalfio
 
savage
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Contact:

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:46 am

Further to stop using CCRs in it's entirety (PSU issues, BGP issues), we too, are seriously considering alternatives (Cambium / Mimosa) to Mikrotik on the wireless side.

Mikrotik's loosing traction fast. Unless v7 is a magic bullet that gets released, very, very soon... I see tough times ahead for MT, even Ubiquity has far better stuff on the market today. We, simply cannot depend on MT any longer, except for the bare basic non-essential stuff.
Regards,
Chris
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:55 am

What a pity that Mikrotik has not responded to its long term short coming in wireless, as a WISP we are also forced to look elsewhere and most annoying to read that other vendors using the similar chipsets have vastly superior wireless performance but don't have the long list of configuration options of ROS, for us wireless performance is more important than a long list of configuration options ?
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:14 pm

I recently attended the Mum in South Africa. I had to travel 2000 kms to get there, with one of my most important questions being about NV2. When I asked the staff present about it, they simply referred me to email support ...
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:32 pm

I think we have to wait until some bigger company that lacks routing knowledge and a neat OS. Wouldn't be surprised Cisco one day buys them. Just to get them away fishing from the router pond...
Ubiquity could buy them too. They probably have the cash by now and the only fields where they are not as good as MT can be bought. It would make many of us happy.
Mimosa could buy them, would be a valuable add-on for routing. But am afraid they are too small yet.

So I don't know. But I already wrote in this forum over a year ago that I'd think Wifi in Mikrotik is on a dead end. We saw some small up springs but overall they are running way behind the market developments.
I mean, why bring an 802.11a/n LHG on the market where the competition is already having a/c products flooding the industry? We all need high gain 'ac' solutions now for reasonable price. Mikrotik still doesn't have this.
The LHG is a neat antenna but I am buying them marginal since I'd hope an 'ac' model comes out soon. (Some provider already has is in their catalogue, but for backorders only.)
The bigger higher gain units should also have been introduced way earlier.

To me it looks a bit like they'd want to squeeze as much out of their existing product lines before they come up with upgrades. So WISP have to buy their stuff again and again in keeping up with the market. That looks like a good money puller from your clients but what happens if your clients decide they can't wait no longer for the needed upgrades and start shopping elsewhere? They probably won't come back no more. And since many network changes mean numbers Mikrotik is gambling hard with their policy of hardware evolution delays. This will break their neck one day.

On the medium and high end they are having an ever bigger backlog in technology and on the medium to low end market they will soon be overtaken by all kinds of other manufacturers. It's only a matter of time before they loose their wifi. And if the company can survive on routers only? I doubt it. When they are becoming to much of a pain to many times bigger Cisco they just buy Mikrotik out of the market....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:17 pm

Further to stop using CCRs in it's entirety (PSU issues, BGP issues), we too, are seriously considering alternatives (Cambium / Mimosa) to Mikrotik on the wireless side.

Mikrotik's loosing traction fast. Unless v7 is a magic bullet that gets released, very, very soon... I see tough times ahead for MT, even Ubiquity has far better stuff on the market today. We, simply cannot depend on MT any longer, except for the bare basic non-essential stuff.
We are quite happy with CCR (in good ambient environment). We like the RB1100AHx4 very much. Fast and very flexible regarding power input. We like Powerbox Pro.
CRS317-1G-16S+RM is a very good product and (while still beta) the new Bridging configuration makes it more usable than the older MT-Switches. And when it does MPLS in Hardware at 10G wirespeed ...
So yes MT wireless falls back. I guess it is used mostly in countries where every $ counts. I guess this is the reason they bring new/old cheap 11n devices. It works reliable but does not scale.
But they still have a lot of products which help WISPs.

So test and select Products for purpose and dont expect one vendor to do it all. Noone does LTE, Licensed wireless, 60GHz, unlicensed wireless, routing, switching, CRM, ...
And dont trust markteting and fanboys. We see Mimosa and Cambium ePMP fall to it's nose with interference where nv2 still work. They dont have a magic bullet. And we soon have 2018 and ePMP is still 11n. We dont buy 11n for a year now ...
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:59 pm

We are quite happy with CCR (in good ambient environment). We like the RB1100AHx4 very much. Fast and very flexible regarding power input. We like Powerbox Pro.
CRS317-1G-16S+RM is a very good product and (while still beta) the new Bridging configuration makes it more usable than the older MT-Switches. And when it does MPLS in Hardware at 10G wirespeed ...
So yes MT wireless falls back. I guess it is used mostly in countries where every $ counts. I guess this is the reason they bring new/old cheap 11n devices. It works reliable but does not scale.
But they still have a lot of products which help WISPs.

So test and select Products for purpose and dont expect one vendor to do it all. Noone does LTE, Licensed wireless, 60GHz, unlicensed wireless, routing, switching, CRM, ...
And dont trust markteting and fanboys. We see Mimosa and Cambium ePMP fall to it's nose with interference where nv2 still work. They dont have a magic bullet. And we soon have 2018 and ePMP is still 11n. We dont buy 11n for a year now ...
I agree with CCR and RB1100 being good products!

Can you say what type of interference (co-location or channel interference...) causes "...we see Mimosa and Cambium ePMP fall to it's nose with interference where nv2 still work..."
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:40 pm

Noone does LTE, Licensed wireless, 60GHz, unlicensed wireless, routing, switching, CRM, ...
And dont trust markteting and fanboys. We see Mimosa and Cambium ePMP fall to it's nose with interference where nv2 still work. They dont have a magic bullet. And we soon have 2018 and ePMP is still 11n. We dont buy 11n for a year now ...
I agree, MT is versatile in a lot. We have their routers in our core and they probably will never be replaced. But where we years ago (when tdma became in play) had to make a decision in what hardware line we wher going to follow we'd choose MT in these days since the first UBNT lines where crap to say the least.
The ROS-versatility-range of products-pricing etc. factors made MT a winner and after the initial issues NV2 started to work fine too where others (mainly Ubiquity in my region) where still having issues.
But then MT's wifi evolution sort of stopped where other moved on and new ones entered the market.
How many years have we seen the 'sync' discussions on this forum. Now it finally sort of cautiously arrived it doesn't seem to work. (We can't get it to work at least....)
The many software updates not always brought 'good', sometimes complete disaster even on 'stable' versions.
Wireless management absolutely is not that ergonomic anymore as in the 'old' days where you could fine tune links without loosing the link after each 'enter' or 'accept' of yet again a small edit.
(I mean; If I just edit the comment field in an AP and hit 'enter' all clients disassociate? That was never like that in the old day. In old version you could even swap the order of the 'connect-to' listing without loosing the link of a CPE. Now you only have to touch anything and the link drops......)

We have one eCambium 2000 AP with beam forming and have 5 high demanding clients on it. 50/50Mbps packages for some of them and it always works and I see it regularly been used.
This in a heavy congested spectrum on a 20Mhz channel width. And the links are stable. Try to do the same with a Netmetal and apart from the link been less stable its almost impossible to surpass the 60-70Mbps aggregated throughput with a handful of clients attached. I have done several tests and best I could ever get in 80Mhz wide channel was 90Mbps (no, not a cable limit).

Some back haul links that really needed to have more then 100Mbps aggregated plus lots of spare have been replaced with Airfibres that run with 300 or 400Mbps aggregated stable connections.
With Netmetals on the same links with the same Jirious antennas, same frequency we tried and tried (nv2, nstream, csma 40Mhz, 80Mhz) but never more then 150-160Mbps aggregated. So we tried the Airfibres and are happy with these. Have 3 links running with them.

Then we replaced two other links for Mimosa B5c's and although not as good as the Airfibre's the still outperform the Netmetal and with the channel spit for ul/dl we'd manage to stay away from most sever interference where with a single Netmetal setup this is just impossible.

Last, but not least. In an heavy used by 5Ghz wifi dense urbanisation we had 6 Netmetals/Omnitiks serving some 150 clients but lots of complaints about poor speeds and broken streams. After a year of struggling we decided to try Mimosa. They came finally (first in Spain!) a year after their first promise and we started to use one. Even in 'interop' (=csma wit RTS/CTS) it worked much better then the previous Mikrotiks. We've had the work previously done by two Omnitiks to server 2 x 25-30 clients (=55 clients) by one A5 that served those 55 plus 10 more (=65 clients!) and speeds were back to were we'd wanted them. Lower latency.
I'v done tests and could easy push the aggregated throughput over the 200Mbps levels. Even when in csma mode with some 'n' SXT's still present in a full working AP network (some 30-40Mb aggregated traffic from clients) I could push my test SXT-ac in 40Mhz channel to 60-70-Mbps. When AO was set to 80Mhz (the legacy units still connected in 40Mhz!) my SXT-ac could go to 180Mbps ! And this where adjacent frequecies are 'loud' and the working channel even 'sees' some remote AP's using the same.

Since some weeks we have now two A5's at only 125 meters separation working in full sync with their tdma mode and 40 on the one (44 is still their limit for tdma) and 6 on the other but they all work flawless. 60-80 and 150Mbps including not a problem for their C5's.

Now the Mimosa system has off course better specs then the Mikrotik equivalents, cost quit a bit more too. But MT just haven't an answer to this. And as an operator I have to keep the fiber boys out of my backyard so had to move on.....

I am also using several 60Ghz links from Metrlinq and although not as good as the specs they do a great job. 500Mbps over 400 meters is not an issue.
I say the Mikrotik 60Ghz platform in Milan a year ago and that is only recently fully available. But up to 100 meters only. Not a lot of use for that. Their bigger units promised by then are since fallen quiet...
And now Metrolinq has an triple (60,5 and 2,4Ghz 12dBi Omni with beamforming in each band that can 'pump 10Gb of aggregated traffic! I need that one to serve my 6 60Ghz links leaving one tower with two 5Ghz AP's and a 2,4Ghz hotspot system.
If this was all Mikrotik it means I can throw away 12 Mikrotik units to be replaced by one Ignitenet unit only!

No, Mikrotik has to come up with beter news or I am afraid in a years time you won't see me a lot on this forum more neither....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:59 pm

Noone does LTE, Licensed wireless, 60GHz, unlicensed wireless, routing, switching, CRM, ...
And dont trust markteting and fanboys. We see Mimosa and Cambium ePMP fall to it's nose with interference where nv2 still work. They dont have a magic bullet. And we soon have 2018 and ePMP is still 11n. We dont buy 11n for a year now ...
I agree, MT is versatile in a lot. We have their routers in our core and they probably will never be replaced. But where we years ago (when tdma became in play) had to make a decision in what hardware line we wher going to follow we'd choose MT in these days since the first UBNT lines where crap to say the least.
The ROS-versatility-range of products-pricing etc. factors made MT a winner and after the initial issues NV2 started to work fine too where others (mainly Ubiquity in my region) where still having issues.
But then MT's wifi evolution sort of stopped where other moved on and new ones entered the market.
How many years have we seen the 'sync' discussions on this forum. Now it finally sort of cautiously arrived it doesn't seem to work. (We can't get it to work at least....)
The many software updates not always brought 'good', sometimes complete disaster even on 'stable' versions.
Wireless management absolutely is not that ergonomic anymore as in the 'old' days where you could fine tune links without loosing the link after each 'enter' or 'accept' of yet again a small edit.
(I mean; If I just edit the comment field in an AP and hit 'enter' all clients disassociate? That was never like that in the old day. In old version you could even swap the order of the 'connect-to' listing without loosing the link of a CPE. Now you only have to touch anything and the link drops......)

We have one eCambium 2000 AP with beam forming and have 5 high demanding clients on it. 50/50Mbps packages for some of them and it always works and I see it regularly been used.
This in a heavy congested spectrum on a 20Mhz channel width. And the links are stable. Try to do the same with a Netmetal and apart from the link been less stable its almost impossible to surpass the 60-70Mbps aggregated throughput with a handful of clients attached. I have done several tests and best I could ever get in 80Mhz wide channel was 90Mbps (no, not a cable limit).

Some back haul links that really needed to have more then 100Mbps aggregated plus lots of spare have been replaced with Airfibres that run with 300 or 400Mbps aggregated stable connections.
With Netmetals on the same links with the same Jirious antennas, same frequency we tried and tried (nv2, nstream, csma 40Mhz, 80Mhz) but never more then 150-160Mbps aggregated. So we tried the Airfibres and are happy with these. Have 3 links running with them.

Then we replaced two other links for Mimosa B5c's and although not as good as the Airfibre's the still outperform the Netmetal and with the channel spit for ul/dl we'd manage to stay away from most sever interference where with a single Netmetal setup this is just impossible.

Last, but not least. In an heavy used by 5Ghz wifi dense urbanisation we had 6 Netmetals/Omnitiks serving some 150 clients but lots of complaints about poor speeds and broken streams. After a year of struggling we decided to try Mimosa. They came finally (first in Spain!) a year after their first promise and we started to use one. Even in 'interop' (=csma wit RTS/CTS) it worked much better then the previous Mikrotiks. We've had the work previously done by two Omnitiks to server 2 x 25-30 clients (=55 clients) by one A5 that served those 55 plus 10 more (=65 clients!) and speeds were back to were we'd wanted them. Lower latency.
I'v done tests and could easy push the aggregated throughput over the 200Mbps levels. Even when in csma mode with some 'n' SXT's still present in a full working AP network (some 30-40Mb aggregated traffic from clients) I could push my test SXT-ac in 40Mhz channel to 60-70-Mbps. When AO was set to 80Mhz (the legacy units still connected in 40Mhz!) my SXT-ac could go to 180Mbps ! And this where adjacent frequecies are 'loud' and the working channel even 'sees' some remote AP's using the same.

Since some weeks we have now two A5's at only 125 meters separation working in full sync with their tdma mode and 40 on the one (44 is still their limit for tdma) and 6 on the other but they all work flawless. 60-80 and 150Mbps including not a problem for their C5's.

Now the Mimosa system has off course better specs then the Mikrotik equivalents, cost quit a bit more too. But MT just haven't an answer to this. And as an operator I have to keep the fiber boys out of my backyard so had to move on.....

I am also using several 60Ghz links from Metrlinq and although not as good as the specs they do a great job. 500Mbps over 400 meters is not an issue.
I say the Mikrotik 60Ghz platform in Milan a year ago and that is only recently fully available. But up to 100 meters only. Not a lot of use for that. Their bigger units promised by then are since fallen quiet...
And now Metrolinq has an triple (60,5 and 2,4Ghz 12dBi Omni with beamforming in each band that can 'pump 10Gb of aggregated traffic! I need that one to serve my 6 60Ghz links leaving one tower with two 5Ghz AP's and a 2,4Ghz hotspot system.
If this was all Mikrotik it means I can throw away 12 Mikrotik units to be replaced by one Ignitenet unit only!

No, Mikrotik has to come up with beter news or I am afraid in a years time you won't see me a lot on this forum more neither....
All true but dont neglect e.g. problems with other gear. We have 3 Metrolinq links running. 60 GHz is good but this equipment has it's own problems. The first batches had to be replaced due to faulty HW. The SW shows some showstoppers now and then and needs to be rebooted. The last update of a V2,5 link makes the remote end reset to factory default. No problem as this is a backup link. But in no way I trust this equipment at current stage. We wait some months before we consider using more of this gear.

There is no Wireless decision for life. Next year you may need 3,5GHz and there you need another vendor. And might be you find your Mimosa quite sluggisch compared to LTU gear which might be much better. And there will be 802.11ax sometimes and may be Atheros makes a chipdesign which makes MT good again.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:55 pm

What LTU gear ?
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:10 pm

What LTU gear ?
This is a MT forum. So I do not want to educate ;-). It is not LTE.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:15 pm

What LTU gear ?
This is a MT forum. So I do not want to educate ;-). It is not LTE.
OK - I suppose U it's a 8 letter word ending in "i"
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:09 am

What LTU gear ?
This is a MT forum. So I do not want to educate ;-). It is not LTE.
Well, several other platforms passed the discussions here including their technology and performances....
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
User avatar
bajodel
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 545
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:30 am
Location: Italy

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:00 pm

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/02/ ... rying.aspx
.."will be rolling out a brand-new technology called LTU this year"..
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:44 pm

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/02/ ... rying.aspx
.."will be rolling out a brand-new technology called LTU this year"..
Typical of a sales promo - but its the festive season and "this year" has only 19 days left, so we won't have long to wait for this new technology :D
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:26 pm

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/02/ ... rying.aspx
.."will be rolling out a brand-new technology called LTU this year"..
Typical of a sales promo - but its the festive season and "this year" has only 19 days left, so we won't have long to wait for this new technology :D
Purchasable via BetaStore in USA as PTP-Product for 2 months now. Late and beta but no paperware.
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:31 am

Ok,

So I have had an actual email discussion with an actual Mikrotik agent. Here is his answer:

Hello,

You can look up in Internet how all the frequency re-use plan works.
The CPE should see only the one of the Synced AP - it can't see the other AP otherwise the connection will not work correctly as there will be collisions.
The best plan to have 4 sectors.
The AP to sync with the other AP that are located back to back on the tower so the CPEs would not see the other AP as it is on the other side of the tower.
Then you can put another AP 90 degrees on different frequency from the other AP and make it back to back to the other AP on the tower.
You can try to repeat that setup putting more such 4 sector combinations on the tower with more frequency spacing so they do not overlap.



So according to this, you can't have sync working on AP's facing the same direction. Which makes the whole idea of sync redundant for me. I mean, in what perfect world are your connections all balanced accross 360 degrees ???!
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:17 pm

Ok,

So I have had an actual email discussion with an actual Mikrotik agent. Here is his answer:

Hello,

You can look up in Internet how all the frequency re-use plan works.
The CPE should see only the one of the Synced AP - it can't see the other AP otherwise the connection will not work correctly as there will be collisions.
The best plan to have 4 sectors.
The AP to sync with the other AP that are located back to back on the tower so the CPEs would not see the other AP as it is on the other side of the tower.
Then you can put another AP 90 degrees on different frequency from the other AP and make it back to back to the other AP on the tower.
You can try to repeat that setup putting more such 4 sector combinations on the tower with more frequency spacing so they do not overlap.



So according to this, you can't have sync working on AP's facing the same direction. Which makes the whole idea of sync redundant for me. I mean, in what perfect world are your connections all balanced accross 360 degrees ???!
1. We tried to do it exactly as prescribed by MT. Tower on a hill. Both sides covered with an sector (and thus in opposite direction). Both sectors are separated by at least 2 meters horizontal and also the steel construction is in between. Ono of the sectors is an SXT-ac with shield. The other a Netmetal on a 'Gold' 60 degrees sector.
Clients on one side of the hill have no way of being able to 'see' clients on the other side. The hill is in-between.
The original setup had separated frequencies on both sectors. We made speed test from both sides and noted the speeds.

After that we picked the best frequency of the two and set both sectors to that one and in full sync according Wiki.
Again we took some clients and did speedtests and noted these.
We already saw the CCQ's dropped on most antenas but worse, the speed to each clients for the test was no more then half. Sometimes even less.

Both sectors both have their own router/radio but in transparant bridge mode. Both are part of the same /28 network and both connect to the same Netonix switch that trunks all AP ports towards one port that has a tower router connected for OSPF, routing etc. Si in Neighbour both sectors and even their clients are visible (by mac only. Clients all have PPP tunnels for authentication towards remote PPPoE server.)

In my opinion this would be the best scenario situation for having two back to back connected sectors working in Mikrotik sync. But it doesn't.....

2. We have another vendor system where we have two Omni directional AP's at only 120 meters apart from eachother and working in full synch (GPS)
We only have to make sure CPE's don't see both in their same working beam. It works fine! Very high MCS rates with high PHY rates.
These have other technology but the sync works....

I think MT has to work harder to get it working. At present it doesn't.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:47 pm

Ok,

So I have had an actual email discussion with an actual Mikrotik agent. Here is his answer:

Hello,

You can look up in Internet how all the frequency re-use plan works.
The CPE should see only the one of the Synced AP - it can't see the other AP otherwise the connection will not work correctly as there will be collisions.
The best plan to have 4 sectors.
The AP to sync with the other AP that are located back to back on the tower so the CPEs would not see the other AP as it is on the other side of the tower.
Then you can put another AP 90 degrees on different frequency from the other AP and make it back to back to the other AP on the tower.
You can try to repeat that setup putting more such 4 sector combinations on the tower with more frequency spacing so they do not overlap.



So according to this, you can't have sync working on AP's facing the same direction. Which makes the whole idea of sync redundant for me. I mean, in what perfect world are your connections all balanced accross 360 degrees ???!
1. We tried to do it exactly as prescribed by MT. Tower on a hill. Both sides covered with an sector (and thus in opposite direction). Both sectors are separated by at least 2 meters horizontal and also the steel construction is in between. Ono of the sectors is an SXT-ac with shield. The other a Netmetal on a 'Gold' 60 degrees sector.
Clients on one side of the hill have no way of being able to 'see' clients on the other side. The hill is in-between.
The original setup had separated frequencies on both sectors. We made speed test from both sides and noted the speeds.

After that we picked the best frequency of the two and set both sectors to that one and in full sync according Wiki.
Again we took some clients and did speedtests and noted these.
We already saw the CCQ's dropped on most antenas but worse, the speed to each clients for the test was no more then half. Sometimes even less.

Both sectors both have their own router/radio but in transparant bridge mode. Both are part of the same /28 network and both connect to the same Netonix switch that trunks all AP ports towards one port that has a tower router connected for OSPF, routing etc. Si in Neighbour both sectors and even their clients are visible (by mac only. Clients all have PPP tunnels for authentication towards remote PPPoE server.)

In my opinion this would be the best scenario situation for having two back to back connected sectors working in Mikrotik sync. But it doesn't.....

2. We have another vendor system where we have two Omni directional AP's at only 120 meters apart from eachother and working in full synch (GPS)
We only have to make sure CPE's don't see both in their same working beam. It works fine! Very high MCS rates with high PHY rates.
These have other technology but the sync works....

I think MT has to work harder to get it working. At present it doesn't.
Without deep knowledge of the chipset features I guess this will never work very good with HW not designed for sync. At least I would expect a hint from MT which exact HW/Chipset they tested/designed this for (I cant believe this works across all Atheros Chips without adaption). Where is the whitepaper describing the test-setup with results? Dont waste your time ...
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:00 pm

Ok,

So I have had an actual email discussion with an actual Mikrotik agent. Here is his answer:

Hello,

You can look up in Internet how all the frequency re-use plan works.
The CPE should see only the one of the Synced AP - it can't see the other AP otherwise the connection will not work correctly as there will be collisions.
The best plan to have 4 sectors.
The AP to sync with the other AP that are located back to back on the tower so the CPEs would not see the other AP as it is on the other side of the tower.
Then you can put another AP 90 degrees on different frequency from the other AP and make it back to back to the other AP on the tower.
You can try to repeat that setup putting more such 4 sector combinations on the tower with more frequency spacing so they do not overlap.
Only by this last line again it seems Mikrotik takes it for granted we users do their tryouts and testing. Old members on this forum that are regularly posting comments and or failures already knew! :lol:
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:06 pm

Oh yes, and by the way, the sync is done wirelessly, not via layer 2 cable....
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:37 pm

Oh yes, and by the way, the sync is done wirelessly, not via layer 2 cable....
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:24 pm

Update from Mikrotik:


Hello,

This is how the wireless sync features are working and there is nothing which could be done to improve the situation.
If you have lot of clients pointing in one direction then the only solution is to use different wireless frequency.


I guess us moving into Mimosa was the right decision in the end.
 
savage
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Contact:

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:24 pm

I guess us moving into Mimosa was the right decision in the end.
+1

Love it how mikrotik pretty much just don't care.
Regards,
Chris
 
2jarek
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Poland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:51 pm

Update from Mikrotik:


Hello,

This is how the wireless sync features are working and there is nothing which could be done to improve the situation.
If you have lot of clients pointing in one direction then the only solution is to use different wireless frequency.


I guess us moving into Mimosa was the right decision in the end.
Man UBNT / Mimosa / Cambium same as mikrotik u cant use sync this way use brain or read UBNT manual. I have meny AirFiber 5x p2p links rly hard use sync sometimes just cant.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:01 pm

Update from Mikrotik:


Hello,

This is how the wireless sync features are working and there is nothing which could be done to improve the situation.
If you have lot of clients pointing in one direction then the only solution is to use different wireless frequency.


I guess us moving into Mimosa was the right decision in the end.
Man UBNT / Mimosa / Cambium same as mikrotik u cant use sync this way use brain or read UBNT manual. I have meny AirFiber 5x p2p links rly hard use sync sometimes just cant.
Only part of the truth. Even in the same direction sync helps as it does reduce near channel interference. Of course you cant use the same channel but as wifi-radios are bleeding quite much into the neighboring channels (some vendors take measures to reduce this) you have to separate frequencies quite far depending on TX-Power, channelwidth and antennapattern.
 
letabawireless
Frequent Visitor
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:42 am

To me, the whole point would be to manage the airtime, so multiple frequencies, but a big boss decided who gets which time slot overall.
 
MichaelDP
just joined
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:11 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:38 pm

Hi.

I'm new here, and probably in the wrong place, but if someone could please point me in the right direction i'd really appreciate that.
This is my problem:

I set up 2 Mikrotik NetBox's they work perfectly fine, i have stable good connection. I need to add routing to them so i can go from 192.168.6.x range to 192.168.0.x range.
and i've spent 3 days on-line looking for an way to do that, and found nothing that seems relevant. They have Version 6.40.5

Thank you.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:21 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:44 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
I am running 3 or 4 OmniTik 5 ac now, all on 6.40.5 and fw 3.41 and have no issues...
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:11 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
I am running 3 or 4 OmniTik 5 ac now, all on 6.40.5 and fw 3.41 and have no issues...
This one had no issues, too. Just enabled access-list and boooom. Looks like the radar event happens as soon as the first cpe connects. Spectrum is quite free there.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:26 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
Is that occurring with wireless set to frequency-mode=superchannel ??
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:47 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
Is that occurring with wireless set to frequency-mode=superchannel ??
Did not test this. Tried to get people online asap.
 
n21roadie
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1889
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:36 pm
Location: Limerick,Ireland

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 2:18 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
Is that occurring with wireless set to frequency-mode=superchannel ??
Did not test this. Tried to get people online asap.
That setting is the quickest way to get clients registered??
 
ste
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:21 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 2:25 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
Is that occurring with wireless set to frequency-mode=superchannel ??
Did not test this. Tried to get people online asap.
That setting is the quickest way to get clients registered??
Ah. Ok. Tested. I thought this needs a licence I have to obtain.
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:00 pm

So another one:

Had to change a wireless setting on an OmnitikAC running 6.40.4 with nv2.
Interface goes into radar detect and finds radar on every single frequency in 5GHz. (Guess what. There is no radar).
Upgrade to 6.40.6 does not help. Downgrade to the latest SW without radar detect = not allowed by ROS.

Disable nv2 for plain 802.11 -> no radar detect

So all connected again. But one station disconnects with extensive data loss
Is that occurring with wireless set to frequency-mode=superchannel ??
Did not test this. Tried to get people online asap.
That setting is the quickest way to get clients registered??
Ah. Ok. Tested. I thought this needs a licence I have to obtain.
Wel, let's put it this way; If everybody in the world is going to work according regulatory domain 802.11 based WISP industry would be marginal.... ;-)
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
steen
Member
Member
Posts: 469
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 2:15 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:33 am

Hello Folks!

Access point Radar detect in real life:
10:14:55 system,info device changed by admin <---- disable wlan1
10:14:57 system,info device changed by admin <---- enable wlan1
10:15:02 wireless,debug wlan1: must select channel
10:15:02 wireless,debug wlan1: selected channel 5320000
10:15:02 wireless,debug wlan1: search for radars on 5320000
10:16:02 wireless,debug wlan1: no radar detetected, start network

It took about one minute to go on-line.
Maybe I was lucky or something, but this one minute per wireless device has repeated itself all the time when we restart basestations.

But It seems like radar detect is made in sequence for the wlan adapters connected to your base stations.
So it took something like little more than one minute each.
I don't know if it is in parallel on all wlan devices to save tim, at least the log file does not tell that story.
 
xrayd
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Mar 23, 2018 1:23 pm

@WirelessRudy
Please check mikrotik Sync again with NV2 improvements version 6.42.rc49!!!
I'm waiting for your report

Thanks!
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Mar 23, 2018 3:17 pm

@WirelessRudy
Please check mikrotik Sync again with NV2 improvements version 6.42.rc49!!!
I'm waiting for your report

Thanks!
Well, I am not really enthusiastic in putting a rc version on a production network..... The more since I see that NV2 in PtP setup is having serious problems lately with arm devices.

Just last night we had a link replaced from a QRT-'n' to a Netmetal towards a LHG-XL-ac and Netmetal. We managed to improve the signal from a high -50's to low -50's (better alignment, newer hardware) and by having higher cpu and 802.11-ac on both ends we were expecting higher througputs.
I spend several hours in troubleshooting but in NV2 the link was unstable and best we could transport was 30Mbps. I finally tried nstream and went up to 60-80mbps and as last just set the link to plain 802.11 ac and we run almost 200Mbps!
Excatly the same happened with another link some days ago.

My conclusion: If a link has one arm device in it (Netmet to Netmetal or SXT-HG-ac to SXT-HG-ac or two QRT-ad's) don't seem to have issues. But put a LHG unit on one end and you'll have problems... (even 6.41.3 is not good. Only 6.42rc 28+ seem to work on LHG's. Everything lower is not working for NV2)

I can try overnight on two mipsbe AP's if I am confident I can roll back......
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
xrayd
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:51 pm

@WirelessRudy
You have news?
 
WirelessRudy
Forum Guru
Forum Guru
Topic Author
Posts: 3089
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Spain

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:29 am

@WirelessRudy
You have news?
I made several posts in several wireless related treads this week. Search for them and you'll find a lot of info.
Show your appreciation of this post by giving me Karma! Thanks.

Rudy R. Puister

WISP operator based on MT routerboard & ROS.
 
xrayd
newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: NV2 sync issues and solutions

Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:35 pm

posts for SYNC?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests