Me too. We are also very interested in deploying some of these links but would like to hear a success story first.Tbird,
please let us know if there is some more info about Strix Nitros.
Regards
Looks like you no longer believe in 802.11n from MT. As we are bound toMe too. We are also very interested in deploying some of these links but would like to hear a success story first.Tbird,
please let us know if there is some more info about Strix Nitros.
Regards
We're ordering test-equipment *now* and have a time frame of 2-3 months to install.I already have docs and files on something you will definitely like, but it's not time yet
Hi Normis,I know that everyone needs everything like yesterday, but that's not how it works. 802.11n had multiple Draft standards that are not compatible with each other, and we would like to support also the older draft clients, in addition to also the new draft clients, so this makes things complicated. Did you know that there are already 9 draft standards of this unfinished thing, and not all of them work together?
We're getting our Traffic from a housing center. At the moment 2x100MBit FDX. No problem getting 1GBit (justThe trouble is though that access to greater backhaul is becoming easier and cheaper
Every day. Faster, cheaper, ...and the demands of the client for more bandwidth more frequent.
We would want to stick with MT. We've nearly dropped this old Cisco Aironets. We've a mountain ofYou have to roll your eyes when someone who lives miles from the nearest town tries to compare the WISP offering with what their friend has who lives in the city!
9.99$ for 20Mbps - that's what I want here!
WISPs worried about fibre and copper nets creeping further and further into their zones should have reinvested in the same a long time ago.
But nevertheless, maybe MT should choose a draft, select some hardware and roll out some MIMO functionality even if it does go against the grain.
Fowards and backwards compatiblity can surely come at a later date?
I suspect many people want the extra "through the air" capacity but are unable to afford the Alvarion and Motorola price tags or don't really want to introduce other brands into 100% MT networks.
Yes. We need 100MBit FDX now to get the traffic out of the door. Next year we need 200MBit at theWe need 100Mbps full duplex now and so what we are doing is choosing a provider that can offer this.
A few months down the road when MT are doing the same we know that we can always return and try out their solution.
I don't want to make advertise on this forum so if you really want N, don't wait for MT.
There are software defined expensive radios out there which definitifly get moreFiretide just released an N mesh node. They make no mention of range, noise immunity, or anything other than they achieve "400Mbps".
Of course they had to use a pre N guess at final protocol.
In looking for benchmark testing on N there is just nothing. The only test that seemed even remotely applicable was one from Tom's Guide http://www.tomsguide.com/us/draft-11n-r ... w-724.html . Given that nothing has really changed since this article was written.
N certainly has some value in outdoor wireless, particularly if you can leverage MIMO and beamforming in point to multipoint with lots of changing multipath. But channel bonding is pretty much useless, and as pointed out, the marginal improvement in throughput over standard OFDM operation for outdoor applications is hardly worth the effort.
Read the article...
Dude...did you not read any of these posts...You need to upgrade to ROS 4b3 to support mimo.i have Mikrotik ROS 3.20 on RB600A. I plug the SR71-15 in and... nothing.
Upgraded to ROS 3.27... nothing
I suggest this one:Reseated card... nothing
Setup other RB600A with ROS 4.0 beta 3 and reseated card... nothing
So, I have a few choices.
I don't agree with that. I find that even in weak signal situations, turbo is sometimes better than regular. You won't know until you try in each situation."Turbo N" sucks just like "Turbo A" at longer distances unless there is a clean LOS between the two points.
I'm open to any info about how you get turbo to work better than regular, maybe i'm missing something? Maybe i should raise my noise floor levels? I would really appreciate any useful information. Thanks!I don't agree with that. I find that even in weak signal situations, turbo is sometimes better than regular. You won't know until you try in each situation.