Ditto to the above.
We are 90% 2.4 GHz ePMP to supplement our network, would be great to have some of the newer features AP from the 2000/3000 series. Chris' list is a great summary.
1 Like
@Chris_Bay wrote:
I do understand there is that major problem of no 2.4 ac chips out there... atleast that i know of. Hopefully some magic souce is hiding in your lab over there ;)
The main problem is is that there is no 2.4 profile for 802.11ac... and the only one that's adapted 802.11ac for 2.4, is Ubiquiti. This is a very expensive thing to develope as you can't leverage a cheap off the shelf SOC... it has to be custom silicon... that is unless UBNT is back to using hacks like up/down converters... but I think they've learned their lesson and they actually designed some custom 802.11ac 2.4 silicon.
Hi all,
Thanks for your feedback! No promises but you've been heard.
Thanks,
Dmitry
4 Likes
@Eric Ozrelic wrote:
@Chris_Bay wrote:
I do understand there is that major problem of no 2.4 ac chips out there... atleast that i know of. Hopefully some magic souce is hiding in your lab over there ;)The main problem is is that there is no 2.4 profile for 802.11ac... and the only one that's adapted 802.11ac for 2.4, is Ubiquiti. This is a very expensive thing to develope as you can't leverage a cheap off the shelf SOC... it has to be custom silicon... that is unless UBNT is back to using hacks like up/down converters... but I think they've learned their lesson and they actually designed some custom 802.11ac 2.4 silicon.
No, Ubiquiti 2.4ghz AC isn't a custom chipset or up/down converted... off the shelf 2.4ghz AC chipsets do exist... it's not part of the AC standard, but they do exist.
That said, I don't see any of the actual 11AC specific features as being very useful in 2.4ghz... instances where you're going to be able to make 256qam work on a 2.4ghz link are pretty rare, and 80mhz channels aren't even possible, so what does that leave you that can't be done with 11N? I think the biggest improvement in the Ubiquiti 2.4 AC gear comes from the ePMP2000 type filtering that they have. There's also some other nice stuff like the new spectrum analylizer, and they also fixed some of the deficiencies in the old ubnt gear (which for the most part ePMP already solved a long time ago, on the 11n chipset). I think it would be more practical for Cambium to just develop something more like a 2.4ghz ePMP 2000 than to bother trying to do AC in 2.4ghz.
2 Likes
The one thing that might really help is a beam-steering/null-forming antenna, like the ePMP 2000 has on 5 GHz. 2.4 GHz is on the noisy side (at best), so anything to deal with noise would help.
And for good measure, when you homologate it in the US, include 10 MHz-wide channels and try to get it approved as far north as 2472 (not a WiFi channel), to help avoid noise. Or even higher if narrow enough. Yes, that's getting pretty close to a protected band... but a lot of folks freaked when UBNT lost 2464, which they had originally included but hadn't bothered to type approve.
If I remember right, ePMP already will go up to 2467mhz on a 10mhz channel (and down to 2407), so there's already a pretty decent advantage over UBNT there.
I'd say just a epmp 3000 4x4 connectorized that we can connect our own sectors to would suffice. That would effectively double download capacity on existing systems using the 64qam on the epmp1000 CPEs out there. Getting 150mbps downlink on a 20mhz channel in 2.4ghz would make a world of difference.
1 Like
any future in 2.4 would be amazing... 4x4 at just qam64 would be great... anything to improve gps re-use. IE losing the need for front to back to add more APs. probably technically not possible, but still a wish.
75% of our subscriber base is 2.4 and as it sits we've begun converting to FTTH to improve those subscribers... definitely not cheap, but to retain those subscribers, thats all we have. some of them are 5ghz omnis on utility poles and keeping them on epmp. others are getting fiber directly to them. something like a 3k in 2.4 with 20mhz channels, and reuse only limited to SNR would definitely shift our direction.
1 Like
@Mathew Howard wrote:
I think the biggest improvement in the Ubiquiti 2.4 AC gear comes from the ePMP2000 type filtering that they have. There's also some other nice stuff like the new spectrum analylizer, and they also fixed some of the deficiencies in the old ubnt gear (which for the most part ePMP already solved a long time ago, on the 11n chipset). I think it would be more practical for Cambium to just develop something more like a 2.4ghz ePMP 2000 than to bother trying to do AC in 2.4ghz.
For my 2c - there are Wish-Lists of things which are doable, and those which are not very doable. Cambium has said that the 2.4Ghz products are a difficult business plan - but that's a chicken-and-egg deal too, since more development in the 2.4Ghz line would lead more of their customer's to expand with 2.4Ghz ePMP.
For me - Mathew Howard has nailed it. Even if ALL they added was just to the AP side, and just added a Dynamic Filter like the ePMP2000.
Yes, Beam Steering Antenna would be great, and AC features would be great - but these would be difficult to create, and (in the case of AC) would require new chips to be built probably. However, a Dynamic Filter CAN work, and it does give great benefit. There are users on these forums who have installed physical filters when encountering nearly off-channel interference, with great results.
For me - Dynamic Filtering in 2.4Ghz this is not a matter of engineering impossibilities for Cambium, it's a matter of will. I've been reasonably pleased with the results so far from our ePMP 2.4Ghz links, but at the tower side, interference mitigation at the AP site would be a very welcome upgrade.
BESIDES, with 802.11ax coming at some point, I would have to think that Cambium will need to include a 2.4Ghz Dynamic Filter then anyway... so build it now and create an ePMP2000 (or call it ePMP1100 or something) AP in 2.4Ghz with filtering - OK?
The main thing i would like to see on the 2ghz product is more overall throughput. Our best panels are able to move about 55mbps at peak. If were were able to get it to even 100mbps it would be worth changing.
Obviously more would be even better.
@ninedd wrote:
@Mathew Howard wrote:
I think the biggest improvement in the Ubiquiti 2.4 AC gear comes from the ePMP2000 type filtering that they have. There's also some other nice stuff like the new spectrum analylizer, and they also fixed some of the deficiencies in the old ubnt gear (which for the most part ePMP already solved a long time ago, on the 11n chipset). I think it would be more practical for Cambium to just develop something more like a 2.4ghz ePMP 2000 than to bother trying to do AC in 2.4ghz.For my 2c - there are Wish-Lists of things which are doable, and those which are not very doable. Cambium has said that the 2.4Ghz products are a difficult business plan - but that's a chicken-and-egg deal too, since more development in the 2.4Ghz line would lead more of their customer's to expand with 2.4Ghz ePMP.
For me - Mathew Howard has nailed it. Even if ALL they added was just to the AP side, and just added a Dynamic Filter like the ePMP2000.
Yes, Beam Steering Antenna would be great, and AC features would be great - but these would be difficult to create, and (in the case of AC) would require new chips to be built probably. However, a Dynamic Filter CAN work, and it does give great benefit. There are users on these forums who have installed physical filters when encountering nearly off-channel interference, with great results.
For me - Dynamic Filtering in 2.4Ghz this is not a matter of engineering impossibilities for Cambium, it's a matter of will. I've been reasonably pleased with the results so far from our ePMP 2.4Ghz links, but at the tower side, interference mitigation at the AP site would be a very welcome upgrade.
BESIDES, with 802.11ax coming at some point, I would have to think that Cambium will need to include a 2.4Ghz Dynamic Filter then anyway... so build it now and create an ePMP2000 (or call it ePMP1100 or something) AP in 2.4Ghz with filtering - OK?
So I've asked Cambium engineers about why they don't use dynamic filtering on more products, like the PMP450i 900MHz, or PMP/ePMP 2.4 products and what it comes down to is that the bands are too small to effectively use this kind of filter. For instance, they've done a lot of evaluation with the dynamic filtering with the PMP450i 900MHz before they brought it to market and found that it actually degraded performance, along with increasing cost.
I think a BSA might be beneficial for 2.4GHz, but you also have to realize that the size of the panel would be huge for 2.4GHz to get any gain over the sector. This obviously makes the panel more expensive and adds to tower rental fees.
AC would be nice as well, except that AC isn't natively supported. Ubiquiti had to build a custom AC chipset for 2.4GHz and I guarentee you this was not cheap to do.
If I was Cambium I'd wait until 802.11ax comes out, which has native 2.4GHz support and see how well it works and then maybe try to adopt that as the next generation of Cambium 2.4 and 5GHz products. That's going to be the cheapest, highest performance route IMHO.
@Eric Ozrelic wrote:
@nineddSo I've asked Cambium engineers about why they don't use dynamic filtering on more products, like the PMP450i 900MHz, or PMP/ePMP 2.4 products and what it comes down to is that the bands are too small to effectively use this kind of filter.
Yes, I've heard them say the same thing. However, other brands have dynamic filtering in 2.4Ghz and they get substantial benefits from the filters.
Also, in the threads below - adding external filters to ePMP 2.4Ghz AP's has a dramatic performance improvement in interference on nearby channels. So - that's a solution I guess, but in order to change channels, we then need to drive and climb and physically change filters. :(
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-3000-2000-and-1000/Uplink-interference-from-a-cell-carrier-2-4/m-p/77166
So, it's disapointing not to have a 2.4Ghz AP with filtering available.
To my knowledge Ubiquiti is the only one that's using an airPRISM aka dynamic aka super-het filter on a 2.4 radio... but, that does get me thinking... I find it interesting that Cambium has included an LTE/2.5GHz filter on some of their E series WiFi AP's. There are multiple instances where we could have used this LTE/2.5GHz filter as we have a 2.5 license and sometimes collocate ePMP 2.4 alongside LTE. We've had to buy expensive, custom made physical filters for some of our LTE to keep it from bleeding over to 2.4GHz.
There was recently a very long FaceBook thread in the WISP Talk forum IIRC and people were debating and sharing stories about UBNT AC vs. ePMP for 2.4 and IIRC the majority of posters had had more positive real world results with ePMP (myself included) ALTHOUGH (full disclosure) when I initially tried UBNT AC 2.4 in the field, it's poor performance could have been due to early firmware issues and lack of working GPS sync and trying to use mixed mode... all of this maybe have been resolved as the platform matured along with a ton of work on their TDD implementation and the introduction of ReSE. That being said, we use ePMP 2.4 and GPS sync in the field everywhere and love it and haven't found enough compelling reasons to move over to UBNT's 2.4 radios.
1 Like
Definitely would love to see some filtering added. MU-MIMO as well. From a radio perspective, I am not sure AC MU-MIMO (AX seems to be a different beast breaking a 20Mhz channel down to 2Mhz channels so I will not got there) would be beneficial at 2.4Ghz. At least not for frequency resuse. The current antennas on the market do not have the F/B ratio to support the higher modulation rates.
We have customers a mile from our towers (4 90 degree AP's using ABAB GPS frequency reuse) with signals in the 50's only able to achieve an MCS 13-14 because the sector behind it is being seen by that customer only 20-24db down.These customers are in the middle of no where with no interference (besides from the other sector on same frequency). AC would do nothing for these customers, they would still be at an MCS 13-14 with an AC system due to a CINR of 20-24db because of antenna's F/B ratio being below 28db at the angle they are hitting the AP. High F/B just is not as obtainable at 2.4Ghz as it is a 5Ghz due to the way radio waves work at lower frequencies.
For N radios (current ePMP line), they need a CINR of 28db to reach MCS 15 on a 20Mhz channel. In a AC system for MCS 8 (if they follow the current CINR levels of the N radios) you would need a CINR of 32 and for MCS 9 a CINR of 34. Current sector antennas on the market, at least that I know of, do not have the F/B ratio to allow this kind of CINR using ABAB frequency reuse.If you are using 60 degree antennas with ABCABC freq reuse, you have a better shot of reaching MCS 8, but seriously doubt you would ever see MCS 9. -If- you mount these on the 4 sides of a building, or around the catwalk of a water tower, then you have enough of a physical barrier to reach a CINR that would allow MCS 9, but not on a standard tower installation.
With that said, I would still take a MU-MIMO AC system at 2.4Ghz for the 2x increase in dl throughput over "N" radios. I would just know not to expect to see MCS 8 or MCS 9 while mounted on a standard "radio" tower using GPS freq reuse. At the same time, this would become a headache for Cambium as WISP owners would constantly be complaining that they never reach MCS 8/9.
1 Like
@CWB wrote:Definitely would love to see some filtering added.
That's what I think. I'm disappointed that there is no 2.4Ghz with filtering. Self-interference is the worst enemy - which Cambium knows (ie, they developed the ePMP2000). I also don't see any real need to create a custom AC chipset implementation in 2.4Ghz - but I would pay for dynamic filtering, and I think dynamic filtering would pay dividends.
I know that Cambium says there isn't a benefit to filtering in 2.4 Ghz with only 100 Mhz of total spectrum. BUT - I would counter that they also state that filtering allows AP's to be only 5Mhz apart... so it would seem that there is a HUGE benefit and more to the point - a HUGE need for filtering in 2.4 with only 100 Mhz of spectrum. PLUS - people who are installing physical filters are seeing dramatic benefits by the reports they are posting here. If that's the case, then it IS possible to filter in 2.4Ghz and to dramatically reduce interference.
1 Like
Hi all. I’d just like to bump this thread here in Aug 2021, and to encourage anyone interested in 2.4Ghz to comment on any/all 2.4ghz threads. Cambium has said that they judge things based on their perception of our interest, so we need to let them know that we are interested. ESPECIALLY with the 802.11ax chipset products coming, which DOES have a 2.4Ghz chipset available. Cambium even makes dual-band products such as the XV2-2 and the XV3-8 which are AX chipset 5ghz / 2.4Ghz, and with features such as 4x4 in 2.4Ghz and 8x8 in 5ghz. It would be brilliant to see this find it’s way into the 4000 series - a dual band AP and 4x4/8x8 sector would be a monster product. Of course, if the 2.4Ghz products are separate products with separate antennas, that’s OK too. Or if the AP’s are just AP’s and we have to source our own antennas, that’s also also OK… just please please give us some AX in 2.4Ghz>
Yes please cambium! I’ve gpt hundreds of 2.4 aps active and will forklift them all and pay a premium price. 2.4 needs an upgrade path badly.
We’ve been shifting away from wireless over the nlos in our situation and the low bandwidth. A solid 4x4 qam 256plus 2.4 product would be a life saver. Well aware noise is a huge risk in 2.4, but for us, there isn’t much. We’re the only provider in our areas for now. Our network is ¾ 2.4 epmp, ¼ 5ghz. Well what’s left on wireless. The hybrid fiber wireless model is our goal. 100 mbps plus is our goal, 300 would be great.
1 Like
Our 2.4Ghz deployments are rural farms and acreages, and yes - we’re typically mainly only dealing that that customer’s own router as the primary noise culprit. Even if we can only get 1/4 the speed that our 5ghz customers get, that’s still better than telling them “we can’t reach you” and having them go to the competition. And it’s still better than buying UBNT 2.4Ghz gear… help, help - please don’t make me do that.
For example - this client is on 2.4Ghz at 10 Mhz wide, and he just doesn’t work in 5Ghz through the trees. No feasible way to get over the trees, no feasible way to get around the trees - or to run ethernet/fiber. Plop in a 2.4Ghz ePMP and he’s got an acceptable/workable solution for where he is, 6.95 km away, through his neighbor’s trees, even with 2.4ghz noise. If this was Cambium AX, we’d have more options in our arsenal - more tools in the tool kit.
Downlink 30.501 Mbps
Uplink 5.229 Mbps
Aggregate 35.73 Mbps
1 Like
The bulk of our customers are 2.4 and like the others have noted, we are rural and there are trees, trees, and yet more trees. We rely heavily on 2.4 to reach customers out to 5 miles and also use 900 for those really hard to reach customers. We would love to have an AC based 2.4 platform that doesn’t require selling blood every day to afford.
2 Likes
YES. AC or better yet, AX based.
For a sizeable chunk of our clients, there is no practical way to get over or around the trees. Most of them have at least a row or two of Spruce around the yardsite, and they are 60-80’ tall. We can often get good signals from the roof with 2.4Ghz, and next to nothing in 5Ghz.
1 Like