Service providers with an experimental license from the FCC will be able to gain experience in planning and assessing the performance of 6 GHz solutions. What use cases do you see as the most popular for the new frequency, and what will be the impact on your business?
2 Likes
Learn more about ePMP 4600 at 6 GHz.
3 Likes
Check out today’s press release at Cambium Networks Delivers Industry’s First 6 GHz Full Spectrum Solution Expanding Fixed Wireless Broadband with Gbps Subscriber Speeds to Cost Effectively Bridge the Digital Divide - Cambium Networks
4 Likes
ePMP 4600 6 GHz fixed wireless access points ready for shipment.
9 Likes
Olá tudo bem, quando chegará no Brasil tem previsão? algum site pra venda.
Hello, all right, when will it arrive in Brazil, do you have a forecast? any site for sale.
Hello. I know that some are available under experimental licenses in Brazil. Check out this press releaseu. Anatel may be able to help with some equipment before the 6 GHz frequency band is generally available.
Let me know if you need some assistance.
Ray
2 Likes
Obrigado Ray, no aguardo das novidades da Cambium, tenho um pequeno provedor, o link está quebrado.
checks the prices Wow !
Is it going to “require” cnMaestro ?
I would guess it will for the AFC component, which will be required for 6Ghz operation.
Is been quite a few years ago but we tested some white space gear back in the day that used AFC and I don’t remember having to set up any special server/software and if I did it didn’t phone home with info that wasn’t specifically required for AFC to work or I would not have allowed it on our network.
1 Like
What happened to the 8x8 MUMIMO support that was on the roadmap for EPMP4K series products?
So this thread is regarding e4k @ 6GHz. The 8x8 MU-MIMO AP is only for the e4k 5GHz line. There are both integrated (released first) and connectorized models (later release) for 5GHz. These should be available at distributors soon.
1 Like
Is there an 8x8 on the roadmap for the 6GHz line?
No. Only 4x4… BUT… the 4600 line supports up to 160MHz channel widths and up to 4096QAM.
3 Likes
I think their logic was that in 5ghz (with more noise) there was more benefits of 1024qam and 8x8 - and in 6 GHz (with less noise), there was more benefit in achievingng 4096qam and 4x4
1 Like
Yep, right on those points. As to the 4500 8x8, we’re finding even in noisy environments using a 40MHz channel width, that we have a surprising amount of traffic that is moving at full 1024QAM modulation. This is from an AP’s perspective with 6 SM’s connected. ALSO, IIRC, broadcast + multicast traffic is sent at SS MCS1.
Ub!q#!ti went the high QAM route at 5GHz and it just limits distance which is a huge factor in why we didn’t upgrade our Airmax gear to LTU and instead started switching over to more expensive ePMP3000. 6GHz has lower EIRP so distances to get high modulation rates will be far less than 5GHz plus not every country or location can access wide channels at useful EIRP levels.
8x8 MUMIMO at 40MHz with 256QAM gives us 4 end users at ~300Mbps physical rate so even if TCP rate is half of that it’s still a better path to take IMHO.
I personally can’t wait for the ePMP4500 (8x8 and OFDMA being main reasons). I note it goes up to 6135MHz. Is there anywhere we can see gain of the sectors and subscriber radios at the higher frequencies?
Whilst I’d congratulate Cambium on getting the 4600 to market so quickly, if Cambium perhaps indicated 8x8 MUMIMO @6GHz was on the future development path (even a few years away) and likely to be compatible with legacy subscriber radios then WISPs would be more likely to choose ePMP4600 than say, a MIMOSA A6 (assuming the latter isn’t plagued by poor firmware and other issues)?
2 Likes
8x8 MUMIMO at 40MHz with 256QAM gives us 4 end users at ~300Mbps physical rate
you don’t need 8x8 MUMIMO to achieve that.
40MHz/256QAM (8x) has been doing 389Mbps physical rate 10 years ago with --ANY-- 802.11ac device.
The real transfer (tcp, big files) is almost always channel size times modulation rate, so 40MHz times 8x multiplier in this case would be around 320Mbit/s (320MBps) REAL throughput. Of course, that throughput is in interference free environment etc (but interference doesn’t affect datarates at all, almost).
Look here : Ask about Force 400 30 db antenna
Force 400 devices which are not 8x8 and : “My recommendation would be to get the signals on all chains into the 50’s and then you’ll be able to hit the DS11 modulations, and it will SCREAM. We get about 465 Mbit in a 40Mhz wide channel with ours – but the key is to get the signals and SNR were they need to be.”
they have 465Mbit in the 40MHz channel compared to 389Mbit mentioned by me because Force400 are 802.11ax devices - I was talking about 802.11ac. DECADE old technology.
With superhyper 8x8 16x16 MUMIMO devices, I would expect REAL throughput to be around 800 Mbit/s for multiple clients in parallel…
I think one interesting use case for the 4600 is to use alongside, or in place of cnWave 60GHz for PtMP distribution across a small, densely packed community. 4600 has much better nNLOS and weather performance compared to 60GHz. The small 4x4 AP antenna (when compared to the 4500 8x8 panel, which is about as big as a 450m 5GHz) can be deployed surreptitiously, and the 160MHz channel widths will allow for many 100+mbps connections, or low count gigabit delivery, or a mix of the two. The lower EIRP is much less of an issue when the shots are less than 1mi, and 4096QAM should be easily achievable.
We’ve been testing 4600 for awhile now, and I’d say that the sweet spot is 3mi or less, but we do have some shots out to 5mi @ -75 RSSI that are doing quite well, I just don’t think it would be a good idea to load up an AP with a lot of these poor RSSI shots.
2 Likes