I need qos to work on the f425. I have the need to ensure my voip packets always make it across, even when the link is cranking. I do this on the e3k by honouring dscp46 at SM and AP - works beautifully.
The techs told me a year ago this was coming but I can’t wait any longer so, I want to macguyver it somehow. There’s a qos tab where I can choose predetermined services to prioritise. How can I ‘hack’ this to work for me?
I was thinking if these were based on dscp it would be easy for me to sort, so they won’t be. My guess is it’s done on domain names or IP’s, or some L7 stuff.
Can anyone think of a way to trick my voip packets into masquerading as something that would get the vip treatment across these F452 links? It depends on how these priorities are setup in the firmware - any ideas?
Why does it feel like more and more manufactures are forcing the end users to be beta testers of new products? Hardware is getting released with crippled software that is missing software components available in previous generations. The Robust QoS options in previous generations of ePMP is why we went with Cambium over Ubiquiti as we are a VoIP provider as well as a WISP. There is absolutely no way I would deploy a product lacking QoS. With that being said, what other features is the 4x series missing? Is MIR available? What about vlan tagging the data port and management VLANs?
You have always a choice between buying the previous generation of the product with all the features delivered or burying the latest generation with increased throughput and new hardware capabilities, but at the same time with some missing features.
There is no magic there and time is needed to bring all the features to the new hardware, new chipset.
It’s not as easy as copy paste.
VLANs are already in place and MIR is coming shortly.
I’ve been openly (and oftenly) critical of Cambium for a few certain things, but on this I think they are doing absolutely the correct thing. They offer the new generation of hardware as soon as it’s available and functional - being forthcoming about any not-yet-supported features, and anyone who wants early-access can get the new generation, and use it with it’s current state of features, OR they can choose to buy the previous generation and get a more mature set of features. You have the choice.
They basically did the identical thing with the Force 300’s as they are doing with the F400 at first too… when the 300-25 were very first offered, they were Point-to-Point only (as were the Force 425’s at first) and they were very functional for that. We have some Force 400c that are SCREAMING good as Backhaul links for… well over a year already. I for one wouldn’t want them to hold that hardware back, because there is some firmware features still in the works.
Anyway, with the Force 300-25, they were first PTP only, then they were PtMP but ‘greenfield’ only with 3000 AP’s, and then they added Forward/Backwards compatibility and TDD and QOS and VLan and all the features we have today.
The 4000/400 series is the same… at first, PTP only, and then Cambium developed PtMP with 4000 series AP to 4000 series SM’s, and just now the TDD/GPS & then Forward/Backward compatibility are emerging.
That’s perfectly understandable - the good news then is that you can still use the fully featured 3000 with Force 300’s until those features are in the 4000 series.
Unfortunately ePMP 3000 has turned out to be a bit of a trash product and if you read the forums I’m not the only one that thinks that. Given the choice I’d much rather deploy ePMP 2000 however then you are speed crippled because they are N based.
You are the only person I have seen to prefer the e2k AP over the e3k AP. And this is considering that the same SMs for the e2k are the same as the e1k generation. The e3k when properly setup with good quality antennas out performs the e2k hands down.
It’s pretty well documented on the forums that latency goes pretty wonky when you start to load more than 9 F300 SM’s onto one ePMP3000 Sector. Here’s one thread as an example. On the one tower I went from ePMP1000 with F200 to ePMP3000 with F300 the latency took a major dump. Every tower I run ePMP2000 with F200 the latency is much more stable and latency kills voice traffic.
Latency can kill voice but there is more to that statement, i should know since I use to run quite a few vonage over Xplornet viasat 1 and hughesnet satellite links. Average latency was 1200ms and we even had t.35 fax working. Buffering (buffer bloat), packets per second capacity and jitter (how wildly latency shifts) are more important factors and the e3k DID have issues until the 4.6.1/4.6.2 firmware.
Regardless of the AP and its generation, if the SM signal/snr are all over the map and you are not keeping the AP at a stable MCS rate, the AP will have latency issues as it is constantly switching MCS modes to service SMs.
Heh. A perfect example of this is Elevate. They billed it as bringing over your existing UBNT hardware into the ePMP ecosystem with all the features of the Cambium software. The reality was that most N based UBNT radios had processors to weak to run Elevate and the end result was they discontinued the program completely because it didn’t work reliably unless you replaced the Nanos with Rockets but at that point why not just put in a Force 200? It never should have made it to retail.
We started with UBNT and after we outgrew it we moved completely to ePMP 1000 and then 2000 and it’s been a dream compared to the old generation AirMax gear. But then ePMP3000 came out which left a lot to be desired. I remember having to wait for months and months for beamform antenna support to be added to the ePMP3000 radios. And I’m pretty sure we had to do a tower climb to reverse the the SMA cables for the beamform antennas once the firmware actually supported them because what was printed on the equipment was backwards. Since then we’ve either stayed on ePMP 2000 or done some small Airmax deployments with Prism Stations where VoIP isn’t as much of a concern. I definitely think UBNT was better for the AC generation of gear. I really hope that Cambium puts out a better offering for the AX generation.
You have a misconception regarding Elevate, it wasnt the ubnt hardware that was the problem, it was a legal issue that cause UBNT hardware to be dropped from the program. Mimosa hardware was added quite regularly until about mid last year.
For the record, we had quite a bit of UBNT hardware at one time and used Elevate to buy us time to swap out radios. Worked near flawlessly for us.
You are correct that Elevate does not work with AC or AX based hardware, it never was supposed to and Cambium only kept Elevate in the e3k APs as part of their ongoing standard of backward compatability.
We tried the e2k APs and had nothing but troubles. We finally abandoned that generation around fw4.2 as e3k was shaping up nicely and since we dont use the BFA, didnt have issues there. We have been using the e3kL and f300csm for ptp links since they came out and though we had to wait for tdd-ptp for syncd links they have been very reliable, wish they had sync over power rather than built in GPS though.
The beamforming antenna has been a nightmare for everyone including Cambium. This is cellular technology that has been attempted to bring to the WISP level and though it is a good technology, it does take a lot of resources to make work properly, resources that Cambium chooses to put into other things like firmware fixes, stability and features that we the community ask for like full IPv6 implementation etc.
We use a few different manufacturers for AC based equipment but do favor cambium as it is the most stable in out application and network design/operation with mimosa a close second. UBNT does have a good product for the price but they are RF noisy and do not like noise themselves. UBNT does have a nice and affordablely cheap 11ghz option which one is hard pressed to ignore.
So far in my testing the Cambium AX gear is better, though is lagging with features but is catching up. UBNT has the most features but they seem to be half heartedly implemented or lack all of the functionality, this is typical of UBNT though. The 5ghz equipment race isnt really a race since the real focus is the 6ghz market which is supposed to open up 2nd or 3rd quarter this year and Cambium does have the advantage here.
