it is blocked after 2 days :(
@Asesores wrote:it is blocked after 2 days :(
What do you mean? Can you provide more information on the issue?
3 Days & 19 Hours so far. I think that's a world record. I know for sure it's a personal best by a long shot, but I think it's also a world record too. Someone call the Guinness people? ;)
Regarding the SM rebooting bug - the first Force300 SM we upgraded to version 4.1.4 is now past 5 days and counting.Ā :)Ā It's starting to look like that Force200 bug has been squashed.Ā :DĀ
Equipment
| Device Name | F300_FIBER_SM_ON_NCOTE |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4-RC4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (Jun 08 2018 - 17:50:43) |
| Contains FCC ID(s): | XXXXXXXXXXXX |
| Ā Unit MSN | XXXXXXXXXXXX |
| Ā System Uptime | 5 days, 0 hour, 6 minutes, 50 seconds |
Yes - sadly me too.Ā The Force300 SM that we upgraded to 4.1.4-RC4 had run for a little more than 5 days, but it locked up this early morning (5 days, plus a couple/few hours) and had to be power cycled.Ā :(Ā
Equipment
| Device Name | F300_FIBER_SM_ON_NCOTE |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4-RC4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (Jun 08 2018 - 17:50:43) |
| Ā System Uptime | 5 days, 14 hours, 23 minutes, 1 second |
Force300 SM with 4.1.4-RC4 uptime is 5 days, 14 hours and still going....
We're still running strong with the RC, no reboots and it's been over 9 days now. Have it on an F300 PtP and PTP550 and all is well.
@Eric Ozrelic wrote:We're still running strong with the RC, no reboots and it's been over 9 days now. Have it on an F300 PtP and PTP550 and all is well.
OK Cool Eric. I had a lockup (needed a power cycle) last Monday, after running it for 5(ish) days. After that power cycle, it's been another 6 days 5 hours since then. So - that's 12 days maybe, but I did have that one lockup in the middle last Monday. However - maybe that was a fluke thing to. If you're at 9+ days, that's good to hear. :)
Equipment
| Device Name | F300_FIBER_SM_ON_NCOTE |
| Software Version | 4.1.4-RC4 |
| Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (Jun 08 2018 - 17:50:43) |
| System Uptime | 6 days, 5 hours, 35 minutes, 35 seconds |
So reboots donāt happen as often now, but I canāt seem to set the radios to work on full 1000. is anyone else having that problem? both the radio and switch are set to auto and even if i set it to static 1000 the radios go down to 100 full. can you guys check your radios please and see they are operating at 1000
Well, it's too early to tell if 4.1.4 is flawless yet - but I upgraded this Force300 SM 9+ days ago, and it's been running since with no issues.
Equipment
| Device Name | F300_FIBER_SM_ON_NCOTE |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (Jun 08 2018 - 17:50:43) |
| Ā System Uptime | 9 days, 3 hours, 20 minutes, 36 seconds |
And yes, it's just plugged into the switch, nothing special configured.Ā As far as I can tell, it's always been 1000 Mbps Full Duplex just fine.
Ethernet / Internet
| Ā Main PSU Port | 1000 Mbps / Full |
| Ā Ethernet MAC Address | 00:00:00:00:00:00 |
Slick1,
please, submit a request on our support page.Ā https://support.cambiumnetworks.com/
We will try to help you with this.
Just updating this thread...Ā with Firmware version 4.1.4 we have uptime of over 16 days on the SM, so for us it appears there are no random reboots anymore.Ā :)Ā
Equipment
| Device Name | F300_FIBER_SM_ON_NCOTE |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (Jun 08 2018 - 17:50:43) |
| System Uptime | 16 days, 4 hours, 9 minutes, 22 seconds |
1 Like
In what channel width do you have it?,Ā How far do you have between the POE and the antenna?.Ā Because my SM I have to restart every 2 or 3 hours on average :(
Hi. We are using 40Mhz widths on this link (we only have a 300 Mbit Fiber to carry).Ā We are about 1.3 KM AP to SM.Ā On the SM side, there is about....Ā I guess about 120' of Ethernet cable between SM and the POE & Switch.
Prior to 4.1.4, we had spontaneous reboots about every 2-3 days, but since we upgraded to 4.1.4 it' has been 16+ days with no issues so far.
Performance Test Results (40Mhz Channel Width - TDD Mode 75%/25%):
DownlinkĀ Ā Ā 242.914 Mbps
UplinkĀ Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 72.266 Mbps
AggregateĀ Ā Ā 315.18 Mbps
Ping Results
PING 10.0.0.46 (10.0.0.46) 32(60) bytes of data. 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=5.73 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=4.71 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=4.14 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=2.50 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=5.41 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=6 ttl=64 time=4.12 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=7 ttl=64 time=4.01 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=8 ttl=64 time=2.85 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=9 ttl=64 time=6.48 ms 40 bytes from 10.0.0.46: icmp_req=10 ttl=64 time=5.32 msā 10.0.0.46 ping statistics ā
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9010ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.502/4.530/6.481/1.194 ms
Ā
I have them at 11 km, and tried on both channel width, but so far the most stable is version 4.1.2. Thank you
2 ninedd
Could you show ping (packet size 1470 bytes) via ethernet Force 300 under traffic load 100-160 Mbps DL + 10-20 Mbps UL?
I have downloaded firmware 4.1.4 but I see that it shows a different version, do you have any idea why?
Equipment
| Device Name | ApBackAt |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (May 02 2018 - 12:08:09) |
@Vyacheslav wrote:2 ninedd
Could you show ping (packet size 1470 bytes) via ethernet Force 300 under traffic load 100-160 Mbps DL + 10-20 Mbps UL?
Hi. This test below is with live customer traffic going over a Force300/Force300 link. This is just in the Force300's TDD mode, and this is NOT an ePTP mode or anything. At the time of this test, the link was carrying about 80-100 Mbit download, and about 10 Mbit upload of live customer backhaul traffic. This test was with 1472 (1500) byte packets.
Ping Results
PING 10.0.0.45 (10.0.0.45) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=3.34 ms 1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=2.01 ms 1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=5.13 ms 1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=3.54 msā 10.0.0.45 ping statistics ā
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.015/3.509/5.133/1.107 ms
This next test is with the same link, but as saturated as I can get it. This is while running a 20 second bandwidth test from the AP to the SMā¦ and while simultaneously running a ping test on the SM to the AP. So, the Wireless Link test would have saturated the link, but Iām guessing it also would have used quite a bit of CPU in order to Generate the Data and do the testing. The MONITOR -> THROUGHPUT CHART reported about about 310 Mbit/Second of combined client and test data. So, maybe this isnāt the fairest test, since Iām asking the radios to be as busy as they can possibly beā¦ so I guess this is a āāworst caseāā scenario in a way.
Ping Results (1472 byte packets, Force300 in TDD mode, 1.3km, link carrying ~310mbit aggregate traffic)
PING 10.0.0.45 (10.0.0.45) 1472(1500) bytes of data.
1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=8.69 ms
1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=7.91 ms
1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=9.37 ms
1480 bytes from 10.0.0.45: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=6.72 ms
ā 10.0.0.45 ping statistics ā
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3001ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.725/8.176/9.373/0.984 ms
So - thatās a 40Mhz link, right across the city center, about 1.3 KM, and itās as full as I can make the link be I think. For a couple $150 Force300ās thatās pretty good.
PS: Now, that being said: when we do this same link on Force200's with ePTP mode, the latency is about 1.3ms and it is virtually flat, with almost no deviation. Maybe 1.3 to 1.5 ms min/max on ePMP radios which have an ePTP mode.
Ping Results (32 byte packets, Force200 in ePTP mode, 6.3km, link empty of traffic)
PING 10.2.4.18 (10.2.4.18) 32(60) bytes of data. 40 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.56 ms 40 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.35 ms 40 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.30 ms 40 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.41 msā 10.2.4.18 ping statistics ā
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3005ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.306/1.409/1.563/0.106 ms
Ping Results (1472 byte packets, Force200 in ePTP mode, 6.3km, link carrying live traffic)
PING 10.2.4.18 (10.2.4.18) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.68 ms 1480 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.50 ms 1480 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.41 ms 1480 bytes from 10.2.4.18: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.46 msā 10.2.4.18 ping statistics ā
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.413/1.518/1.684/0.108 ms
Re: force 300 ptp station random reboot
I have downloaded firmware 4.1.4 but I see that it shows a different version, do you have any idea why?Ā in specific the date
Equipment
| Device Name | ApBackAt |
| Ā Software Version | 4.1.4 |
| Ā Firmware Version | U-Boot IPQ40xx 2012.07.26 (May 02 2018 - 12:08:09) |