The webinar on Migrating Your Network to ePMP replay is HERE. Post any questions you have to this thread.
Hi, thanks so much for having this webinar. It was really good. How do you use the eAlign tool. It was mentioned that they really find it awesome, but had to go the CLI to use it. Is this a GUI feature or CLI feature of both. If so, what will be the key differences between using either one? Will one show more information than the other?
Regards.
2 Likes
Hi, this question is for the IntelliPOP presentation presenter, were those the RF Elements TwistPort symmetrical Feed horn antennas being used / showing in your tower photos? If so, what beamwidth / sector size are you using and how do you find the performance and sector coverage? Are they coming close to their specifications?
2 Likes
@Lincs_Chel wrote:
Hi, thanks so much for having this webinar. It was really good. How do you use the eAlign tool. It was mentioned that they really find it awesome, but had to go the CLI to use it. Is this a GUI feature or CLI feature of both. If so, what will be the key differences between using either one? Will one show more information than the other?
Regards.
You can find more details on the eAlign tool HERE.
Hi,
I noticed that both parties, i.e. Josh (Imagine Networks) and Mat (IntelliPOP) are not using the ePMP OEM sector antennas from Cambium. Was the decision not to use and deploy the Cambium ePMP sector antennas during your migration upgrades a technical reason (primary reason) or based on having existing antennas already in use and that could have easily migrate and were compatible with the ePMP APs?
If you eventually start to use the GPS feature (built-in), will those force you to do workarounds for integrating the GPS antenna that came with ePMP APs?
Also, which one of the KP Performance antennas you are mainly using? I was looking at these, and I found that some of their sectors did not originally cover the full 5GHz range (from the specs datasheet) and if I'm not mistaken, their F/B (front-to-back) was not over/near the recommended specs ePMP says makes their GPS synch work great and self interference attributes shine.
Regards.
1 Like
eAlign is GUI for sure. I would say it's my favorite align tool on a web server by a huge margin (it updates extremely fast).
http://i.imgur.com/98N6aPI.png
Notice the dozens of data points in under 0.2 seconds.
3 Likes
Thanks. Really helps.
So there is not a need to use the CLI as mentioned in the webinar when they had an issue with an unusual problem with one of their links? He mentioned that when they pinged Cambium support, they were asked to drop to the CLI to further troubleshoot the issue.
I use KPP since it's always worked and I like the mechanics. It does work in 5.1 and 5.7 for sure in experience.
On our sites we're using GPS on the APs that are with other older APs or new towers get SyncInjectors (PacketFlux) with our DC applications. We may change the other sites in time, but for now the GPS is working where we need individual sync.
I've never used the CLI eAlign tool. It's much much easier for our smart phones/laptops to use the GUI.
Hi Jluthman;
Thanks for the screenshot photo and info.
Does the straight pink horizontal line represent a target level (specified) or the the peak signal found?
Regards
The eAlign tool is actually in the Web UI, before this tool was installed we used just the get rssi command in the CLI. However the GUI tool works so much better.
2 Likes
Yes the RF-Elements Twist ports are currently in use on our tower. We are running their 30 degree model. We originally deployed with the Cambium sectors, we only decided to move because of the space required on the tower. With 5 normal sectors our tower was really getting maxed out and I was concerned about wind loading. The twist ports have the added benefit of smaller beam, and a larger vertical radiation pattern. For our deployment this is really helpful where customers are on the valley floor and the edge of the hill. They do seem to be meeting their specifications, we have done some initial testing for RF-Elements and provided back some data to them on the antennas. I would advise picking up one and testing it in your network.
2 Likes
Hi;
I was wondering about system latency. I noticed both WISP are using flexible mode. But have any of you tried or have any areas in your ePMP network that is using GPS synch and 20Mhz channel and what is the latency you're experiencing?
Like with the PMP100 FSK series, you sort of know you will consistently get 20ms. Even under load, it doesn't jump around all over the place.
Can you speak to the latency you're seeing in your network between the SM and AP?
This was before eAlign was built into the software. We had an issue where an antenna had a broken RF cable, and we were able to find that from the CLI. In the current release of the firmware this info is now all presented in the GUI via eAlign and thus there is no need for us to use the CLI when deploying ePMP any longer.
1 Like
I have noticed a slight jump when running in GPS mode, we have toyed with it before but there is about a 10% loss in capacity when going to GPS mode that we have been avoiding because at the time we didn't have room on the tower for more antennas. Now with RF-Elements we have the chance to go back and add new radios, then try moving everything to GPS sync. We also are running 5MS frames to give us some added capacity. I recall seeing the latency around 20-25 MS on GPS mode. But this was with older firmware versions. Unless you have towers that can hear transmissions from each other, or SMs that can hear two towers on similar channels, or back to back sectors. There isn’t a direct need for GPS, we are hoping that with RF-Elements we can do frequency reuse with less than 180 degree differences in sector heading. We are hoping to be able to run re-use at something around 70-90 degrees off.
1 Like
Hi Mat;
That's interesting. I thought the cry in the forum wilderness was for the 2.5ms frames in order to get better latency and throughput. Besides having the need to do co-location with the PMP100 FSK series. But what you're saying is that the 5ms frame is working out better for your environment. Giving you more capacity?
From our testing it appears so, we have not done extensive testing at 2.5MS but I'll make a note to run some additional tests side by side of 5MS.
Hi Mat;
I'll have to see if LINKPlanner will predict the latency when playing with the two different frame sizes. I'll probably post the question in the LINKPlanner forum.
1 Like
Sounds like a great idea. I look forward to seeing your link planner document.
Hi Mat;
I was originally going to deploy our new setup using the new 2.5ms frame size. As this seems to be what others seemingly were saying giving better results or what was being promoted as being a performance advantage.
But now you brought another side to this. So I guess before we start with our deployment I can probably play with the settings and results on paper. Again, it will all be theory, but I guess it should be interesting. I originally did all my LINKPlanner settings using the the 2.5ms frame. But never really paid close attention to any performance differences.
1 Like