Hi cambium team,
I have a concern, have in the path of launches in firmaware 4.x activate MUMIMO in SM legacy N
If not, could they make it possible?
Regards
Hi Mike,
Unfortunately only 11ac wave2 subscribers can support MU-MIMO.
Thanks,
Dmitry
The ability so support backward compatiblity is one of key advantages of the ePMP 3000 platform. You can upgrade your existing AP's (ePMP 1000 or ePMP 2000) to the ePMP 3000 and maintain connectivity to the original 802.11n SM's (eg. Force 180, Force 200).
At that point you can then start a migration towards the Force 300 series SM's whenever it makes sense. For Force 300 SM's use 802.11ac technology so they support MU-MIMO.
One strategy that we see many WISP's using is to start by migrating the top 10-15 users of data to a Force 300 SM. This moves your 'top talkers' to 802.11ac which gives the opportunity to do MU-MIMO and also provides the opportunity to hit the higher modulation mode (256QAM).
- Bruce
1 Like
@Bruce Collins wrote:The ability so support backward compatiblity is one of key advantages of the ePMP 3000 platform. You can upgrade your existing AP's (ePMP 1000 or ePMP 2000) to the ePMP 3000 and maintain connectivity to the original 802.11n SM's (eg. Force 180, Force 200).
At that point you can then start a migration towards the Force 300 series SM's whenever it makes sense. For Force 300 SM's use 802.11ac technology so they support MU-MIMO.
One strategy that we see many WISP's using is to start by migrating the top 10-15 users of data to a Force 300 SM. This moves your 'top talkers' to 802.11ac which gives the opportunity to do MU-MIMO and also provides the opportunity to hit the higher modulation mode (256QAM).
- Bruce
This is what we did, however we noticed in this scenario that the F300 customers upload crashes and we end up swapping them back to a F200
We have a panel with 71 subscribers on a 40mhz channel, we are not maxing the frame usage, we have 12 F300 customers on the panel, all 12 F300 have 0.1-0.9 upload, the other 59 customers uploads vary from 3-12mbps. We just swapped a F300 customer back to a 200 friday and their upload went from 0.15 to 5.5.
We have the smart sector hooked up but are awaiting firmware for activation assuming it is the resolution for the upload issue. If we reboot the sector, if you log into a 300 before all customers connect you can get 4-12mbps upload out of them.
@Skullzaflare wrote:This is what we did, however we noticed in this scenario that the F300 customers upload crashes and we end up swapping them back to a F200
We have a panel with 71 subscribers on a 40mhz channel, we are not maxing the frame usage, we have 12 F300 customers on the panel, all 12 F300 have 0.1-0.9 upload, the other 59 customers uploads vary from 3-12mbps. We just swapped a F300 customer back to a 200 friday and their upload went from 0.15 to 5.5.
We have the smart sector hooked up but are awaiting firmware for activation assuming it is the resolution for the upload issue. If we reboot the sector, if you log into a 300 before all customers connect you can get 4-12mbps upload out of them.
So I just did some testing on a mixed mode AP using a 40MHz channel width and 75/25 TDD ratio and I'm seeing the same things. All clients running 4.4.2, with 50+ subs... mostly N clients and a small handful of AC clients. In the past I remember getting much closer to 75mbps down and 25mbps (20mhz channel width) up with the N clients, and even better with AC clients... now during testing I'm lucky to get 2-3mbps on AC and 5mbps on N on the upload. We're not running into a frame utilization issue either and most of our data is being sent across the highest modulation levels. Downlink seems OK. I'm not sure when things changed and with what firmware. We typically only deliver 1mbps upload to clients, so we haven't had anyone complain, and that's why we didn't notice it. With ePMP we monitor/graph the downlink frame utilization... but there's no way currently to monitor/graph uplink utilization, so again, we didn't notice this issue, and we're not sure if it's an uplink utilization issue, but we doubt it.
I'm wondering if this has something to do with a 40MHz (or larger) channel width? I'm going to have to do some additional testing late night when I can remove the MIR on some key subscriber radios and/or change channel widths to do more testing. I'll report back.
1 Like
I want to make sure I read you -both- correctly. You replaced your 2000/1000 AP's with 3000's. You are running a mixed network on these AP's (200 and 300 SM's), with the 200 being the majority, and now your upload for 200's that connect to these 3000's in this mixed network have went downhill?
We did the opposite approach, and saw the opposite results.
We left up our 2000's, and traded out some 180's and 200's with 300's (mostly due to lightning damage). Download MCS rates fell by around 2 levels for same RSSI as the 200's. This was in a rural location. SM's had no interference (there are some posts on the forum where I show this). Upload stayed the same or actually became better for a few customers. I also have disconnects on two 300's, where the 200 that was previously in their places -never- disconnected.
This brings up a question, did your upload MCS rates stay the same, or did they fall like mine have for download?
We planned to replace 2000's with 3000's this Tuesday (tomorrow) at this tower because of this drop in download MCS rates for same RSSI. Now you have me rethinking things. I do not want to flip flop issues. I was thinking that true backward compatibility must be using a 3000 AP and 200/180 SM's, and this would fix our issue. Guess I will be riding out to one of our greenfield 3000 towers and testing 180/200's performance today...before we do any AP replacing. But, one 200 mixed in with several 300's may not matter. Also, we are using 20Mhz channels, not 40Mhz. At any rate, it is a lot easier for me to trade 300's back to 200's than it is for me to replace all 200's with 300's. This was planned to be a slow migration,changing out 200's on slow days or when they had to be. We will have to test first and go from there.
After additional testing, the issue seems to be much worse during peak hours when one or more N clients are using a lot of upload... this seems to tank upload for the entire AP, and is even worse for AC clients. After peak hours, when things aren't busy, upload rates return to normal. It seems like N clients might be monopolizing the uplink frame utilization. Multiple people have now reported this issue on FaceBook and have seen it happen with both 20 and 40mhz channel widths.
That being said, I've looked at the AP we're experiencing this on and it only peaks around 6mbps upload... and based on a 40MHz channel, 75/25 split, and clients with good modulation, we should have around 30-40mbps to play with in the uplink... so we're not even getting close to the limit during peak hours.
@CWB wrote:I want to make sure I read you -both- correctly. You replaced your 2000/1000 AP's with 3000's. You are running a mixed network on these AP's (200 and 300 SM's), with the 200 being the majority, and now your upload for 200's that connect to these 3000's in this mixed network have went downhill?
Not quite, swapped 1000 AP with 3k, correct on the mixed network, however the 200/1000's are fine, the 300's die when usage comes up
@Eric Ozrelic wrote:After additional testing, the issue seems to be much worse during peak hours when one or more N clients are using a lot of upload... this seems to tank upload for the entire AP, and is even worse for AC clients. After peak hours, when things aren't busy, upload rates return to normal. It seems like N clients might be monopolizing the uplink frame utilization. Multiple people have now reported this issue on FaceBook and have seen it happen with both 20 and 40mhz channel widths.
That being said, I've looked at the AP we're experiencing this on and it only peaks around 6mbps upload... and based on a 40MHz channel, 75/25 split, and clients with good modulation, we should have around 30-40mbps to play with in the uplink... so we're not even getting close to the limit during peak hours.
Good to know its not just me, i hadnt seen the facebook posts
At this juncture we have stopped rolling any 300's out and have swapped some 300's for 200's.