Banned from UBNT Forum?

[theonlyone]

http://www.mimosa.co/home/b5-page/overview-b5-backhaul.html

Well damn, now who do we go after? They don't have a forum... The IEEE for allowing 802.11ac to become a standard?

[sirhc]

Well at least that link is based on 802.11ac which means it is not transmitting a full stream 24/7 but only when needed.

Either way 5 GHz is in for a stomping!

This link is more like the Ubiquiti M5 AC line which I am ok with, it is that constant transmit and I hate the fact that they did not do a link that the community really asked for AF 11/18/23.

Do not get me wrong I really wish manufacturers or the FCC would limit channel sizes to 40 MHz outdoor.

I love UBNT, I just did not like the AF5 and a few other decisions.

[jakecraner]

I'd be happy with a 30mhz restriction.

[Gene]

I find it disconcerting that UBNT would ban a member from their forums without an explanation, to either the community as a whole or even to the person they banned. Even more so with someone that, apparently, was a prominent member of the community.

It might just be me, but the more time goes by the more shady they appear to become. :/

[rebelwireless]

Consider my mind blown as well. I've surely been more of a dick about their false advertising on the airprism and airmax asic and haven't been banned yet. I'll add that their webpage is still very deceptive.

I totally agree on AF5. I've seen some spectograph images and it is a friggin mess. 100Mhz in the wisp bread-and-butter 5Ghz is Stupid®. A local competitor is running an AF5 at a 90degree angle to me midway across a 12.5km link, I can see the AF5 on airview.

I don't know what to do about this though, I'm anxious to jump to other products but there just isn't anything atm. if 'tik would pull their head out on the wireless side that would be nice. airPrism is touted to be amazing, but who knowns when/if it every comes out.

[sirhc]

I totally agree on AF5. I've seen some spectograph images and it is a friggin mess. 100Mhz in the wisp bread-and-butter 5Ghz is Stupid®. A local competitor is running an AF5 at a 90degree angle to me midway across a 12.5km link, I can see the AF5 on airview.

This is my fear with AF5, what happens when they become available in mass numbers and they start popping up everywhere?

[rebelwireless]

absolutely. wish there was a 40Mhz cap or something...

I find it strange that they pulled motorola talent to make the AF, but it doesn't behave like motorola gear at all. Where is the nice clean mask? why does an AF5 SCREAM out of channel junk like it does?

[kbloch]

The biggest problems I see with the Air Fiber or Mimosa equipment is that the antennas have too wide of a beamwidth due to being too small.

In my opinion for a point to point link the beamwidth should be restricted to something like 3 degrees or smaller. Smaller beamwidths reduce the harmful interference to other users in many cases.

The other thing that should be mandated on point to point links is some sort of automatic power control. There is no point on a link to have a signal any higher than is needed to maintain the data rates needed for the bandwidth being used at any given time.


Last thing to post is that for RJ45 connectors I have been using the EZ RJ45 connectors for years with great results. They have both shielded and unshielded connectors and they make it very hard to make a bad connector. The benefit of the EZRJ45 connectors is that the wire pulls through the connector and then is crimped and cut at the same time

[rebelwireless]

The biggest problems I see with the Air Fiber or Mimosa equipment is that the antennas have too wide of a beamwidth due to being too small.

I don't agree. If you look at the spectral mask of the AF, it's brutal to nearby bands. It also is able to use up the entire upper UNII2 space and dirty up the entire DFS space too.

I also don't want 3degree beamwidth. Fine if you have extremely solid mounts on both sides with no tower sway etc, but if you are on a guyed tower they getting a perfect alignment that will hold up during buffetting winds etc can be quite difficult. 6degrees is much much easier to work with. IMHO

The other thing that should be mandated on point to point links is some sort of automatic power control. There is no point on a link to have a signal any higher than is needed to maintain the data rates needed for the bandwidth being used at any given time.

I agree to this, though I think it should be a default option that can be disabled in circumstances where an algorythm might not keep up. DFS false positives would be my best off-the-top-of-my-head example.