dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1553
share rss forum feed

TheHox

join:2012-05-31

PTP link problem, 300ft with NanostationM2

Click for full size
Click for full size
So I setup this link to share a 100MB internet connection between 2 offices. I should probably go 5ghz, but I had these two laying around so I figured I'd try them first.

I have them up and running, I can see the AP, I can connect the two, but the connection lasts for a 2-5 seconds then drops, and reconnects, repeatedly.

This is my first PTP link with this hardware. What do you pros recommend to look at?

Here are some screen shots from the station side.

TheHox

join:2012-05-31

Well I looked at the log, and saw auth fail over and over.

I had the passkey typed incorrectly. It connects now!

But since I am here, for 300ft, what should I adjust the power levels to. Would full power be too hot?

The range on this is 5 to 23dBm. Should I adjust both the AP and the station side lower?



WHT

join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5

That's pretty hot, back down power on both sides to get -50 or lower, like -55.


SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4
reply to TheHox

said by TheHox:

Would full power be too hot?

Yes, "Full Power" is ususally too much for most scenarios.
»forum.ubnt.com/showthread.php?t=60879

TheHox

join:2012-05-31
reply to TheHox

Click for full size
I got it up and running, power range from -58 to -68, usually right around -64. The best speed test I got was almost 20mb, that was at a 20mhz width.

I changed it to 40mhz with and it seemed to get lower, lucky to get anything past 10mb. The connection at the modem is 100MB.

I would like to get at least 50MB out of this. Is that possible at 300ft? Or too much noise? Or something else? As others have said, I wish UBNT had bandwidth test on the APs. I can ping the AP or the rotuer behind it and get 1ms to 4ms on average.


Semaphore
Premium
join:2003-11-18
101010
kudos:1

IMHO: Bandwidth testing ON the device is never a fair measurement of the throughput OF that device... buffers, I/O and CPU all play a role, and when you're testing using the same device that you ARE testing it's pretty unlikely to be a true measurement. Use IPerf. It's easy to learn and easy to use.
With those numbers I'd expect at least 30 Mbps. 2.4 is ugly. I'd also try Hard Coding your Ethernet ports to 100/FD on all devices if you haven't already - that may help.


Newbie

join:2011-04-18

1 recommendation

reply to TheHox

I would also recommend 5.5.2 firmware as I have seen up to a 20% increase in performance in some cases.

In every case I have at least seen a small percentage increase vs 5.3.x branch


SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4

1 edit
reply to TheHox

Turn AirMax OFF and manually set ACK to the minimum value. Lock the channel width to 40 and enable channel shifting to step a half channel between the regular noise. Find the most quiet frequency using the built in air view utility or even a simple site survey. Push the TX power up to within 3 dB of maximum, or an RX level of -53 dBm on the partner radio, which ever comes first.

I have had best luck with the firmware version you are using. 5.3.3 is some excellent stuff. 5.5X got away from Ubiquity. Bloated and still waiting for more patches.


TheHox

join:2012-05-31
reply to TheHox

Well I'll try updating it and see what I can do.

I want to try and get most out of the 100MB as possible, so I am going to buy something else to do the link. I had these laying around and was hoping for better results, but after some more reading and other posts on other forums, seems I'll be lucky to get 1/2 that, especially in 2.4ghz.

Any recommendations on what will do it? 5ghz for sure, PowerBridge? or NanoBridge?


SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4

1 edit

said by TheHox:

Any recommendations on what will do it?

said by SipSizzurp:

Turn AirMax OFF and manually set ACK to the minimum value. Lock the channel width to 40 and enable channel shifting to step a half channel between the regular noise. Find the most quiet frequency using the built in air view utility or even a simple site survey. Push the TX power up to within 3 dB of maximum, or an RX level of -53 dBm on the partner radio, which ever comes first.

I have had best luck with the firmware version you are using. 5.3.3 is some excellent stuff. 5.5X got away from Ubiquity. Bloated and still waiting for more patches.

That will get you upwards of 90 Mbps. The Ubiquity forum is full of fum ducks, FYI, as incredulous as that may sound.

TheHox

join:2012-05-31

So I take it you are reading my posts over there too? lol

I'll give that a shot today, thanks!


SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4
reply to TheHox

It is a small world. I have been using these products for a few years now, and the info I provided is first hand. Let me know if you have any questions on setting up any of my suggestions. A 300 foot link is quite short and even if you have quite a lot of interference you should still achieve over 80 Mbps. Channel shifting will prevent your radios from hearing the back ground traffic and subsequently pausing for the foreign traffic.

AirMax is hit and miss from one firmware release to the next, and the manual ACK setting will ensure maximum potential. I hope you still have 5.3.3 on them because 5.5x will prevent most radios from "Downgrading" to older releases.

For bandwidth testing be sure to set up j-perf on computers at each end of the link and test with multiple streams. Around 35 is streams is where most of my links will peak at 95 Mbps, the practical limit of the LAN port.

Ubiquity is approximately a 50/50% mix of stupidity and brilliance.


TheHox

join:2012-05-31

Well unfortunately I already upgraded to 5.5.2, it appears ACK menu is gone.

Best I have so far is 27mbs, but that is online testing, I have to get perf setup to test. Thats on 20mhz width



Semaphore
Premium
join:2003-11-18
101010
kudos:1

It's on the Advanced Tab. Uncheck "Auto Adjust" and dial it as low as you can. I found the same on short shots. Auto sucked.


Newbie

join:2011-04-18
reply to SipSizzurp

Why are you advising people to use firmware that is vulnerable to the skynet virus is my question....

Use 5.3.5 at least...... And with 2.4 I have done before and after testing.... 5.5.2 is the money firmware right now with huge gains over 5.3.3/5.3.5.


TheHox

join:2012-05-31
reply to SipSizzurp

Click for full size
said by SipSizzurp:

said by SipSizzurp:

Turn AirMax OFF and manually set ACK to the minimum value. Lock the channel width to 40 and enable channel shifting to step a half channel between the regular noise. Find the most quiet frequency using the built in air view utility or even a simple site survey. Push the TX power up to within 3 dB of maximum, or an RX level of -53 dBm on the partner radio, which ever comes first.

I have had best luck with the firmware version you are using. 5.3.3 is some excellent stuff. 5.5X got away from Ubiquity. Bloated and still waiting for more patches.

That will get you upwards of 90 Mbps. The Ubiquity forum is full of fum ducks, FYI, as incredulous as that may sound.

I set ACK on the AP or STATION side or both?
I can go as low as 0, so 0.1 miles?
(Again I upgraded to 5.5.2 so I believe I have the right setting here?)


Semaphore
Premium
join:2003-11-18
101010
kudos:1

Both sides. Size it a bit bigger than reality, I went about 9% more than the actual distance and it made a difference of 25 Mbps vs. 80Mbps ... that was on 5.8 though. And you do have the units mounted as high as possible right ?


SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4
reply to Newbie

said by Newbie:

Why are you advising people to use firmware that is vulnerable to the skynet virus is my question....

Since I never use Ubiquity radios as perimeter devices and I have not heard of too many infections, it appears that you may have a good point. I do also have some 5.3.5 links running and they are as fine as 5.3.3

On that subject, I would recommend to anybody that Ubiquity radios be used only for packet delivery. If you need a router then get an Asus RT-N12 and flash it with Shibby Tomato firmware. It will the be the best 40 bux you ever spent.

SipSizzurp
Fo' Shizzle
Premium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:4

2 edits
reply to Semaphore

said by Semaphore:

Both sides. Size it a bit bigger than reality, I went about 9% more than the actual distance ....

That is good advice in general, but on a 300 foot link a setting of zero miles is still the most appropriate.

Edit - @ TheHox. I just looked at your site survey screen shot. You definitely need to get off of channel eleven. It looks like your best frequency would be 2.449 Mhz which would be available with channel shifting enabled, as I described above.

TheHox

join:2012-05-31

Yes I got off 11, that channel was horrible.

I've tried channel 3, 4, and the one you just mentioned. Most I ever got was 30mbps, but just once. Average tests were around 15mbps.

I hooked it up to the router last night and everyone is using it, according to the MT router peak dl was 12mb, but I just saw it spike to 17mbps for a brief second. Still not happy with it, I've tried 20mhz width and 40mhz, channel shifting vs not, different ACK timings, AirMax on/off, adjusting the physical antenna.

I want to get something 5ghz to just test it compared to the 2.4ghz I have up. If anything it is a good learning experience for me. If I go 5ghz, powerbridge or nanobridge? Difference in cost of a few hundred isn't a huge deal if I can get the most out of it. I'd assume any device in 5ghz should be better than what I have here now. Or go crazy and go 10ghz?

Thanks again for the help.


Newbie

join:2011-04-18

5.8ghz will blow the 2.4ghz stuff out of the water,

for 300ft you could use NanostationLocoM5's if you wanted.. Last year I did a shot in a small town about 4 blocks with two NanostationM5's and I was getting VERY close to maxing out the ethernet port. I highly recommend



John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:6
reply to TheHox

+1 on the LocoM5 units...


TheHox

join:2012-05-31
reply to TheHox

Installed the locoM5 units today. On all auto settings with channel shifting enable at 40mhz widths I got 72.3mbps, with AirMax enabled.
That is plenty for now, I can try and tweak them from home now.

That speed test is online also, so internet congestion may effect that. I couldn't get iperf to work correctly. The results were way off. Perhaps my laptop is too slow.

I also have the output power turned down from the max 23dBm to 5dBm on each side. Signal strength is still coming in at -48/-49dBm.

Should I turn them down even more? Is that too hot or should that be ok?



WHT

join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5

-48 kinda hot, but not that bad. Can you get it down to like -53?

/added after thought
Or mis-align one end?



John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:6

said by WHT:

Or mis-align one end?

This.

Turn the lower one into the trees behind the building. The antenna pattern is wide then falls off quickly so you should be able to adjust it with some precision.

I'm presuming that the one on top is pointing down towards the new source, which points up...?
--
The most powerful weapon in the world is ignorance. Politicians exploit it to achieve almost anything they want.