The RB-SXT would be an excellent product to be used in multipoint because
1 - There's nothing to assemble (it is ready to use)
2 - It has built-in LED signal for easy alignment
3 - It have MiMO 2x2 and this maximizes spectral efficiency
4 - Very practical

The problem is the LOW GAIN!!

Now, I ask because it will not released a more suitable product to the real world, ie
1 - A version with integrated 20dB (I think is the minimum to connect customers with the maximum modulation up to 7-8km)
2 - A version of the same except with 2 external connectors for a high-gain antenna (for customers of up to 20km)

The actual version has a gain of 16dB too low to be used in large scale on PTMP

Is there any prevision to release a SXT-20dB and SXT-ExtConnectorized?


It would be the perfect product that reflects the needs of us (Wisp)

I would start to improve our distribution network by installing and connecting customers to BTS 2x2 MIMO up to 20Km with decent signals (-75dB)

How many of you are interested?
And Normis, what do you think?

I think the product is fine.

I think the solution to your specific issue is already being addressed by many other individuals.

SXT Reflectors!

much more elegant solution. and very cost effective.

-Brad

external connectors would mean "there is something to assemble". why can't you use RB711 in a box and any antenna you choose?

I think the product is fine.
SXT Reflectors!

We have already tryed to use offset but the result was not acceptable

why can't you use RB711 in a box and any antenna you choose?

Because with the RB711 and the box there's still much more to assemble and the rb711 isn't MiMo 2x2

Offset reflectors are working very good. 10dbi more with 55cm.

Offset reflectors are working very good. 10dbi more with 55cm.

please resize and rotate images before posting. it was 3Mb total, which is too much for some regions

Sorry, here everyone has 100mbps

Offset reflectors are working very good. 10dbi more with 55cm.

I tried a
RB711 + Grid 90cm x 60cm
vs
SXT + Offset 60cm

On the same AP cell with the Offset+SXT I got 3dB less than the other.
I thought that would make something better of the grid.

Probably would be better with a 5Ghz real feeder? SXT is too large to capture the perfect focus?
Have you tried the same offset dish with a real 5Ghz feeder?

The problem remains, however, on the sxt 16dB (up to 7-8km... call it standard antenna).
As I understand, many people say it would take at least one 20dB

it would take at least one 20dB

with more than 20dBi it would no longer be a low cost product for everyone

it would take at least one 20dB

with more than 20dBi it would no longer be a low cost product for everyone

Yes. But we need cost efficient not low cost. If I'm in need of a 20db CPE I've to
pay the price. It does not help there is a low cost 16db if I need 20db.

it would take at least one 20dB

with more than 20dBi it would no longer be a low cost product for everyone

Yes. But we need cost efficient not low cost. If I'm in need of a 20db CPE I've to
pay the price. It does not help there is a low cost 16db if I need 20db.

we are trying hard to please everyone, but it takes some time we only recently started with the integrated solutions

we are trying hard to please everyone, but it takes some time we only recently started with the integrated solutions

Of course but If we wouldnt beg you it might take longer

Yes. But we need cost efficient not low cost. If I'm in need of a 20db CPE I've to
pay the price. It does not help there is a low cost 16db if I need 20db.

use RB411 and http://en.jirous.com/antenna-5ghz/JC-320 - 20dBi?

The problem is the LOW GAIN!!

Low gain? Say what? My friend built new base station recently with Dual-Pol 17 dBi Sectoral antenna (HV). Radio was standard power (100 mW) and he did a quick test with SXT 5 km away from base station. The signals were STABLE -68/-69. SNR was great, CCQ near 100% and the best part - throughput. SXT could upload 20 Mbps and download 70-80 Mbps. Traffic was generated from laptop using Bandwith test. All stable. Period.

What was it? Low gain you say? Nah

<edited>

if you want to be rude, do it on some other forum. if your results are bad, blame your setup, not the person who did it better.

What was it?

hey Normis, calculate it in wifi calculator. He's lying. Such signals are not real 5 km.

Life is not just positive.

What was it?

hey Normis, calculate it in wifi calculator. He's lying. Such signals are not real 5 km.

Life is not just positive.

change your calculator

calculate it in wifi calculator. He's lying. Such signals are not real 5 km.

just tried http://www.radiolabs.com/stations/wifi_calc.html, sounds plausible to me...
May be your calc is lying.

ok, and now... SXT has a 26 db tx power only when the data rate 6Mbit/s, yes? When MCS15 has only 19 db, yes? Now, put both sides into the calculator. about -72dB in the ideal state. The added noise, a reserve... SXT has a small gain. Intercede for the offset reflector as the canopy.

ok, and now... SXT has a 26 db tx power only when the data rate 6Mbit/s, yes? When MCS15 has only 19 db, yes? Now, put both sides into the calculator. about -72dB in the ideal state. The added noise, a reserve... SXT has a small gain. Intercede for the offset reflector as the canopy.

calculators already include some loss, and they add cable loss which is not there for the SXT. stop looking at the calculators and buy one SXT for testing. this is nothing spectacular, normal SXT performance

SXT normally use. two SXT have a 2 kilometers to the signal -62, default power. Yeah ok, but against the signal nanobridge m5 it has no chance.

Count on maximum performance but no real plan to make power for the respective date rate.

we make connections that runs at full data rate, and have a reserve against interference.

you've probably never seen hampering intermediate. Never would have not joined clients at five kilometers per sector.

your requirements are different than for other people. we have made 10km link with SXT and people are happy about it. in most of the world, people are happy with connectivity, they don't ask minimum speed. just a few days ago one customer told me about his project in some islands where people are happy about their 256Kbit sattelite uplink, split my a mikrotik device to some 20 users.

if you need more speed than others, it doesn't mean that product is unsuitable for everyone on the planet. mikrotik has customers in most countries of the world. czech republic is just one small country with very specific needs.

we do have many products that allow high speeds at higher distances, but like I said, if you want something that looks like an SXT for long distances (above 10km) and at high speeds, you will have to wait until we make it.

@hapi: Theory is theory and real life is real life. Calculators give you estimated values.

ok, where to deliver the most? Much would I care by whom manufacture the device.

... if you want something that looks like an SXT for long distances (above 10km) and at high speeds, you will have to wait until we make it.

Normis, so it means that you are actual working on it? what intended gain of antenna are you working on?

Sorry but I did not say that.

@normis:

seriously -96 rx threshhold? did you look at what MCS you would need for that? That is MCS0 @20Mhz, which is just 6.5Mbps.

with the -69 signal level you should be able to get about MCS10@20Mhz which is about 40Mb connection speed.

at 5Km, the SXT with -69 signal is going to be good for about 20Mb maximum with an appropriate fade built in. In perfect conditions you may be able to pull 50-60 but if you build out that way then as soon as some weather comes in you have a bunch of clients pissed off because they are stuck in their house and cant use the internet.

alright, you can recalculate http://routerboard.com/pricelist/downlo ... ile_id=267

What was it?

hey Normis, calculate it in wifi calculator. He's lying. Such signals are not real 5 km.

Life is not just positive.

Hey boy,
I have a SXT paired 5 km PtP link with clear LOS and signal -58/59 and CCQ 100%. Throughput always more than 20000 at 5 Ghz-10Mhz. And I find SXT an adorable piece. Although I would sure love it more with a 20dbi stuff. However it is still adorable and makes our installations very neat.
Our field staff loves to work with it too. Hassle free stuff. We have got wall mount fixtures ordered in bulk to suit the SXT.

mahnet

the difference here is that you are using a 10Mhz channel. The other poster was claiming 80Mbps, which quite frankly, cannot be done in a 10Mhz channel with 2 streams. MCS15 10Mhz would be a absolute theoretical maximum of about 65Mbps and more realistically 40Mbps. I can see you getting 20-30Mbps. But 70Mbps+? not likely

also, I will state again that -96 rx sensitivity is MCS0 which is 6.5Mbps in 20Mhz. So regardless of the truth, the settings put in the calculator are just plain wrong. Not to mention that one side of the link is set to 100mw which is incorrect as well.

i don't try to seek more than 20 mbps from any of our links.
If more is needed we would prefer going for OFC.

Practical more than 20mbps wld NOT even be possible across 200 mtrs and clear LOS and same building heights in our region.

It may not be more efficient, but I think it is more effective to have slimmer slices of band such as 5 or 10Mhz with the highest MCS value you can handle over your client base, and then use more channels/sectors. This is a trade off in that the maximum speed of a single client is reduced but range and client isolation is improved.

We are diverging from topic here a bit I think, but an SXT is a really great device for CPE where clients are on MCS12 and 10Mhz channels for me. Gives good peek bandwidth for customers while not hogging all the channels up.

First time I saw the product..I saw a HOLE..is it still there??

Mikrotik will have lots of customers for this..bees and Wasp.

wirelessguy1

First time I saw the product..I saw a HOLE..is it still there??

Mikrotik will have lots of customers for this..bees and Wasp.

wirelessguy1

there is no more hole

we are trying hard to please everyone, but it takes some time we only recently started with the integrated solutions

Integrated solutions is most welcome and while it may not solve issue(s) any quicker when they surface but it will take out a variable like the use different antenna's used or radio cards and are these contributing to the issue or not?

the question didn't make any sense to me, sorry. can you rephrase it?

the question didn't make any sense to me, sorry. can you rephrase it?

With any faulting techniques you always first eliminate any variables in the fault chain and go back to a constant, that where the fault finding starts, every fault finding engineer knows this method,
Without going too deep into the following example – lets ask why some users do not have NV2 disconnections they use antenna (Z) and others who have disconnects use antenna (W) but others who tried antenna (Z) at their location have disconnections maybe co-location interference but it could be antenna (Z) maybe they should try antenna (W), …… see where the variables are, by using integrated solution there is no antenna variable which as mentioned may not solve the issue any sooner but it will eliminate that variable?

the question didn't make any sense to me, sorry. can you rephrase it?

With any faulting techniques you always first eliminate any variables in the fault chain and go back to a constant, that where the fault finding starts, every fault finding engineer knows this method,
Without going too deep into the following example – lets ask why some users do not have NV2 disconnections they use antenna (Z) and others who have disconnects use antenna (W) but others who tried antenna (Z) at their location have disconnections maybe co-location interference but it could be antenna (Z) maybe they should try antenna (W), …… see where the variables are, by using integrated solution there is no antenna variable which as mentioned may not solve the issue any sooner but it will eliminate that variable?

AS PER MY EXP. I FIND WIRELESS TO BE A STORY WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY FOR DIFFERENT LOCATION.
and that is how it should be. Integrated solutions are fine so far u do not expect the world out of them. And certainly if you want result u should be ready to spend a few more bucks. If some companies r charging high for their products, they r worth it. NV2 is still something very preliminary. and i find it better than PROXIM worp, though proxim is priced high. And to much integration takes of the value of a network proff. Due to too much integrated products available in market the customers now visit the market place, get the products and find a Do It Yourself kind of solutions.

WHO IS GOING TO FILL IN OUR POCKETS ??

AS PER MY EXP. I FIND WIRELESS TO BE A STORY WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY FOR DIFFERENT LOCATION.
and that is how it should be. Integrated solutions are fine so far u do not expect the world out of them. And certainly if you want result u should be ready to spend a few more bucks. If some companies r charging high for their products, they r worth it. NV2 is still something very preliminary. and i find it better than PROXIM worp, though proxim is priced high. And to much integration takes of the value of a network proff. Due to too much integrated products available in market the customers now visit the market place, get the products and find a Do It Yourself kind of solutions.

WHO IS GOING TO FILL IN OUR POCKETS ??

“AS PER MY EXP. I FIND WIRELESS TO BE A STORY WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY FOR DIFFERENT LOCATION.
and that is how it should be..”
Can I ask how can you expect the same operational performance or reliability when each user installs at every location totally different components with totally different operational characteristics from each other, this “Mix & Match” does not work every time in a RF receive/transmit network but can if you are willing to spend a lot of time and have all the necessary technical test equipment at hand and work through both the hardware and software obstacles that each location can present to you,
“..Integrated solutions are fine so far u do not expect the world out of them..”
I agree with you but first by having an integrated solution which MT can work on the software issues side of NV2 and if that also results in modifying the hardware to solve the issue then this information can be used to resolve new issues which may arise by using different antenna’s,

“…And certainly if you want result u should be ready to spend a few more bucks. If some companies r charging high for their products, they r worth it…”
Only if these products are certified to be compatible with propriety wireless protocols have you seen any with such certification or just labelled suitable for 802.11.., then are they worth it, just because you pay more does not always mean you have a better product?

“…NV2 is still something very preliminary.”
Yes totally agree with you but how do we as users who need the features NV2 offer speed up fixing of the first phase bugs, unfortunately MT are at disadvantage when they cannot reproduce some the NV2 issues, at present MT are sending out pre-release versions to those who have contacted support for testing which is a positive action, we may look back in the future and realise that NV2 will work best with only a particular type of antenna, a modified radio card, etc.?

"Due to too much integrated products available in market the customers now visit the market place, get the products and find a Do It Yourself kind of solutions.

WHO IS GOING TO FILL IN OUR POCKETS ?? "
Remember we were customers before we started becoming WISP's and what would be the difference from what you have pointed out about accessibilty to hardware and say taking on a apprentice who when they have gathered enough knowledge leave and setup a rival company?