Ubiquity PS-2 bridge kit - followup
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Posted by Lloyd E. Sponenburgh on September 15, 2008, 7:22 am
Please log in for more thread options I received, installed, and fiddled with the Ubiquity kit. IF the documentation had been less ambibuous, the whole process would have taken about two hours -- most of which would've been hanging the masts and routing the POE cabling. However, it took me one day of head scratching, and an hour the next day to fix the problem. It turns out, their docs use the strange convention of "station" and "Access Point" for the bridge components. They do not make it clear - in fact they somewhat mislead you to think otherwise - that it's important which end is which. Presumably, the setup is a totally transparent bridge, but only an "access point" is capable of associating with a local subnet via DHCP; even though either end can (apparently) be configured to do so. So, reversing my station and AP assignments got the system up on the first try, after dozens of attempts to figure out what I had failed to do when they were the other way-round. The system holds up solidly at 48Mb/s over the 500' I have to feed. Some footnote specs say that the "typical" link of 5Km will work at full bandwidth. I still need to do some threshold tests to see how low a radiated power I can get away with. I drove to a spot a mile downwind of my AP (with it set at maximum), and was still able to get a solid carrier. I shouldn't really be pushing that much power out into the woods for that short a link. LLoyd | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Core2Duo on September 15, 2008, 5:51 pm
Please log in for more thread options Interesting read Lloyd. Keep us posted. | |||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Ubiquity PS-2 bridge kit - followup | September 15, 2008, 7:22 am |
| Ubiquity bridge kit | September 10, 2008, 9:31 am |
| wi-spy followup | March 23, 2006, 11:58 am |
| Bridge/workgroup bridge scenario and channels | August 1, 2005, 1:21 pm |
| Bridge to Multipoint Bridge, best security? | November 29, 2005, 9:02 pm |
| bridge | January 20, 2005, 6:24 pm |
| Using an AP as a bridge | October 6, 2005, 12:54 pm |
| bridge | October 17, 2005, 10:24 am |
| 2 APs as bridge? | December 16, 2005, 4:06 pm |
| AP or Bridge? | March 15, 2006, 10:24 pm |
| Best Bridge? | June 11, 2006, 12:55 pm |
| Anyone Used a E-ZY Bridge/AP?? | February 8, 2007, 7:33 pm |
| AP used as a "bridge"? | May 1, 2008, 11:47 am |
| Netgear Bridge 802.11g | October 19, 2004, 2:12 am |
| Cheapest 802.11b bridge? | October 20, 2004, 8:57 am |
>I received, installed, and fiddled with the Ubiquity kit.
>
> IF the documentation had been less ambibuous, the whole process would
> have taken about two hours -- most of which would've been hanging the
> masts and routing the POE cabling.
>
> However, it took me one day of head scratching, and an hour the next
> day to fix the problem.
>
> It turns out, their docs use the strange convention of "station" and
> "Access Point" for the bridge components. They do not make it clear -
> in fact they somewhat mislead you to think otherwise - that it's
> important which end is which.
>
> Presumably, the setup is a totally transparent bridge, but only an
> "access point" is capable of associating with a local subnet via DHCP;
> even though either end can (apparently) be configured to do so.
>
> So, reversing my station and AP assignments got the system up on the
> first try, after dozens of attempts to figure out what I had failed to
> do when they were the other way-round.
>
> The system holds up solidly at 48Mb/s over the 500' I have to feed.
> Some footnote specs say that the "typical" link of 5Km will work at
> full bandwidth.
>
> I still need to do some threshold tests to see how low a radiated
> power I can get away with. I drove to a spot a mile downwind of my AP
> (with it set at maximum), and was still able to get a solid carrier.
> I shouldn't really be pushing that much power out into the woods for
> that short a link.
>
> LLoyd
>