VPN from an RBI router

Forums › New Zealand Mobile and Wireless › VPN from an RBI router

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

71 posts

Master Geek

#1370438 19-Aug-2015 18:52

only can say on what i've done myself and working stable here and have recently upgrade it by using a rocket m5 ti instead of a bullet so I'm guessing it matter of real world situation vers someone that may not of ever used a ubnt radio mind you I wont waste my time commenting if their always someone thinks they know more than someone else on here so all ive said is that I seen my own working here for years and never seen it drop link unless I decided to reboot things or power has failed beyond the UPS that supply it .

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1370451 19-Aug-2015 19:01

gorringS: only can say on what i've done myself and working stable here and have recently upgrade it by using a rocket m5 ti instead of a bullet so I'm guessing it matter of real world situation vers someone that may not of ever used a ubnt radio mind you I wont waste my time commenting if their always someone thinks they know more than someone else on here so all ive said is that I seen my own working here for years and never seen it drop link unless I decided to reboot things or power has failed beyond the UPS that supply it .

As somebody who's job it is to build and engineer wireless networks with various brand of equipment and who's personally installed probably somewhere in the vicinity of 500 or so UBNT radios I'd like to think I know a thing or two about them - both good and bad.

I'm not arguing that your solution doesn't work. I'm merely pointing out 5GHz WiFi is a LoS technology. It will not go through obstacles and reflections will cause very poor performance.

dwl

371 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1370528 19-Aug-2015 20:25

I agree with sbiddle that 5GHz outside over any sort of distance should be considered a LoS technology. While a link will work with some obstruction, it can also become less stable - for example might change when ground is wet.

My suggestion is try and get LoS, maybe consider 2.4 rather than 5 GHz models if any hint of obstruction, and use the distance extension offered by PoE to position the radios where there is clearer path. I have heard good reports about 900 MHz if you must bend over an obstruction or push through trees but I see the price is higher for this equipment.

Remember that you aren't just wanting a link that will pass some traffic with a weak signal but rather trying to get close to the maximum modulation as with the higher RBI speeds the WiFi segment could be the limiting factor. The difference from lowest to highest modulation can be 20dB and I seriously doubt you will get highest modulation over an obstacle at 400 metres.

kaihoka

164 posts

Master Geek

#1370534 19-Aug-2015 20:29

Under what circumstances would you use 3.5GHz and when 5GHz wireless

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1370538 19-Aug-2015 20:33

kaihoka: Under what circumstances would you use 3.5GHz and when 5GHz wireless

You could use 3.5GHz if you own management rights from RSM to use this band as it's licenced. Since you don't own management rights you'll be breaking the law and will be fined heavily if caught.

Up until 2 months ago the use of TDD equipment in the 3.5GHz band was also illegal. Only FDD was permitted. TDD now maybe used as part of a trial in accordance with the new rules.

dwl

371 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1370543 19-Aug-2015 20:46

kaihoka: Under what circumstances would you use 3.5GHz and when 5GHz wireless

If this is remote rural I see no benefit is trying to use 3.5GHz when 2.4GHz or 5GHz should be clear and the spectrum can be managed by the owner of equipment on site (i.e. apply a basic channel plan to separate linking from the AP serving a house).

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1370546 19-Aug-2015 20:49

dwl:
kaihoka: Under what circumstances would you use 3.5GHz and when 5GHz wireless

If this is remote rural I see no benefit is trying to use 3.5GHz when 2.4GHz or 5GHz should be clear and the spectrum can be managed by the owner of equipment on site (i.e. apply a basic channel plan to separate linking from the AP serving a house).

And more importantly as I mentioned above unless you own management rights in the 3.5GHz band you will be breaking the law and will be prosecuted if you try and use the 3.5GHz band.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

gorringS

71 posts

Master Geek

#1370550 19-Aug-2015 21:05

why not use channel 43 on frequency of 2474 on 2.4ghz range as ubnt gear are only one few that can use that channel currently . Firmware 5.62 allows access via air max mode selected to 40mhz and 2.4ghz range does travel further easier than the 5ghz range.

dwl

371 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1370595 19-Aug-2015 21:37

gorringS: why not use channel 43 on frequency of 2474 on 2.4ghz range as ubnt gear are only one few that can use that channel currently . Firmware 5.62 allows access via air max mode selected to 40mhz and 2.4ghz range does travel further easier than the 5ghz range.

I wouldn't like to encourage illegal use of spectrum - a centre frequency of 2474 MHz and bandwidth of 40 MHz seems to be outside Radiocommunications Regulations (General User Radio Licence for Short Range Devices) Notice 2015 upper limit of 2483.5 MHz. I doubt there is a problem with using slightly lower channels.

As an aside, the calculators have got better and I was surprised how well the airLink calculator made use of the terrain database for our property. Don't trust this for accurate results as the contour data isn't high enough resolution but it gives an idea of claimed performance - you will need to check for LoS. I would be interested in any comments on how optimistic this is in terms of clear LoS levels and rates.

kaihoka

164 posts

Master Geek

#1370609 19-Aug-2015 22:27

Thanks for all the input
Any network will be completely clear LOS even if we have to add another pole and no distance will be more than 400 meters.
I have read that 5GHz can carry more data
In anticipation of 4G RBI upgrade would that.be a better option than 2.4

dwl

371 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1370698 20-Aug-2015 09:29

kaihoka: Thanks for all the input
Any network will be completely clear LOS even if we have to add another pole and no distance will be more than 400 meters.
I have read that 5GHz can carry more data
In anticipation of 4G RBI upgrade would that.be a better option than 2.4

The data throughput capacity does not depend on the frequency but rather on the bandwidth of the channel and the modulation methods used. A 40MHz channel at 2.4GHz has same capacity as a 40MHz channel at 5GHz for the same method.

Where higher frequencies benefit is the amount of spectrum available and there is more at 5GHz, hence easier to fit in wide bandwidth and more channels. If you have clear LoS over this short path then 5GHz gives more options for leaving the 2.4GHz spectrum for the WiFi users on the sites with a separate AP.

The actual throughput will always be less that the claimed wireless speed due to overheads (e.g. 802.11a does not give 54Mbps throughput). A rough guide here aligns with my understanding and you probably want better than 802.11g/a (get under 30Mbps) with 802.11n with 40MHz channels probably a good starting point. I don't think it is worth trying for 802.11ac with current pricing.

kaihoka

164 posts

Master Geek

#1371375 21-Aug-2015 10:53

thanks everyone for all your input into my wireless questions
in the end RBI was not feasible.
even though the farm has areas of RBI signal everywhere none fall on buildings.
the roof of the building it would have been best to connect to was 10 meters out of the coverage colour zone.
even after i pointed out that i went to the house and got three bars vodafone, to legally get the cheap data it has to be in the zone.
the nice lady at farm side pointed out that RBI was different than mobile and i could not use my phone signal as a measure.
vodafone was better but it is simply a business decision not really about coverage
spark signal is good enough there so my friends have got antennas and cellular modems for spark and the local 3G tower
it is very disappointing that spark is not doing RBI data plans on 3G.
in our area the spark tower has a west/ souwest sector not covered by vodafone that sends out a good signal for mobile broad band.
there are lots of houses and farms stuck with farmside satellite or expensive mobile broadband waiting for the day, sometime in the unforseeable future for spark to upgrade the mnt burnet tower so they can have affordable broadband

RunningMan

8954 posts

Uber Geek

#1371535 21-Aug-2015 12:41

kaihoka: [snip]
the roof of the building it would have been best to connect to was 10 meters out of the coverage colour zone.

So you haven't had an actual installer do a test for signal strength at the location? The coverage maps are a calculated estimate of coverage, not a definitive and absolute answer.

dwl

371 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1371880 21-Aug-2015 22:49

RunningMan:
kaihoka: [snip]
the roof of the building it would have been best to connect to was 10 meters out of the coverage colour zone.

So you haven't had an actual installer do a test for signal strength at the location? The coverage maps are a calculated estimate of coverage, not a definitive and absolute answer.

Yes, something does seem not quite right here. Unless something magical has happened with the accuracy of terrain data and coverage predictions since I was involved with rural wireless planning, acceptable results on a map only 10 metres from where you need coverage would seem worth trying for an install especially if your phone has coverage at the house on the same service.

Could you please clarify the steps that have occured as I am sure others would be interested. Has this just been over the phone or has someone visited the site?

Is it really a case of the commercial subsidy being based on a coverage map when it seems obvious this location is what RBI is meant to serve? Not making sense to me.

kaihoka

164 posts

Master Geek

#1371892 22-Aug-2015 00:08

hi
i think i could have done a self install deal with ultimate but my friends on the farm are not technical and i realized they would need an authorized technician to provide backup.
both vodafone and farm side were adamant that they would not send technicians out to the farm because there was not an actual address under a coverage zone and the property would not be eligible for the cheap data plan
i did point out that most of the farm was under coverage and i have double checked the distance from the roof to the coverage zone and it is 8 metres.
the house unfortunately, is in a green square with orange all around.
apparently there is a tree in the way of the house .
i said how about they put up a shed in the best spot for coverage and use solar power and bring it in there but apparently it has to be on mains power.

this is on the check your mobile coverage 4G 3G , mobile, rural broad band map
on the rural broadband map the house is 30 meters away from a zone, the maps are slightly different .

it does seem that it is the roof that counts.
when i got RBI a year ago my shed was in the zone, but not my house, but vodafone came out cause i didnt tell them it was the shed.
my house was 50 meters away down the hill on the wrong side
when the technician put an antenna on my house roof he said it was one of the best signals and DBm he had installed .
vodafone still have my house address no on my shed roof and the coverage map extends to my house now anyway

it seems coverage, or not,is just a business decision.
if you are technically inclined you can do self installs with ultimate
otherwise you are at the mercy of arbitrary decisions by teleco firms
maybe this is common situation i do not know
if you were technically minded you could fight your way round it , other wise you would just give up

1 | 2 | 3 | 4