• Hello

    I'm currently starting my research into a 5Ghz PtP solution that will connect between two buildings that are across the street from each other, a few hundred feet. the buildings are located close to a major highway and in a business park.  

    We found the AirFiber solution from Ubiquiti (ttps:// solution so far which looks promising with its high throughput.

    I was wondering if anyone has any experiences using this Air Fiber solution or have recommendations on other PtP solutions.


  • I recently used the Cisco 1532e bridges to shoot 1 mile across the Texas medical center. Its been up for almost a year. In fact last time I checked the radio association was like 250 days. Im working on a bridge wave solution now. Im not installing it but I worked on the specs. These bridges are very $$$$. We are looking at 27K for the pair. 

    If you're only a few hundred feet apart and you have line of sight it should be easy. I would check the install location at each side and check the layer 1 and layer 2 to see what the channels look like. 

  • Anything else such as features i should look for in the solution?

    Any idea if there is a RRM type option is  standard to switch channels due to interference? 

  • I almost always deploy my PtPs with "autonomous" radios and not allow a controller to manage it. if you do an RF study first you should be able to see what the air looks like. I wold also avoid DFS channels (UNII2 and UNII2E). As for some type of advance RRM I don't use it. 

  • By RFmanDan - edited: April 29, 2015

    What kind of throughput are you really needing?  If on a tight budget, the Ubiquiti M5 or EnGenius EnStation5 are ideas too.   Do not use 2.4GHz and do not use DFS channels.  I like using the UNII-3 frequencies.  Channel 149, 153, 157, 161 etc.  At only a few hundred feet, even some partial obstructions should still work fine.  If perfect line of sight - you may actually have to turn down power.  Throughput sometimes will actually get worse on some devices when RSSI is stronger than -40dBm.

  • For required bandwidth requirements I'd like to get the fastest speed possible within a reasonable price. As bandwidth requirements will increase over time.   It looks like the 1.2 Gbps is the current fastest standard speed.

  • By RFmanDan - edited: May 1, 2015

    Looks like that Ubiquiti 5GHz AirFiber is a good fit or Mimosa...

  • By karlenr - edited: May 28, 2015

    If the radios are quite close such as across a street here is a trick that can potentially reduce outside interference to zero. Run the radios at full power with very high gain directional antennas pointed directly at each other and use the maximum amount of attenuation between the antenna and the radio that will still give full throughput. The actual EIRP will still need to meet regulations of course. 

    The effect of the attenuators is to reduce any other received signal except  the one you want to below the noise floor of your receiver. It will be like private fiber Ubiquity also make a 24GHz PtP link which might be worth a look.

    I would be looking for something with good security as well. A lot of the cheap WiFi WDS based bridges don't have AES encryption.

  • Karlenr,

    I read your post with interest.  It sounds like it should work.

    The probelm with attenuators, is that they effectively cut down on the receivers sensitivity too, and is the effect you are trying to take advantage of here.  I've never wanted to do that intentionally (yet).

    One problem I can see is that receive and transmit gain is not the same with highly directional parabolic antennas, and it might be a chore to get the attenuation just right.  Also, good attenuators are not cheap, and putting together a selection of them might be expensive.

    Trying a horizontal antenna polarity might work just as well at a lower cost, and I would try that first.

  • Karlenr & Howard,

    I'm also finding this idea fascinating.  If money isn't really a great concern, and your are using quality components, I really like this idea.  You'd be able to get a very 'tight' link by using highly directional antennas.  On a short link, even if you administratively reduced the TX power significantly, you'd likely still have to leverage attenuators anyway.

Page 1 of 2