Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls
-
Is a static Wifi bridge the right call for VoIP? Isn't that unreliable to a degree? Dropped packets etc.
-
As you can see, the tree tops may be an issue in some years.The weather has been clear.
I set up a similar wireless bridge and they don't have problems with VoIP calls.
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
As you can see, the tree tops may be an issue in some years.
The weather has been clear.
I set up a similar wireless bridge and they don't have problems with VoIP calls.
I haven't done this before so please don't take what I'm asking as any sort of challenge. I'm just working off of my own experiences with Wifi in general
Sounds really interesting if that's worked for you -
Are you certain that the mounting is solid and neither unit is moving? Seems that way, just checking.
I would definitely be worried about the pings not being stable. That is indicative (but not certain) of jitter on the connection.
-
Both are mounted to the building like this. It doesn't seem like they can move.
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
Both are mounted to the building like this. It doesn't seem like they can move.
That does not appear very sturdy from this view. Could be, but it hanging out like that seems like it could wobble all over the place.
-
It's lagged in there pretty good. I don't think it's moving without something breaking.
-
@coliver said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
Both are mounted to the building like this. It doesn't seem like they can move.
That does not appear very sturdy from this view. Could be, but it hanging out like that seems like it could wobble all over the place.
I agree. I think some wind would move that all over the place from the look of it.
Edit: Fair enough. Maybe I'm wrong.
-
Ping times after running a few minutes:
Ping statistics for 192.168.1.19:
Packets: Sent = 244, Received = 244, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 8ms, Average = 1msIt seems like the last time I ran it, I had some time outs. I'll run a longer ping.
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
Ping times after running a few minutes:
Ping statistics for 192.168.1.19:
Packets: Sent = 244, Received = 244, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 8ms, Average = 1msIt seems like the last time I ran it, I had some time outs. I'll run a longer ping.
Are you pinging the AP on the other end of the connection, or are you pinging a device on the other end of the connection?
-
@Mike-Davis From that picture you posted of the building, I'd be concerned that the antenna placement puts some of those trees in the LOS. Once leaves appear on the one tree, you'll probably see the signal strength drop.
I forget now exactly how large you want the area for good LOS between antennas, but I remember it being larger than you might assume from the size of most antennas. Something like 12'-15' if I remember correctly.
-
That was pinging the AP on the other side of the bridge. I hooked my laptop up to the far side and pinged back to the router at HQ. No drops, but I think it's weird that there was any pings above 1ms since I'm the only one on it. I think when I dropped the channel width down to 20MHz they were all consistent at 1ms. Is there an explanation for that? I don't really understand the theory behind that one.
Ping statistics for 192.168.1.2:
Packets: Sent = 459, Received = 459, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 74ms, Average = 2ms -
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
Both are mounted to the building like this. It doesn't seem like they can move.
The correct mount for this type things is a very sold mast (or schedule pipe) and an clamp around the pipe, something like that will move out of alignment.
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
That was pinging the AP on the other side of the bridge. I hooked my laptop up to the far side and pinged back to the router at HQ. No drops, but I think it's weird that there was any pings above 1ms since I'm the only one on it. I think when I dropped the channel width down to 20MHz they were all consistent at 1ms. Is there an explanation for that? I don't really understand the theory behind that one.
Ping statistics for 192.168.1.2:
Packets: Sent = 459, Received = 459, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 74ms, Average = 2msThe way I understand it is that the wider the channel, the more chances there are from devices or other things on nearby channels... Just like when running at 2.4gHz (these are 5gHz units, right?).
For the wireless N units that I last set up (5 years ago), we used the 20 mHz channel width all the way around.
-
yes, they are 5GHz. I don't need the bandwidth at 80mHz, so maybe I'll try knocking it down and seeing how that goes. From what I read the lower frequencies are less suseptable to interference. Does anyone have any real world experience of that? Also what is the "constellation" tool supposed to look like when things are good vs bad? I ran it, but then didn't know what I was looking at.
-
@Mike-Davis What your reading is correct, but that's the physical radio signal. A 10MHz signal can more easily pass through walls than a 10GHz signal, which while correct, isn't what most people refer to when talking about wifi. Lots of things can interfere with the 2.4GHz wifi signals. Less things use the 5GHz range, so that channel is normally more available.
-
I knocked it down to 20MHz channel width and ran it for 14 hours with no pings over 20 ms. Users have been on it for 2 work days now and everything is working fine. I wish I understood the science behind it so I could know definitively if I moved the second antenna higher on the building if I could get more bandwidth out if it, but at the speed it's running now, it really doesn't matter. They have more than enough bandwidth and it seems to be solid, so I'm going to leave well enough alone.
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
I knocked it down to 20MHz channel width and ran it for 14 hours with no pings over 20 ms. Users have been on it for 2 work days now and everything is working fine. I wish I understood the science behind it so I could know definitively if I moved the second antenna higher on the building if I could get more bandwidth out if it, but at the speed it's running now, it really doesn't matter. They have more than enough bandwidth and it seems to be solid, so I'm going to leave well enough alone.
glad this worked out for you
-
@Mike-Davis said in Ubiquiti wifi bridge static on VoIP calls:
I knocked it down to 20MHz channel width and ran it for 14 hours with no pings over 20 ms. Users have been on it for 2 work days now and everything is working fine. I wish I understood the science behind it so I could know definitively if I moved the second antenna higher on the building if I could get more bandwidth out if it, but at the speed it's running now, it really doesn't matter. They have more than enough bandwidth and it seems to be solid, so I'm going to leave well enough alone.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, lol. Glad you got it sorted!
-
Woot!
