Will the new 1520 radio talk to the old 1510? I'm in the middle of installing the whole wireless network, I got about half of them up and running. Now I found out that 1510 is end of life and being replace by 1520. Just want to make sure they will talk to each other.
Solved! Go to Solution.
I'm very experienced with this. I have several networks mixing both 1510 and 1522 series. (200+ radios in one). It used to be true that the 1522 had to be the RAP, but this is no longer the case. You can mix and match all you want. Just remember the basic differences in mesh data rate between them. And of course, neither series will talk to a 1505.
A side note- Keep in mind that all these radios currently mesh on ~5 GHz and this does not work well at all if you have trees. You will need to have quite a few more access points than you think, possibly as many as 50 per square mile (or more).
Also- The antennas on the 1510 point down, while at least one on the 1522 must point up. This is the 5 GHz one. The other 3 are for 2.4 and only one on the bottom is truly needed (unless you want the MISO (Multiple In Single Out) feature. This antenna sticking up will intrude into the 40 inch clearance required by the electircal code, so you won't be able to mount them as high as you perhaps thought you could. The radio with the cable modem mounts on a strand and has all the antennas pointing down, though.
Of course if you are lucky enough to actually have the power company allow you to mount them on the street lights themselves then pat yourself on the back! In about half of my cases, I have to add another street light arm lower and only for the radio or forget the power pole altogether and put up a metal pole for the radio.
I have learned a lot about outdoor mesh applications and troubleshooting from all my Cisco mesh projects as well as my projects for Earthlink. I was one of the main field engineers for their mesh systems with 300 to 10,000+ radios each. Although they were from a different manufacturer, the basic idea is pretty much the same.
Feel free to ask questions if you want.
Good post Ralph! What do you think about Cisco loosening the noose on the guys deploying smaller networks. I am definitely against it. I think that you can either design these networks or not. If you can configure one AP then you can configure many APs. That doesn't mean you can build a good outdoor MESH network. The problem is the average WiFi engineer doesn't know enough about complex RF to deploy in the outdoor areas. They don't understand link margins, fresnel calculations, free path loss, doppler shift, clutter data, electrical codes, public relations, and last but not least the politics involved around large municipal deployments. I think Cisco has created themselves a support mess by doing this. We now have 5 MESH engineers on staff, RCDDs to cover our electrical code issues, and an installation team that has installed these in several cities and campuses around the country. We use state of the art planning tools based around clutter data. What I am getting at is that this MESH practice cost us a lot in time, money and manpower to do the job right and now we have anybody able to one auth a small town which you know is 90% of the market place. This is truly an ATP technology and should've stayed that way.
In your experience what is the type of distances that you expect in an urban area RAP-MAP and MAP-MAP.
I have looked at the AP Link Calculator for the 1522 and read the design guides which seem to be US centric in terms of distances. The calculator is giving distances of around 140m (MAP-MAP) but 100m for backhaul.
I have done some initial survey work and this seems to be roughly correct. I was hoping for greater distances based on the design guide.
BTW I am in the EU domain.