Talk:Cambium Networks

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

172.84.212.158 (talk · contribs) has been paid by unknown on behalf of Motorola Canopy. Their editing has included contributions to this article. disclosure

Early questions[edit]

Is there any rationale for what is essentially an advertisement in the external links? 65.75.73.66 (talk) 01:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Preparing table below before I put it in the article. Cstanners (talk) 06:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name (Original)	Introduced	Protocol, Scheduling	Frequency	Bandwidth	Ethernet rate (Air rate)	PPS	Latency	Max distance	PoE
Multipoint
Canopy P7, P8	2001	Canopy FSK, software	2.4, 5.7Ghz?	20Mhz	6mbit (10mbit)	2000?	20ms	32 miles?	Canopy 24v
Canopy P9	2004	Canopy FSK, SW/[HW]	2.4, 5.2, 5.4, 5.7	20Mhz	6mbit (10mbit) /[14mbit (20mbit)]	3000?	20ms/[5ms]	64 miles?	Canopy 24v
Canopy P9 900mhz	2004	Canopy FSK, SW/[HW]	900Mhz	8Mhz	2.4mbit (3.3mbit) /[4.4mbit (6.6mbit)]	3000?	20ms/[15ms]	120 miles?	Canopy 24v
Canopy P10	2008	Canopy FSK, HW	2.4, 5.2, 5.4, 5.7	20Mhz	14mbit (20mbit)	6200?	5ms	64 miles?	Canopy 24v
Canopy P10 900Mhz	2008	Canopy FSK, HW	900Mhz	8Mhz	4.4mbit (6.6mbit)	6200?	15ms	120 miles?	Canopy 24v
Canopy 400 OFDM	2008	Canopy ODFM, HW	5.4Ghz	10Mhz	21mbit (35mbit)	6200	5ms	5 miles	Canopy 30v
Canopy 430 OFDM	2009?	Canopy ODFM, HW	5.4Ghz	20Mhz	42mbit? (70mbit?)	6200?	5ms	5 miles?	Canopy 30v
Point-to-Point
PTP100 - P7,P8	2001	Canopy FSK, SW	2.4, 5.7	20Mhz	6mbit (10mbit)	2000?	20ms	32 miles?	Canopy 24v
PTP100 - P9	2004	Canopy FSK, SW /[HW]	2.4, 5.2, 5.4, 5.7	20Mhz	6mbit (10mbit), [14mbit (20mbit)]	3000?	2ms	64 miles?	Canopy 24v
PTP100 - P10	2008	Canopy FSK, HW	2.4, 5.2, 5.4, 5.7	20Mhz	14mbit (20mbit)	6200?	2ms	64 miles?	Canopy 24v
PTP200	2008	Canopy OFDM, HW	5.4Ghz	10Mhz	21mbit (~35mbit)	6200?	2ms	64 miles?	Canopy 30v
PTP300	2008	Orthogon 15Mhz	2.5, 4.9, 5.4, 5.8	15Mhz	25Mbit	Full	5ms	155 miles	Ortho new
PTP400 (Gemini)	2002	Orthogon 12Mhz	2.5, 4.9, 5.4, 5.8	12Mhz	21Mbit (lite, 30mbit) / 43Mbit (60mbit)	60K	10ms	125 miles	Ortho old
PTP500	2008	Orthogon 15Mhz	2.5, 4.9, 5.4, 5.8	15Mhz	52Mbit (lite) / 105Mbit	Full	5ms	155 miles	Ortho new
PTP600 (Spectra)	2004	Orthogon 30Mhz	2.5, 4.9, 5.4, 5.8	30Mhz	150Mbit (lite) / 300Mbit	Full	5ms	125 miles	Ortho new

We need to get this cleaned up, possibly give a small background on what point-multipoint wireless systems are, and how canopy plays into that.

I added more information; There's still some cleanups to do, esp. differentiate the original Motorola products from the Orthogon ones, as the series have different design, protocols, speeds and uses. Maybe a table would help? Cstanners 18:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rolled back the edit by Happypc that added a line about canopy being affected by adverse weather due to it being outdoors. Canopy is designed to operate out of doors and adverse weather does not have any effect on a properly installed Canopy network. Also, I'm not sure how true it is that 5.7 is the most popular band, but that could just be my regional environment. 2.4, 900, and 5.2 tends to be the most popular with 5.7 reserved for point-to-point backhaul links. Again, that could be a choice by the operators in my state and not indicate general reality. Has Motorola released sales figures for Canopy broken down by frequency? Jonathan Auer (talk) 18:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know your comment is about 4 years and some months old, but I thought I would just say, the company I work for uses 5.7 GHz Canopy point-to-multipoint wherever possible due to its longer range and better throughput than other frequencies, specifically when using ODFM rather than FSK.Cr@$h3d@t@^{t@1k t0 m3} 19:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gremlins?[edit]

The first bullet point under Comparison with other wireless networking systems includes a whimsical line referencing gremlins which I am unsure is appropriate. Suggesting a rewording if it would indeed be appropriate but unwilling to do so myself with concern of omitting a possibly (if somewhat unlikely) pertinent technical term.

Comparison with other wireless networking systems[edit]

These products are fixed wireless technology. Canopy protocol products have many advantages over Wi-Fi and other wireless local area network protocols: Transmission timing is explicitly controlled, so that all access points (AP) on all towers can be synchronized by gremlins to prevent interference. APs of the same band can be placed right next to each other, and back-to-back units can use exactly the same frequency. Xiaou (talk) 10:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Motorola-Canopy-logo.gif[edit]

Image:Motorola-Canopy-logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Motorola Canopy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071028001836/http://motorola.canopywireless.com:80/support/library/ to http://motorola.canopywireless.com/support/library/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Debatable points in article[edit]

The article states that among the disadvantages is wireless round trip time when compared to wired technologies, but in testing on older canopy gear, ping (round trip times) were as low as 30ms (comparable to most Cable Internet implementations of the time, and even exceeding some poorly setup or maintained DOCSIS Cable systems). Newer Cambium Medusa gear improves this even further. I have no source for this (yet... I am searching), but in my own testing, I have seen the new medusa gear achieve ping times as low as 7ms, which is comparable to many Fiber systems. Yes, Medusa uses multiple frequencies, and wide band channels (80Mhz wide) to improve speeds, and reduce ping, but it is misleading to cite this as a disadvantage when the difference is so nominal that it is not perceivable in real-world use. In addition, as long as there are no obstructions or trees, some WISPS have achieved the same, or even higher reliability levels vs their local wired provider.

While I think it right to list legitimate disadvantages, due to these things, which should be verifiable using third party sources, it is misleading to list some of what is in the article as disadvantages, and seems like something a wired provider would list as a tactic to discourage people from using a WISP. Yes, Wireless systems CAN go down, or experience increased air-delay during *SOME* storms. However, even this is rare with more modern gear from Cambium and others, and when it does happen, it tends to be storms that also cause issues with some wired providers (which, contrary to popular belief are NOT immune to decreased speeds and reliability with severe storms). Cr@$h3d@t@^{t@1k t0 m3} 03:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, even fiber has round-trip delay... the speed of light. It is in ALL network systems. Yes, Wireless tech is more susceptible to increased delay due to interference if not setup properly, BUT THIS IS NOT DUE TO RADIO SIGNALS TRAVELING SLOWER THAN FIBER SIGNALS.... Radio waves, including those put out by Cambium Canopy, Ubiquity's competing platforms, and even your local radio station travel AT THE SAME SPEED AS A FIBER SIGNAL... the speed of light, when in a vacuum. Yes yes, but the atmosphere isn't a vacuum, and it will experience delay in atmosphere... True, but that reduction in speed is so small that even latency and delay sensitive applications wont show any perceivable difference with the relatively short distances of these wireless systems (around 5 KM is the maximum distance recommended by the manufacturers, but some ISPs push it to up to 11 or 12 KM using special gear, but even then it is a nominal difference). Increased round-trip times are not usually due to it just being wireless, but due to interference, which is becoming less of an issue with modern systems that use GPS sync, multiple frequencies on the same subscriber link, and beam forming. Cr@$h3d@t@^{t@1k t0 m3} 03:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Name change Cambium Networks[edit]

Requesting here a name correction / move page from Motorola Canopy to Cambium Networks at wiki/Cambium_Networks -- covering the publicly traded company formerly known as Motorola Canopy (NASDAQ: CMBM). 172.84.212.158 (talk) 23:17, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 July 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane ^talk 18:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motorola Canopy → Cambium Networks – Name changed in 2014 after spin out from Motorola Company. Current name is Cambium Networks, now publicly traded. e.g. coverage https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2019/06/26/cambium-networks-raises-70m-in-ipo-but-shares-slip.html 172.84.212.158 (talk) 23:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support: According to WP:UCRN. Google News search shows far more results for "Cambian Networks" than "Motorola Canopy". Nomian (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I note that the target is deleted and salted, and that nom has a disclosed COI as a paid editor. WP:NAMECHANGES seems to cover this well. I though of closing as move but in view of the (deleted) history I think it's best for another admin to have a look too. Andrewa (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Backhaul Method[edit]

Originally, Canopy was part of Broadband over Power line (BPL) which use power lines for backhaul to the system and internet. I came wondering if/how it has evolved and see nothing about the backhaul except a reference to Ethernet. Can someone add something? I worked for Motorola back then, but didn't have and now have nothing to do with any related business. -- Steve -- (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]