We're expanding our footprint at work and we need a solution to get our network to the adjacent building without running ethernet. The buildings are approx. 50ft apart and separated by a highly trafficked parking lot. (diagram below).

We also need to install our IP cameras (8)(PoE) that are powered from their own router. I will have about 5-7 workstations as well.

I'm thinking this.

FiOS Router ----hardline----> Wireless AP ----wireless----> Wireless AP ----hardline---> Switch ----hardline--->

Thinking about using these....



Thoughts? Suggestions? Anyone with Experience?

I love using the UniFi devices, but would recommend against using them to transit a building to building link; they're designed for broad deployment in an office area, not really for pushing to a remote building. I've got the same devices, one in a building and another in a building about 20' away, and can barely see the signal (metal buildings).

What I would recommend is a UniFi in each building, centrally located assuming the buildings aren't too large, and a point-to-point device from Ubiquiti to perform the transit between the buildings.

If 100mbit will work, a NanoStation M (https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/nanostationm/) will work well. If more speed is needed, a NanoBeam AC would work (https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/nanobeam-ac/) or if gigabit is required, the AirFiber series has a number of options (https://www.ubnt.com/broadband/#airfiber:hardware)

So, FiOS to router at building one. Router to UniFi for Building One. Router to PtP on Building 1 to PtP on Building 2 to Switch in Building 2. Switch in Building 2 to UniFi in Building 2.

As far as the PoE, what cameras are you running?

I have heard really good things about the Ubiquiti Airfiber line.

+1 with AirFiber. It is easy to setup, and you can thank us later.

I would recommend running fiber to the "remote" building, I would not rely on wireless to provide signal between buildings. The security risks are too great using wireless, unless you are not concerned about it? Plus, fiber would not be susceptible to lightning or electrical issues as would an exterior mounted wireless device on each building. Wireless is a great technology but the security is still an issue. Good luck with this project.

thanks for all the input. I ended up talking with Hunter at ISP Supplies in College Station. He recommended the Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-19 - 5GHz NanoBeam ac Bridge 19dB, I've ordered two of these and hope to mount one on each building (exterior). Then simply down to a router or switch and to the rest.

I'm a bit reluctant to drill holes in the building's exterior but so be it. I don't expect to install for a week or two but I'll try to get back here with updates.

btw, those guys at ISP Supplies really know there stuff.

How tall are the buildings? If someone covers the line of sight, are you going to lose your cameras ability to record? Or are those not LOS dependent?

Have you done any testing of the RF environment yet? We were looking to get around Ethernet / MPLS by doing same and no joy - outdoors (parking lot) too cluttered to get consistent band width....

You could probably call a networking company or two and get a probono test

Any rigs go through that parking lot? Aerial fiber is always an option. It doesnt stand out if there is already aerial power coming in.

Under 300 feet, cooper is fine but with multiple users and HD video, fiber between switches would be best practice.

What are you doing for voice in those new offices? If IP phones, live voice packets traveling over that wireless stream with all that data and video will be rough. Better get someone to set up QoS but I still foresee possible issues there.

If a digital phones, you'll need a 25 copper pair to that building anyway. One pair used per phone on most systems. "Remote" IP phones on a digital hybrid system within the same network can run into issues. Been there unfortunately...

I'd second MHA's thoughts on IP Phones

Wifi would be sketchy at best if you need any level of QoS

It's taken us forever just to optimize IP phones over MPLS (which is a bunk proposition at best these days it seems)

Also what routers are you planning/using? I'd attribute a lot of our issues to the Sonicwalls we are running

Edit on a mobile disregard emoticon

I've actually run a number of IP phones over a Nanobridge M5 link (2.6 mile shot, direct LOS) and have rarely had any quality issues. Running simple Aastra phones and a FreePBX system. The Ubiquiti gear has a mode (which I can't recall the term for for some reason) which helps get a good clean signal, and helps to pass traffic transparently, and was required to get the VoIP phones running well.

I've also done latency and video stream testing with a first-generation AirFiber system (which unlike WiFi has full duplex transmission, dedicated radio silicon for clean signal and runs at 24GHz) and it was pretty damned good. I've run a number of voice links over an AirFiber test unit, and the availability of such gear is part of what killed my last company (we did laser based PtP systems).

One problem we had with burial fiber in this area (very prevalent at WalMart gas stations, for example) was that the cheap fiber installers simply cut the driveway and put an armored fiber in. Those typically lasted about 1-2 years before they were broken, either due to repeated heating/cooling cycles moving the pavement around or "backhoe fade".

For a small number of users, with a decent LOS, a PtP NanoBeam system should work decently well. They have some LOS resiliency but with such a short distance shot, I wouldn't count on it.

Using any of the WiFi based systems (NanoBeam, Nano Bridge) would definitely need to verify that the signal in the area is clean. The AirFiber units (on 24GHz at least) are much more likely to be open, and you're well within the 13km distance limitation. The speed on the conventional AirFiber 24GHz is 1.4Gbps, but that's counting each way, so a balanced 700Mbit each way. The AirFiber development team were pretty much moved wholesale from Motorola and have a really good product.

@NWS, the fact you're running an Aastra/open source phone system is a testament to the fact you don't mind tinkering. The average customer/end user relies on a telecom integrator, who relies on the manufacturer.

If the OP is using an enterprise PBX, his integration vendor & system manufacturer (ShoreTel, Avaya, NEC, etc) will likely not support VOIP over a wireless bridge setup.

Live voice packets are tricky. Jitter & dropped calls are big issues compared to an Email loading for a big longer, etc. I can take a little load time on my PC but it's unacceptable while on the horn with a customer.

My two cents for the day.

We tried multiple bands with Ubi and one other (I forget the manufacturer) and there was just too much RF clutter - maybe a 2.5mi/13km shot where you would have to transmit from higher elevation for good LOS (hello zoning board) you can avoid a lot of the RF clutter issues but that's a lot of work any way you cut it

if you are point to point in a parking lot (we are) between single story office buildings it's a different beast - depends on density and how many interferers you have to contend with at 12' off the ground

And cutting concrete didn't work for us because a) nobody wanted to schedule a small job and b) it was cost prohibitive for our lease term $8-$12k

@MHA,

Actually, that's what was in place when the customer requested a link between building A and building B, as Verizon was over 6 months late in deploying fiber connection to building B. I'd explained to them that it might not be great, but it actually turned out to be just fine, and supported about 80 phones at Building B when the PBX was at Building A. Call quality was actually quite good, once the bridging mode was configured. Of course, YMMV, and I completely get that many larger PBX systems wouldn't like it, or wouldn't play nice (through limitations on the link, or limitations on testing, or limitations on what the manufacturer will look at working with).

That was over an inexpensive NanoBridge. The least reliable item was the FreePBX itself!

The AirFiber systems are a new class and really can't be compared to the other systems.

Looking at the average number of users this person is saying they may have across the link, I'd be hard pressed to say they're going to be shelling out for a larger enterprise PBX, which would necessitate the higher requirements, especially given that phones weren't even part of the original scope listed (one of my clients has pretty much done away with all desk phones and simply does forwards to cell phones, and only uses IP phones for certain users and conference rooms) I'd assumed they'd either solved that issue, or it wasn't a concern.

I simply brought up that the UniFi wasn't a good fit for the link requested, and proposed other hardware which would be better suited.

It's also funny how many "integrators" are doing just that deployment of Aastra + FreePBX/PBX-In-A-Box/etc these days. Personally, I prefer different systems, but the small to medium business market these days is increasingly being sold these systems that are "good enough" for the basic uses and cost 1/10th of competing enterprise level systems. Budget no concern, I wouldn't do a FreePBX style system, but you know how some small businesses are some times....

Did you guys try the AirFibers at all?

The only reason I mention is that they're 24GHz based, which virtually nothing is on, and run a GPS-synchronized full-duplex signal.

In PRBS testing, we got a signal that was incredibly clean and had very little signal loss, jitter or FCS/CRC errors. It did better than any other wireless devices in RFC2544 we'd tested at the time (even better than our own product!)

Let me go back and check bands and product tested; I'll ping my integrator

We tested a little over a year ago, so, it might not have been AirFiber

nwspmp is right on target.

The UBNT line of products can carry voice traffic just fine when the link is setup properly. Anyone having trouble didn't set the link up properly.

We have about 1000 UBNT wireless devices in the air servicing over 700 rural wireless customers. We deliver our voice service over the airMax radios day in and day out without so much as a hiccup or jitter. We use voip for the office phones and practically spend 8 hours a day on the phones.

The nanobridge ac 19 is a nice short range wireless product which should deliver over 100mbps without blinking.

If you have questions, Hunter is very knowledgeable or you can call us and we can offer advice.

@Brazos, What phone manufacturer do you use and is that set up supported if you call TAC for assistance?

Assuming you meant LAN VOIP via an IP PBX with traditional dialtone, not hosted phones riding the internet?

I'm definitely not a wireless expert. I do have experience with voice over MPLS, voice over WAN, and SIP calls over wifi. Those alone can be tricky and are green lit by PBX manufacturers. Wanting to know if the solution above is a "it works" scenario or if it is a certified solution with any notable telecom manufacturers.

Edit: Rereading that ... I kind of sounded pompous. I am genuinely interested to know if any IP PBX companies green light this

@Aggie MHA, we have a little of everything riding the airwaves.

-- We sell and support SIP VoIP traffic to our managed PBX (racked at Fibertown, our head end).-- About 100 extensions/ATA's at this point.
-- We have customers using 8X8, Vonage, MagjcJack and similar systems just using us as the dumb pipe to the internet.
-- We also run FreePBX with about 15 extensions for our internal use. Our office is 3 wireless hops in from the headend and all our calling (internal, extension->PBX->extension and external, extension->PBX->Flowroute) rides over our wireless network about 14 miles.

UBNT gear, when running the AirMax protocol, prioritizes VoIP traffic (if it is properly tagged with the right DSCP code).

There are serious issues that happen if you have an overloaded link but we have a properly engineered system where the backhauls/routers are not running at capacity. We stay on top of upgrades needed to reduce the chance of bottlenecks.

Thanks for the reply Brazos. Nice info. Most of the clients I work with are enterprise level with fiber between buildings/closets if there are multiple IDFs. I didn't call ShoreTel TAC as I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong here, was just curious about your experience with voice. I do know they require less than 150 ms of latency which I'm sure you're meeting. This would likely be one of those situations where if there was a voice issue, ShoreTel (ST) would immediately point to this setup versus their solution architecture or their soft switch in the cloud.

Unfortunately that's the world of dealing with manufacturers, not limited to ST.

We do have their mobility app running for multiple customers over Ruckus WAPs. This is a SIP device though that still hits the LAN > ST server > ST voice switch > PRI > PSTN.

Wireless is the future. We're getting there. Read any on LiFi? Using light as a data pipe. That's nuts!

@OP, keep in mind this is a non standard setup and you need someone qualified setting this up. Ask for references. Make sure current data and voice vendors are onboard. If not, expect issues.

On airMax links, you'll normally see 2-5ms latency for a lightly loaded link. When it is saturated, it will soar to 300+ms. If it is less than 90% capacity, then you'll see latency in the 10ms range.

AirFiber products have a fixed frame size so the half duplex links are all 2ms until they reach the saturation point at which it will behave like a wired link and have high latency and dropped packets. Full duplex AirFiber gear is <1ms up until the point of saturation.

They are very cost effective radios for linking buildings (or towers).

My old company used a hosted pbx solution with 30 phones over a 5mb/50mb UBNT wireless link.

Yealink SIP-T46G Ultra-Elegant Gigabit IP Phone https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D0SXK1K/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_ZH..wbYWGFNZN