I am just in the process of setting up a node and have a few questions/issues I ran into. Hopefully this is the right place to post these...

For background I am using the NanoStation-M2 and have 2 of them at the moment.

1. Can I use more than one NanoStation node on the same mast? Or, maybe I should ask, what are the considerations of doing so. The idea would be to increase the coverage from ~20º to ~40º
2. The goal is to create a community emergency response network. If all equipment is kept to off-the shelf (part 15) equipment and no traffic is forwarded to any ham service, are there any licensing (ham license) considerations for using hnbb?
3. Any particular notes or tips on using the hnbb software with a Mac? I did see that the Zero-Config DNS entries (e.g. http://localnode:8080/) did not work.

Thanks for any help.

Richard

1) There are a few things you can do to mitigate frequency contention with multiple nodes adjacent to each other. As long as the traffic demand does not exceed the limitation imposed by these nodes competing with each other, it will work:

    1a) there are sites which sell metal shielding between antennas;

    1b) use different bands with a 2.4ghz next to a 5ghz antenna;

    1c) use different channels on same band.

2) I recommend that you check out http://commotionwireless.net/, if the intent is to stay part 15 and build a local "community" mesh with non-hams. These guys and the firmware are built exactly for this purpose. I currently have one of these commotion community nodes joined as a node on my bbhn mesh for evaluation. Using a bbhn node for a part 15 usage would be problematic. Don't want to say that you can't legally do so, just that it raises confusion that can be avoided.

3) I've not looked into the Mac issue, but sounds like a domain search path problem on the Mac. Try adding "local.mesh" to the domain search path? Joe AE6XE

My experience with the NanoStation M2 is that if only need to cover 40 degrees then one node will cover that just fine.

The spec sheet I have from Ubiquiti shows a 55 degree H-Pol/53 degree V-Pol Horizontal beam width with a 27 degree vertical beam width.  I have had stations connect from the side over a long distance. 

If you need two nodes to cover a larger area, a couple feet of separation has worked for me

I commend you for starting out with the NanoStation. You will find it is a great device.  I have had NanoStations connect where nothing else we tried would.  The best part is you only have to add a shielded cat 5 cable and you are ready to put it up.  My math says it is about half the cost of setting up a node with a WRT54GL.  Our experience with the Nanostation here in Waco has made it our favorite device for new installations.  I recommend that people starting out with BBHN start with a NanoStation.

There is a kit made by rfarmor that can be used to add some shielding.  I have not tried them but have heard good things.  I have some on back order to evaluate.

Clint, AE5CA

Well, I have you to thank for using the NanoStation  -- It was one of your blog posts that helped me decide. In fact, I had bought a WRT54GL last April, just before I left the US for 6 months, intending to set it up as soon as I got back. When I got back, in doing a little looking around, I was convinced I had made the wrong choice (bbhn canceling support didn't hurt that decision) and sent the WRT54GL back to Amazon (they are SO good about returns) and got the Ubiquiti.

In my case I have trees blocking the center of my open view. So, I wanted greater coverage, but not in a continuous arc, thus the question.  I suspect that in the end, the NanoStation will be deployed elsewhere and I will end up with a Rocket here. But, I want to see what I can do at "the low end" first.

Richard, you'll want to read up on this forum about DtDLink (cat5 cable between nodes) to connect them together across bands and channels. This acts as a bridge to route traffic between all nodes and distribute traffic on additional frequencies/bands to scale up.

Commotion Wireless and bbhn are both a) same hardware; b) mesh implementations that both use olsrd to route traffic; c) based on linux OpenWRT. The 'engines' are the same. But, they're packaged for different purposes. I think you'll find that bbhn is easier to setup and use with the capability as is with the ham communities' needs in mind. Commotion wireless comes with a number of ways to configure and deploy for a variety of needs--would require higher level of IT/networking skills.