blocks|key|3693094|text|我有十几个客户的“固定无线”(微波)宽带连接。在每一种情况下，我都将这种无线连接与通过不同介质(T1、电缆、光纤、DSL等)传送的连接配对。有关Elfiq链接平衡器的更多信息，请参阅我的文章.。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|3693095|我有一年的真实数据来自类似的一对站点，一个是20+50Mbps无线%2B键合T1对，另一个是50+50Mbps光纤。|3693096|在过去的一年里，固定无线发生了60次1分钟或更长的中断。大多数人在两分钟内就康复了。最严重的停机时间为12个小时或更长时间。|unordered-list-item|3693097|保税T1's有三次停电。一切都与最后一英里有关。|3693098|纤维有一次长时间的中断..。以及上游DNS问题。|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|https://serverfault.com/search?tab=relevance&q=user:13325%2520elfiq^0|1Y|Q|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@$A|U|B|V|1|W]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|H|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|I|3|J|5|H|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|K|3|L|5|H|7|10|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|M|$N|$5|O|P|Q|C|$R|S]]]]

I have a dozen clients with "fixed-wireless" (microwave) broadband connections. In every case, I pair that wireless connection with a connection delivered over a different medium (T1, Cable, Fiber, DSL, etc.). <a href="https://serverfault.com/search?tab=relevance&amp;q=user:13325%20elfiq">See my posts about Elfiq link balancers for more detail</a>. 

I have a year of real data from a similar pair of sites, one with 20Mbps wireless + bonded T1 pair, the other with 50Mbps fiber. 

<ul>
<li>The fixed-wireless had 60 outages of one minute or longer in the past year. Most recovered within two minutes. The worst outages were 12 hours or longer. </li>
<li>The bonded T1's had three outages. All were last-mile related. </li>
<li>The fiber had one extended outage... And an upstream DNS issue. </li>
</ul>

blocks|key|2652263|text|与微波相比，光纤具有更好的利用率。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2652264|在微波的情况下，你在空气中工作，可能会有干扰信号的条件。例如天气状况、闪电和其他设备。|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|D|$]]

Optical fiber has much better availability compared to microwave.

I the case of microwave you are operating in the air where there can be conditions which disturb the signal. e.g. weather conditions, lightning and other devices.

blocks|key|2652276|text|在受控环境之外运行的任何东西都比在受控环境中运行的东西更不可靠。光纤的内部是一个受控环境。微波辐射广播将受到光纤中不存在的干扰。微波肯定不太可靠，除了物理链路的故障，但不可能知道有多少。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

Anything running outside of a controlled environment will be less reliable than something running in a controlled environment. The inside of an optical fiber is a controlled environment. Microwave radiation broadcast would be subject to interference not present in the fiber. The microwave would definitely be less reliable, with the exception of a failure in the physical link, but there would be no way to know by how much.

blocks|key|2652310|text|我随时都会用微波炉做纤维的。大城市的反铲发生率远低于雾和鸽子。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

I'll take fibre over microwave any day. The incidence of backhoes in big cities is far lower than that of fog or pigeons.

blocks|key|3693146|text|这取决于您的位置，及时保证由ISP，和安装费用/经常性费用。在大都会底特律，有一家ISP供应商声称他们的微波服务上升了99.999%25，并有“无长期承诺”的选择。有时，使用多个T1's更便宜、更可靠。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3693147|顺便说一句，微波在技术上已经取得了长足的进步。这些碟子现在不太容易发生几何误差，安装/移除更容易，更容易调整和携带比过去更高的带宽。然而，天气的风险仍然是一个重要的障碍。|3693148|如果纤维便宜的话，一般都是我的首选。它是高带宽，高可用性，几乎总是完美的，但也不是没有它自己的问题，当然。如果你所在的地区有一根巨大的纤维管道，那就去做吧。这些设备维护得更好，而且通常更容易和更快地重新路由/修复。|3693149|TL;DR:某些区域更适合微波，而有些地区更便于纤维使用。可访问性决定成本。如果微波(停机时间费用*停机时间长度)%2B安装fees%2Brecurring月fees%2Bincidentals)+<光纤(停机时间费用*停机时间长度)%2B安装fees%2Brecurring月fees%2Bincidentals)，那么我将支持微波。否则，我会支持纤维。|3693150|个人注意我为我的组织做了一些关于ISP替代解决方案的研究，我们决定尝试微波解决方案，因为有一个较低的经常性费用，没有长期合同，而且ISP将吃掉建造成本。光纤解决方案将花费我们10,000美元的建设，和我报告的人对高初始投资感到不舒服。|3693151|附带注意，20+20Mbps微波解决方案的成本大约与我们用于MPLS的4.5+20Mbps(3倍T1)解决方案的成本相同。我喜欢我的MPLS提供商，因为他们拥有一流的客户服务和服务响应时间。我想我永远不会放他们走。我也会用它们作为我的ISP，但是成本/收益的差距并不存在。|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|L|$]]

It depends on your location, up-time guarantee by ISP, and cost of installation/recurring fees. In Metro-Detroit, there is an ISP vendor claiming their microwave service is 99.999% up, with a "no long term commitment" option. Sometimes, it's cheaper and more reliable to use multiple T1's.

As a side note, microwave has come a long way in technology. The dishes are a lot less prone to geometric errors these days, easier to install/remove, easier to adjust and carry a higher bandwidth than they used to. The risk of weather is still an important barrier though.

Fiber would generally be my first choice, if it were cheap. It's high bandwidth, high availability and nearly always perfect, but is not without it's own problems, of course. If you're in an area where there is a huge pipe of fiber, then go for it. These are maintained better, and generally easier and faster to reroute/repair.

TL;DR: 
Certain areas are more accessible for microwave, and some areas are more accessible for fiber. Accessibility determines cost. If the MICROWAVE((cost of downtime * length of downtime)+installation fees+recurring monthly fees+incidentals) &lt; FIBER((cost of downtime * lenth of downtime)+installation fees+recurring monthly fees+incidentals), then I would be in favor of microwave. Else, I would be in favor of fiber.

Personal Note
I did some research into this for an ISP replacement solution for my organization and we decided to try out the microwave solution, because there was a low recurring fee, no long term contract, and the ISP was going to eat the cost of the build-out. The fiber solution would have cost us $10K in build-out, and the person I report to was not comfortable with high initial investment.

Side Note
The cost of the 20Mbps microwave solution was about the same cost as a 4.5Mbps (3x T1) solution we're using for MPLS. I love my MPLS provider, because they have superb customer service and service response time. I don't think I'll ever let them go. I'd use them as my ISP, too, but the cost/benefit margin wasn't there.

Our ISP if offering us Internet via a direct optical Fiber link or a licensed frequency microwave link.

assuming there is not obstacle and same distance,

which link is more reliable (up-time %) and which have better ping?

Microwave Internet vs optical fiber

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

我们的ISP如果通过直接光纤链路或许可的频率微波链路向我们提供互联网。假设没有障碍，没有相同的距离，哪个链路更可靠(启动时间%)，哪个链路有更好的ping？

问微波互联网络与光纤
EN

回答 5

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问微波互联网络与光纤EN

回答 5

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

Server Fault用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问微波互联网络与光纤
EN