[WISPA] Summary - Senate Commerce Committee Oversight Hearing on BIP/BTOP Round 1
There was some big news out of today's Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing on the BIP/BTOP programs, which just ended. Copies of the prepared testimony by the RUS, NTIA and OMB witnesses are attached but, as usual, the best information came out in the oral testimony. The big news relates to the schedule for making grants under the first NoFA. In his testimony, NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling announced that application processing is proceeding slower than anticipated. As a result, he announced that the first BTOP applications will not be granted until mid-December, and that processing applications under the first NoFA will not be completed until February 2010. RUS Administrator Jonathan Adelstein announced that RUS will begin issuing awards as soon as possible but that November 7th date will slip and that RUS expects to begin making announcements a month after the initially scheduled November 7th date. During the course of his testimony, Strickling made reference to the upcoming Request for Information regarding the second NoFA, but did not give any indication as to when it will be released. Adelstein noted that it would be released shortly. During the questioning, Sen. Rockefeller and others again expressed unhappiness with the remote definition adopted by RUS. Not surprisingly, Adelstein committed to completely review the definition when comments are filed in response to the FRI., and concedes that there are real problems with the current definition. In response to concerns raised regarding lack of mapping and funding of areas that are served by private enterprise, Adelstein mentioned that RUS is focusing on funding deployments in unserved areas. Finally, in response to a Rockefeller question regarding the problems stemming from the shotgun marriage of RUS and NTIA, both Administrators identified the reluctance of applicants to seek BIP loans (that stretch dollars), when they can instead secure BTOP grants. Strickling made clear that they will look at this issue in preparing the second NoFA, but also stated that he was not sure they would change the agencies' approaches. Throughout the hearing, Adelstein continued to emphasize the benefits of using loans to leverage the funds available. So, while NTIA is statutorily restricted to 80% grants and no loans, RUS may not take advantage of its flexibility to change the 50%/50% grant-loan split. For further details and to download hearing transcripts: http://www.winog.org/index.php?q=senatecommitteemeeting102809 Feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions (or if you want to get sold on something =) -Charles [cid:image001.jpg@01CA576D.3014ED10]http://www.ippay.com/ Charles Wumailto:c...@ippay.com President c...@ippay.commailto:c...@ippay.com cell: 773-870-0962 * office: 847-346-0990 x2500 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527http://www.converge-tech.com/www.ippay.com * tel: 847.346.0990 fax: 847.346.0991 inline: image001.jpg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Amateur repeater on a wisp tower -- gotchas?
Peel back a few inches of jacket. Pull the drain wire back along the wire. Install connector with drain wire coming out the back. Ground the drain wire. Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Does anyone know how you use shielded cat 5 when the radio's are all Tranzeo with their plastic Ethernet port??? Trying to solve a interference problem with some hams myself. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of jp Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Amateur repeater on a wisp tower -- gotchas? Yep, use shielded ethernet cable and there won't be problems. Even use shielded indoors. Being they are not doing for money, the amatuer crowd is also somewhat apt to ignore OSHA and many of the modern safety concepts like fall protection. Unless you specify your safety requirements, you might see a guy up on your tower in an old bosuns chair with 30 year old rope, or perhaps an old pole climbing belt. I agree they could be a good folks to know and work with; they could be a good inside connection to lots of other towers and businesses. If you have any electrical and RF skills, it's not much work to get an amatuer radio license; read a book, take a couple classes, and take a test. Morse code is optional. At the very least, they'd feel better understood and some camraderie if you got a license. On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:37:11AM -0400, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: In my experiences with 2 meter ham gear that is around Ethernet there is a lot of interference from the Ethernet to the ham guys stuff. I've never seen the ham guys cause interference though to any wifi gear. Ham guys are a whole different breed of folk and depending on how these ones your talking to are they may be an invaluable asset to you or they may be your worst nightmare. The ones around my area are the later and anyone that gets involved with them end up regretting it later down the road. Just my 2 cents, Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 9:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Amateur repeater on a wisp tower -- gotchas? Wispers: I have a 180' tower sitting high on a hill above the county seat. It has a mix of 5.8 and 2.4 radios and sectors/dishes. We want to install an amateur repeater on the tower, initially at 70 cm (440MHz UHF), and eventually a 2 m (144MHz VHF) radio. The dual band antenna feed point will be at 120'. It is 17' long. There is no microwave equipment below 160'. I don't think there will be any issues with interference either way, but thought I'd tap into the wealth of knowledge here to see if any of you has any experience doing anything like this on your towers. Is there any mixing at uhf (or VHF) going on in the microwave radio cards? I can't find specs that even speak of intermediate frequencies. Gotchas? Hints? Comments? Thanks! Mike G At 06:38 PM 10/26/2009, you wrote: My 24 hours is expiring and I don't want to pull this unit down. Mikrotik's site wants me to authorize my credit card, a process I've begun but my credit card company won't post the transaction for a few days. Can anyone sell me a level 4 license for an x86 machine now? Thanks! Greg --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Fresnel zone issues?
From your RM picture, the building isn't the only issue. The link just has Fresnel problems at the ATT Plaza end. Even with no builidings, I wouldn't try using the link the way it looks. Mike Hammett wrote: I'm looking at a link that has a possible issue. I've linked pictures. http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Radio%20Mobile%20zoom.png This is the building causing a problem. Each color ring is 1 meter of elevation, meaning there's about 10 meters of height error in SRTM. It appears to be a 10 story hotel with the peak in the center being a bit more (other Google and MS angles). http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Radio%20Mobile%20overview.png This shows where Radio Mobile shows the most Fresnel incursion, with stats. http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Google%20Earth%20zoom.png This is where Google Earth shows the link. So does this pose a link with a 60' ground clearance into a 100' building? First time I had a link that went through an area with a tall building and a gross SRTM error. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.34/2463 - Release Date: 10/27/09 15:50:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. attachment: graph_image.php.png WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
Your probably seeing tidal dropouts. We have that problem from time to time and usually a larger antenna does the trick with a narrower beam. I would go to 32 dbi dishes at HPOL (I think H-Pol works better over water from experience) I would probably look into use XR-5 cards for the extra output power at 5.8ghz. -Cameron -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Parr Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:21 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
From my understanding from others doing that very thing h pol is far better over water then v pol and I would agree that it would work better with the wave going side to side instead of up and down (less chance of bounced reflection on the water surface causing multipath issues). /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:20:58 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Fresnel zone issues?
I'd be surprised if it were the building rather than the freeway causing your problem here. In the end, it doesn't really matter what the cause is (could be a power line a few hundred yards away too). Try moving one end up OR down by as little as 2 feet. It could take much more, but sometimes the smallest amounts do the trick. Also try lowing the power level on the link so that you can't see the multipath. You might also try moving sideways with the link but that often takes much longer distances. marlon - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 10:49 PM Subject: [WISPA] Fresnel zone issues? I'm looking at a link that has a possible issue. I've linked pictures. http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Radio%20Mobile%20zoom.png This is the building causing a problem. Each color ring is 1 meter of elevation, meaning there's about 10 meters of height error in SRTM. It appears to be a 10 story hotel with the peak in the center being a bit more (other Google and MS angles). http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Radio%20Mobile%20overview.png This shows where Radio Mobile shows the most Fresnel incursion, with stats. http://www.ics-il.net/images/Naperville%20-%20ATT%20Plaza%20Google%20Earth%20zoom.png This is where Google Earth shows the link. So does this pose a link with a 60' ground clearance into a 100' building? First time I had a link that went through an area with a tall building and a gross SRTM error. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
Is going to circular polarization an option? Greg On Oct 28, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Jeremy Parr wrote: I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. graph_image.php.png WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the signal over or under your receive antennas. You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each link. One 10 to 20' higher than the other one. Then the radio will listen to the two of them and switch to the one with the greater signal levels for it's data flow. I always wanted to try this using a splitter placed EXACTLY in the middle of the two. But with wave lengths so small I don't think it's likely that I'd get it close enough without a lot of blind luck (get it wrong and you create multipath inside the cables). This'll be a tough one. marlon - Original Message - From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 6:20 AM Subject: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
2009/10/28 Marlon K. Schafer o...@odessaoffice.com: It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the signal over or under your receive antennas. You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each link. One 10 to 20' higher than the other one. Then the radio will listen to the two of them and switch to the one with the greater signal levels for it's data flow. I always wanted to try this using a splitter placed EXACTLY in the middle of the two. But with wave lengths so small I don't think it's likely that I'd get it close enough without a lot of blind luck (get it wrong and you create multipath inside the cables). Exactly. My thoughts went to an 802.11n card, with two antennas on each end. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
Have a look at our Radwin2000 MIMO radio- the diversity option is specifically for these applications. Matt Musial Radwin USA Sent via my BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:51:21 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water 2009/10/28 Marlon K. Schafer o...@odessaoffice.com: It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the signal over or under your receive antennas. You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each link. One 10 to 20' higher than the other one. Then the radio will listen to the two of them and switch to the one with the greater signal levels for it's data flow. I always wanted to try this using a splitter placed EXACTLY in the middle of the two. But with wave lengths so small I don't think it's likely that I'd get it close enough without a lot of blind luck (get it wrong and you create multipath inside the cables). Exactly. My thoughts went to an 802.11n card, with two antennas on each end. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
Hmmm, hadn't thought of that solution. Good catch! I try to keep my links to 15 miles or less so that I can have an AP at each one and cover the area in between. That helps with a lot of strange performance issues too. Thanks for the tip, I might have to try some n radios after all :-). It's funny how relatively open rules have so rapidly and completely changed everything in our industry. 10 years ago when I started a link with antenna diversity would cost nothing less than $50 or $100k. Usually a lot more. Just to get 10 to 20 megs. Half a million for 100meg. Now we can do it for a few hundred bucks per end. the quality isn't as good with today's gear, but for the cost we can put in 5 of them and have 100% up time instead of a mear 5 nines. marlon - Original Message - From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 6:51 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water 2009/10/28 Marlon K. Schafer o...@odessaoffice.com: It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the signal over or under your receive antennas. You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each link. One 10 to 20' higher than the other one. Then the radio will listen to the two of them and switch to the one with the greater signal levels for it's data flow. I always wanted to try this using a splitter placed EXACTLY in the middle of the two. But with wave lengths so small I don't think it's likely that I'd get it close enough without a lot of blind luck (get it wrong and you create multipath inside the cables). Exactly. My thoughts went to an 802.11n card, with two antennas on each end. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
I will have to second the ducting analysis. 23 miles is a long way over a water path. You can use space diversity by using a pair of antennas/radios at the same frequency, with 20 foot or more of vertical separation. You could try frequency diversity also. Many times a duct will affect frequencies differently at times during the event. You do know grids don't have a very clean pattern. A dish will focus more of the energy where you want it. If you are limited to space on the tower(s), a dual band feed dish might be your solution. You could run 2.4 and 5.8 at the same time and have software vote for the best link at any moment. In the past I built a 20 mile water path with space diversity using very expensive Nortel radios. This was in SW Fl, where ducting is common. The system would switch antennas several times in a month. These were OC3 radios at lower 6 GHz. The upper dishes were 10' and the lower were 6'. I think the separation was 20'. BTW, that was in 1999, and the link is still running. Mike At 08:20 AM 10/28/2009, you wrote: I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. Content-Type: image/png; name=graph_image.php.png Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=graph_image.php.png X-Attachment-Id: f_g1c41wi50 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I ran into a problem with one of these yesterday that makes me leery of using them again. http://www.mouser.com/Search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=SD-25B-24virtualkey6343virtualkey709-SD25B-24 If the amperage goes over the rated max (1.1A) it appears the unit continues to allow dc through, but does not regulate it any longer. So in my case, I had a well-charged battery powering a mikrotik rb450 as well as a couple Trango AP's (with the infamous heaters). When I plugged in the second AP on a cold day, it momentarily caused the draw to go higher than 1.1A. 28+ volts started flowing through the regulator and caused the RB450 to go into overvoltage protection mode (ie: dead in the water). Will be trying out the Tycon Power and the Packetflux devices shortly. If Mikrotik comes out with another Routerboard that has 28v overvoltage protection... What a waste. Randy Randy Cosby wrote: http://www.mouser.com/Search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=SD-25B-24virtualkey6343virtualkey709-SD25B-24 This is one I have tried at another small site, and it seems to work well. Hoped I could find something a little better amperage. The next bigger one these guys makes is too big, and has a fan that runs all the time. Randy Randy Cosby wrote: Ah, that explains it :) Randy Mike Hammett wrote: Scott Parsons that started PacWireless started the company that makes those. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Randy Cosby dco...@infowest.com Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:39 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar Interesting. That looks like a pacwireless product, but I have not seen it before. Any idea what the amp rating is for that? Jayson Baker wrote: Use these: http://store.wisp-router.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=TP-DCDC-1218eq=Tp= On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Randy Cosby dco...@infowest.com wrote: Is anyone powering Mikrotiks on Solar? What do you use to keep your solar boost voltage from forcing a shutdown on the Mikrotik? I've used some 24 regulators, but they seem inefficient, and have low voltage disconnects that are sometimes too sensitive - ie: if my battery goes down to 22v, it will shut down completely (yes I know the batteries should never go that low, but I don't live in a perfect world). -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
We run 12 volt converters to 18-20v with 24 volt battery systems. no issues. :) --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:06 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Network Testing Application Development
I am currently in development to make a install-less application that will allow an end user to simply click check net, it will preform several checks including pinging their gateway, your network edge, test dns resolution, list their ip information (for clueless users), as well as give them links to your internal speed test site and contact information.Right now we are looking at a per company cost of between $150 and $200 each. If you would like to be part of the discussions on this product development, please e-mail me offlist at dmburg...@linktechs.net. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org http://www.wispa.org/ Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training http://www.onlinemikrotiktraining.com Author of Learn RouterOS http://routerosbook.com/ ___ WISPA Membership Mailing List --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
A couple issues: Wasted energy - these converters can go as low as 75% efficient One more point of failure Often the converters have their own low voltage disconnect - I went 24v to give myself more battery headroom and time if we have problems with the solar or wind Often the converters will stop regulating when the amperage gets too high Maybe I'm just unlucky to have discovered all these issues, but why should we even bother? Dennis Burgess wrote: We run 12 volt converters to 18-20v with 24 volt battery systems. no issues. :) --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:06 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
never had a problem. soo. .lol. Maybge you are over engineering.. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar A couple issues: Wasted energy - these converters can go as low as 75% efficient One more point of failure Often the converters have their own low voltage disconnect - I went 24v to give myself more battery headroom and time if we have problems with the solar or wind Often the converters will stop regulating when the amperage gets too high Maybe I'm just unlucky to have discovered all these issues, but why should we even bother? Dennis Burgess wrote: We run 12 volt converters to 18-20v with 24 volt battery systems. no issues. :) --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:06 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I'm just dreading more snowmobile trips in blizzards. Randy Dennis Burgess wrote: never had a problem. soo. .lol. Maybge you are over engineering.. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar A couple issues: Wasted energy - these converters can go as low as 75% efficient One more point of failure Often the converters have their own low voltage disconnect - I went 24v to give myself more battery headroom and time if we have problems with the solar or wind Often the converters will stop regulating when the amperage gets too high Maybe I'm just unlucky to have discovered all these issues, but why should we even bother? Dennis Burgess wrote: We run 12 volt converters to 18-20v with 24 volt battery systems. no issues. :) --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:06 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I hear your frustration but I would not be yelling at MT. If I bought a regulated power supply that didn't deliver the set voltage I would be all over that manufacturer. Your RouterBoard worked to specification and the power supply didn't. Who is at fault?Really surprises me that it is a Meanwell unit that did that. I have had great success with the AD155 units. They are AC-DC, with built in battery charger. Now I do agree it would be nice if the overvoltage detection would turn the unit back on after an overvoltage condiditon. Based on the wide input range the RBs accept, I doubt that it is an easy engineering change to raise the overvoltage limit. What I really liked were the boards that gave an input option, 12-24 and 24-48 which actually had some overlap. Made power supply selection much easier. Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I use some Cincon Part EC4BW12, dc-dc convertors for anywhere I need to power the sub 28v devices. It will take 18-72 v in and output 12 v. I've had to install a lot of these as most of our sites were 48 v. When we started replacing 532's with the 400 series, we had to put one in for every board. They are solid devices and I get them from Mouser (sorry, don't have a mouser part handy). Cameron Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
Looks nice. How do you connect to that? The spec sheet isn't clear, just says it has pins on it. Randy ccrum wrote: I use some Cincon Part EC4BW12, dc-dc convertors for anywhere I need to power the sub 28v devices. It will take 18-72 v in and output 12 v. I've had to install a lot of these as most of our sites were 48 v. When we started replacing 532's with the 400 series, we had to put one in for every board. They are solid devices and I get them from Mouser (sorry, don't have a mouser part handy). Cameron Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc 435-674-0165 x 2010 http://www.infowest.com/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Yep, I give up on chasing NAT issues. We just give everyone publics. Jim Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Don't NAT all of your customers. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; Motorola Canopy User Group motor...@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
Soldering iron. We just split the cat-5 appropriately, solder the wire on and wrap them up in electrical tape with a Cat-5 jack on one end and an RJ 45 on the other. This way we can just plug-em-in inside the enclosure when we get to the top of the tower. Cameron Randy Cosby wrote: Looks nice. How do you connect to that? The spec sheet isn't clear, just says it has pins on it. Randy ccrum wrote: I use some Cincon Part EC4BW12, dc-dc convertors for anywhere I need to power the sub 28v devices. It will take 18-72 v in and output 12 v. I've had to install a lot of these as most of our sites were 48 v. When we started replacing 532's with the 400 series, we had to put one in for every board. They are solid devices and I get them from Mouser (sorry, don't have a mouser part handy). Cameron Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Yep, we've seen this too. Ended up being a rogue user on the network that we had to shutdown from sending spam. Fixed them and it cleared it up after a little bit. We are moving all users to their own publics as well as we migrate everything to PPPoE. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Well, since it is not a NAT issue, there is probably a better solution. sa...@jeffcosoho.com wrote: Yep, I give up on chasing NAT issues. We just give everyone publics. Jim Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Ahhh, a real answer for Matt. Jason Hensley wrote: Yep, we've seen this too. Ended up being a rogue user on the network that we had to shutdown from sending spam. Fixed them and it cleared it up after a little bit. We are moving all users to their own publics as well as we migrate everything to PPPoE. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:41 PM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
It's a long term solution. Several short term solutions were also listed. You either buy public IPs or buy time dealing with NAT. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.netwrote: RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
I believe Matt has around 5k subs, maybe I'm wrong. At 5k subs, his cost per year per IP address is $0.45. That's under $0.04/month. I'd consider that a reasonable expense. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:23 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring. We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far below the 300+ members and many more non-members who subscribe to this list. We are leaving the survey up until Friday evening so members have seven days to fill out this brief survey. If you have not filled out the survey please go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wsWAhIYE3XfDaKLojwMeNQ_3d_3d Also a list serve has been set up specifically for the organization of the trade show, you can subscribe to this list by going to: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow One more reminder on Friday then your chance for helping us plan this is done. Thanks for your time. Forbes Mercy WISPA - Promotions Committee Chair winmail.dat WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
oh sorry, that was on the moto list. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google You did'ent read my reply then.. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Reed Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I want MikroTik to go back to 48VDC! Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
I see the same issue. I'm on a satellite internet connection shared with about 10 people. The satellite carrier does their own NAT and we all appear as the same IP to the internet. The only fix for me is to turn on my VPN. It's not a NAT-failure or NAT mis-configuration issue, but it most certainly is caused by the very nature of NAT - the traffic of many being seen as the traffic of one IP address due to NAT. So nat still is the root cause. Greg On Oct 28, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Matt, Based on an e-mail you sent last month, you have 1,700 subscribers behind a single IP address. That is excessive over-subscription of a single IP address. I am surprised that it even works. I suggest that you create a pool of IP addresses with many IP address - 50 to 200 IP addresses. I don't know if it can be done on a Mikrotik but I know other firewall/router/NAT devices can create a NAT pool with 100s of IP addresses for clients. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:41 AM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
I run NAT, and my answer is to put each tower, or sector in cases where there is more than one radio on a tower, on it's own public NAT. That way I only have 20 or so users behind one IP It also makes it easier to track down DMCA take down notices. Scott Reed wrote: RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, "oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way." What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
That is what I'm trying to do. Each sector has it's own public IP. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: I run NAT, and my answer is to put each tower, or sector in cases where there is more than one radio on a tower, on it's own public NAT. That way I only have 20 or so users behind one IP It also makes it easier to track down DMCA take down notices. Scott Reed wrote: RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsenvistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.36/2465 - Release Date: 10/28/09 09:34:00 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address on our NAT server. If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I used to use publics, but it was a tremendous pain in the ass, and would be very difficult to implement on my current network design (routed subnets at every single location) so I have no interest in giving each customer their own public IP address. There are about 160 private subnets on the access points in my network, so I have no intention of switching to publics anytime soon. I also loathe PPPoE and have worked with a couple of people who tried to convert to it and converted back as soon as they could because it just didn't work as well as advertised. YMMV, but I'm just fine not using it. NAT has been very beneficial to my customers as a whole, since they are not directly exposed to the Internet and we have far fewer virus/trojan/backdoor issues because of it.We do have a few folks who need a public IP, and route several subnets of public IP addresses out to towers where public IP addresses are needed. That is fine with me, because we charge extra for the IP addresses. Just another reason for power users to move up the pricing ladder if they want the extras. Not using publics has also been a godsend as far as maintaining flexibility between backbone providers and utilization of secondary links in the event of failures. Sometime in the next month, I'm switching my primary backbone to go through a new provider that is delivering 50meg for the same price that I was previously paying for 15. Moving traffic to that backbone will be as simple as changing one line in a policy routing statement. If I was using publics, I would still be stuck with the previous provider. I don't like being hostage to outside network providers if I can avoid it. In addition to my primary backbone link, I also have backbone links with two other neighboring WISPs and the ability to route traffic to the Internet through them in the event of an outage on my network between my APs and my NOC. They can do the same thing through my network.Just last week, a set of rolling power outages took out two towers that were the redundant paths to five APs on the far eastern side of my network. OSPF figured it out and routed them out through my neighbor's network until the towers came back up and it switched back. Same thing happened on his network last month, and we handled the majority of his traffic until his backbone link was back up. That is not a very simple thing to implement with public IP addresses, but it was pretty easy to make it happen with privates. So yeah, I have my reasons for using NAT. Switching to publics is a rhetorical answer, not a useful one. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Mike Hammett wrote: I believe Matt has around 5k subs, maybe I'm wrong. At 5k subs, his cost per year per IP address is $0.45. That's under $0.04/month. I'd consider that a reasonable expense. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:23 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current network? /RANT Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
[WISPA] [Fwd: Re: [Motorola II] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google]
---BeginMessage--- We changed our policy routing statements so that now 8 subnets at a time are going through a single IP address, and we added more IP addresses to the public interface of the NAT server. My lead tech says that this solved the problem. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Tim Sylvester wrote: Matt, Based on an e-mail you sent last month, you have 1,700 subscribers behind a single IP address. That is excessive over-subscription of a single IP address. I am surprised that it even works. I suggest that you create a pool of IP addresses with many IP address - 50 to 200 IP addresses. I don't know if it can be done on a Mikrotik but I know other firewall/router/NAT devices can create a NAT pool with 100s of IP addresses for clients. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:41 AM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---End Message--- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Totally agree dude! Advantanges and disadvanges. Once you have a large routed network with privates, it sux to convert. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:23 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address on our NAT server. If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I used to use publics, but it was a tremendous pain in the ass, and would be very difficult to implement on my current network design (routed subnets at every single location) so I have no interest in giving each customer their own public IP address. There are about 160 private subnets on the access points in my network, so I have no intention of switching to publics anytime soon. I also loathe PPPoE and have worked with a couple of people who tried to convert to it and converted back as soon as they could because it just didn't work as well as advertised. YMMV, but I'm just fine not using it. NAT has been very beneficial to my customers as a whole, since they are not directly exposed to the Internet and we have far fewer virus/trojan/backdoor issues because of it.We do have a few folks who need a public IP, and route several subnets of public IP addresses out to towers where public IP addresses are needed. That is fine with me, because we charge extra for the IP addresses. Just another reason for power users to move up the pricing ladder if they want the extras. Not using publics has also been a godsend as far as maintaining flexibility between backbone providers and utilization of secondary links in the event of failures. Sometime in the next month, I'm switching my primary backbone to go through a new provider that is delivering 50meg for the same price that I was previously paying for 15. Moving traffic to that backbone will be as simple as changing one line in a policy routing statement. If I was using publics, I would still be stuck with the previous provider. I don't like being hostage to outside network providers if I can avoid it. In addition to my primary backbone link, I also have backbone links with two other neighboring WISPs and the ability to route traffic to the Internet through them in the event of an outage on my network between my APs and my NOC. They can do the same thing through my network.Just last week, a set of rolling power outages took out two towers that were the redundant paths to five APs on the far eastern side of my network. OSPF figured it out and routed them out through my neighbor's network until the towers came back up and it switched back. Same thing happened on his network last month, and we handled the majority of his traffic until his backbone link was back up. That is not a very simple thing to implement with public IP addresses, but it was pretty easy to make it happen with privates. So yeah, I have my reasons for using NAT. Switching to publics is a rhetorical answer, not a useful one. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Mike Hammett wrote: I believe Matt has around 5k subs, maybe I'm wrong. At 5k subs, his cost per year per IP address is $0.45. That's under $0.04/month. I'd consider that a reasonable expense. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:23 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
That would mean increased cost on the units. People is more interested in price and MT products not capable of 48VDC and the sale of them caused such a dip in the 48V MT products that the 48VDC product line became too expensive to produce due to lack of quantity so choice was either increase price or drop the line. So the product was dropped because increase in price would mean even more people felt the advantage wasn't enough to justify paying that much more which would lead to even lower sale which would increased the cost and there is a level when producing a product does not become economical because the quantity is not enough. On MOST of their products we can do a special order MOQ 100 pcs last I checked at a slightly higher price than previous list price. Got need enough for 100 pcs RB532 or 100 pcs RB100 series boards. We still have RB230's left. Or of course you could buy RB600 which handles 10-56V on power jack or 38 to 56V on POE port. So you actually do have one option still available that gives you a powerful unit that is still manufactured and sold. So I guess comes down to how much is it worth to you the option is STILL there but I would assume you want the 48V option on the lower cost routers and that will not happen because that is ONE of the reason the products are cheaper. That said the choice is up to you actually since the product is available. / Eje From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Blair Davis Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar I want MikroTik to go back to 48VDC! Randy Cosby wrote: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3 http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0 t=36191start=0 I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the batteries get charged over 28v. I'm begging (and asking for you to join me) Mikrotik to: 1. Upgrade the over-voltage protection to 30v or higher on 24 volt products. 2. Never EVER make another routerboard that runs has over-voltage protection at 28v 3. Change the over-voltage behavior to cause the device to reboot when the voltage drops to acceptable levels, instead of requiring a power-cycle to bring it back to life. Will you join me on this and let Mikrotik, your distributor, etc. know your thoughts on this? This is not a new problem, it has been discussed repeatedly on the lists and forums. Thanks! WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Matt, I find it incredably interesting and clever that you have managed to operate your network on private IP addresses. However, the problem you are running into now is one common reason others have given in to using public IP addresses. Having public IPs throughout your transport network is not necessary, we use all private IPs for all our radios. But there is a large risk not giving end users, or small groups of end users their own public IP space. The inherent problem is, that if one person causes an AUP violation, it risks ALL subs. There becomes a point where you grow large enough that your volume then increases the chances of someone making a violation, where that risk puts to many existing customers at risk to everyone else. The two most common situations are... Sending Email. and Reported as a BitTorrent users. Large ISPs are becomming much quicker to simply immediately block an IP assumed to be a potential threat. The risk can be reduced by devidign your network into multiple smaller groups and assigning multiple public IPs each to one of these groups. Now when there is a problem, fewer customers are effected, and lower odds that group will have one detected. I can tell you in our world, if we have a business sub get their traffic blocked/compromised because of the usage of another business, it quickly leads to letter of cancellation. Its a common reason that WISPs will eventually convert to public IPs, and leverage BGP to bypass being held hostage by upstream providers. But even still it adds a level of inflexibilty for internal network IP assignment. Ironically, you probably have less BitTorrent problems, considering your Private IP sceam. What this really is is a NetNeutrality issue. Yahoo,Google, and Hotmail have the rights to methods of Network Management. And there is a concensus between them that this method of network management is an acceptable best practice, and its your problem if you NAT all your users to a few IPs. You'll also see problems with poor rankings with IP Reputation methods of Anti-spam. Another issue to consider is that Hotmail, Yahoo, and Google prefer to know exactly where the end user resides, so they can better direct advertisement. NATing your customer base to a single NOC location, is distruptive to their long term advertizing goals for target marketing. Its likely this battle wont end here with this insodent. IF your problems are primarilly Email related, you can try to signup for feedback loops to help, and make sure SPF records are valid, valid PTRs and stuff. But if just to web sites, well, not sure their is an answer other than to change the source IP address for the traffic. In that scenario you may want to setup some sort of load balancing routine, to redirect outbound sessions to different source IPs or Proxy servers. A problem where we see it is with Hotels. We'll give a few IPs to the Hotel, and then NAT to all their rooms. When one of the overnight guests decides to download a copyrighted movie, we get an AUP notice, and ahve to react. Obviously for a Hotel, we ahve no way to contact that subscriber or know who it is for Hotel confidentiality reasons. Sometimes upstreams might just block that Public IP that serves them, if they didn't like our answer. Then the whole Hotel will have problems. (The preferred solution is for us to block access to the offending host site). This is one reason many Hotel Hotspot providers try to ask for full Class C PUBLIC IP blocks for their circuits. Then only the one room gets blocked if they violate AUP. This has not been a big problem, because my upstream is easy to work with and rarely blocks traffic. But this situation demonstrates my point. Good luck with it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address on our NAT server. If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I used to use publics, but it was a tremendous pain in the ass, and would be very difficult to implement on my current network design (routed subnets at every single location) so I have no interest in giving each customer their own public IP address. There are about 160 private subnets on the access points in my network, so I have no intention of switching to publics anytime soon. I also loathe PPPoE and have worked with a couple of people who tried to convert to it and converted back as soon as they could because it just didn't work as well as advertised. YMMV, but I'm just fine not using it. NAT has been
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
I agree and disagree with you. NAT is good and works well for most home users. I have issues with consoles and NAT, wherein I have many users who want to game together, and xbox doesn't let that happen nicely. I hand out 1 public to those who need it, more for those who want to pay. As for network redundancy and the failover. That works just fine with publics, better if you have your own ASN. I agree that having your own ASN raises costs and there is a pretty step learning curve to using it and using it well. There are trade offs to both methods and you found one that works for you. Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address on our NAT server. If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I used to use publics, but it was a tremendous pain in the ass, and would be very difficult to implement on my current network design (routed subnets at every single location) so I have no interest in giving each customer their own public IP address. There are about 160 private subnets on the access points in my network, so I have no intention of switching to publics anytime soon. I also loathe PPPoE and have worked with a couple of people who tried to convert to it and converted back as soon as they could because it just didn't work as well as advertised. YMMV, but I'm just fine not using it. NAT has been very beneficial to my customers as a whole, since they are not directly exposed to the Internet and we have far fewer virus/trojan/backdoor issues because of it.We do have a few folks who need a public IP, and route several subnets of public IP addresses out to towers where public IP addresses are needed. That is fine with me, because we charge extra for the IP addresses. Just another reason for power users to move up the pricing ladder if they want the extras. Not using publics has also been a godsend as far as maintaining flexibility between backbone providers and utilization of secondary links in the event of failures. Sometime in the next month, I'm switching my primary backbone to go through a new provider that is delivering 50meg for the same price that I was previously paying for 15. Moving traffic to that backbone will be as simple as changing one line in a policy routing statement. If I was using publics, I would still be stuck with the previous provider. I don't like being hostage to outside network providers if I can avoid it. In addition to my primary backbone link, I also have backbone links with two other neighboring WISPs and the ability to route traffic to the Internet through them in the event of an outage on my network between my APs and my NOC. They can do the same thing through my network.Just last week, a set of rolling power outages took out two towers that were the redundant paths to five APs on the far eastern side of my network. OSPF figured it out and routed them out through my neighbor's network until the towers came back up and it switched back. Same thing happened on his network last month, and we handled the majority of his traffic until his backbone link was back up. That is not a very simple thing to implement with public IP addresses, but it was pretty easy to make it happen with privates. So yeah, I have my reasons for using NAT. Switching to publics is a rhetorical answer, not a useful one. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Mike Hammett wrote: I believe Matt has around 5k subs, maybe I'm wrong. At 5k subs, his cost per year per IP address is $0.45. That's under $0.04/month. I'd consider that a reasonable expense. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:23 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google RANT So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of baloney!! There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what the real question is and then, if and only if, the can pose a solution to the real problem, post a suggestion. But, since the only posts I have seen to Matt's is give everyone a public address, I have a few questions: So, who is going to buy Matt a block of IPs to fix this non-NAT issue? I ask, because I do as Matt does and if that is the fix, I need someone to buy me a block as well. But the issue isn't really NAT, is it? The real question is how does he deal with the current issue on his current
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
NAT is unfortunately not very scalable but also never told is the amount of subs that are being natted and through how many ips. NAT _IS_ an issue. But comes down to business model. Do you spend the time for tech support and issues handling this on an ongoing basis or do you spend the money and buy your own space. Either way will cost you money or do you just borrow space from upstream and go through renumber every time you move to a new provider. If you renumber then it will to cost monies but at least only the few times you change providers which I would think is not very frequently since you probably locked into a one or multi year contract. Also the time (cost) to renumber depends how your delivering ips to your clients (one reason I personally recommend dhcp even if you give your client a static ip because if you need to renumber you just change that one ip on your dhcp server and wait a few days. Most of the time the reason your moving from one provider to another is for cheaper bandwidth. But with that in mind you have to look at is it WORTH saving X amount of $ to move and renumber or what not. Say if I got 50Mbit for the same price I was paying for 15Mbit and my 15 was starting to fill up then yes a reasonable amount of renumbering would be well worth it. There is NOTHING you can do to fix a problem doing a large network NAT to single IP when a website say sorry to much traffic because all your clients shows as sending traffic from that single ip. Maybe you could do an agreement with that one website host but that is just an interim solution. If your set on staying with NAT because you think it is the most economical even if that means more tech support time and issues that you have to pay tech support time then well one need to minimize the amount of subs that uses a single IP. With any linux router you can do a src-nat and specify that this group/subnet of IPs should be NAT'd to this public and this group/subnet is NAT'd to this public. I would ASSUME (you know what they say about that) that if you getting the sorry to much traffic message that your NATing an entire network behind a single IP on a core router instead of NATing at each individual tower site so that each AP or tower itself is NATted to it's own unique public IP. Later is my own personal preference if NATing needs to be done because if you get a court/RIA or just abuse complaint you at least know which tower is causing the problem so instead of trying to figure out from 2k customers (I think that is what Matt said the other day he had) you now just need to figure out from maybe 50 customer whom is the guilty party. My personal preference is to give public ips combination PPPoE and Hotspot (dhcp server) this way if need renumber all need to do is add a new pool of IP's and change the server which pool to use once client automatically changed over to use the new ips then it's time to retired the old ones and if you end up taking to long you simply start NATing the old ip space behind the new until it can be swapped over. Last time we renumbered it took me 5 hours of work and planning to renumber 3 /24's majority of this time was spent on changing all our servers IP's from old IP to new IP (got almost an entire /24 just for server ip space). Way before this was done I had updated our DNS to a 5min cache setting (TTL) for all our domains (regex sed job that took 15 min to whip up since I also had to make sure the serial was updated). I did this a few weeks before we were ready. I created NAT rule to forward the NEW server ips to my old server IPs on my router once we did took the new link live. Then Started the task to change the server ips. Once a server ip was changed the nat rule was disabled. New pools and networks was created on all our access routers and pppoe concentrators (took longer to break up blocks and figure out what needed to go where then what it took to do the configuration). I could have but didn't changed the DHCP lease times to say 5min to make the swap faster and could have disconnected all PPPoE users to force them to take a new ip. But I rather waited and let it swap normally. Larger network with twice amount of towers and clients I would say might add another couple of hours to my renumbering time. A 2k network assuming my approach and setup would probably take around 10 hours (depending on how many servers needed ip changes and updates) without the servers renumber would take probably no more then 5-6 hours. At $150/hr (being generous) at 10 hours it's $1500. I think you are looking at about $3k a year for your own IP space. I'm still a head even if I changed provider yearly. But if I did I would have it down to an art and time frame would probably be lot less in the future. With NATing on a Core I would expect to have almost an single tech guy that would spend most of his time handling those issues and dealing with customers problems from natting and assigning publics. Even if I'm generous and
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
Its relevent to disclose the radio OS type using. (You stated using a R5H a Mikrotik card, but weren't clear if using Mikrotik OS). The symptom you are explaining sounds similar to how some of my Mikrotik OS units had responsed to noise. Basically they kept dropping speed until they disconnected. It was like watching a clock tick down to zero, and repeat. I had this problem recently with 900Mhz and MIkrotik, and the problem was curred as soon as I switch to a different brand product. I'm suspect, but not verified, nor conclusive, that it could be a Mikrotik driver issue. The point I'm making is that you are likely getting some sort of noise or multi-path (self noise), but the overall problem may not be the noise/multi-path but instead the inabilty of your product to adequately deal with that noise/multipath RF conditions. The easiest place to do a science project probably isn't between two towers seperated by a 20 mile body of water, but it would make for a very interesting and meaningful science project. Sure a Mimo card w/ Dual Pol (for single stream) or Space Diversity would likely help deal with Multipath. But what I wonder is whether the same bad results are replicated with other single channel products of similar spec. It would be interesting to put up a Tlink-45, get results of it's noise survey scan, and see if it overcomes the problem. Or even try a StarOS box. Its also relevent to understand how much of the issue is canceled RF, and how much is side effects of 802.11 CDMA? I'm wondering if a TDD system w/ good ARQ better handles it. My point here is in an ideal world a radio should never have the characteristic to start at 6mb and slowly go to Zero. Instead it should stay at 6mbps, and just have a very high error count. Even if it has 50% packet loss it should stay associated, and with a TDD system w/ARQ it likely would.. Also note, if Using Mikrotik, they now support Atheros's threshold feature, to mask out weak signals, this can help reduce multipath signal. (although use cutiously as there can be significant fade of water with Fog/Clouds/evaporation/Solar and such.) Obviously if you switched to a TDD MIMO system, you'd optimize your chance for success, but you would not be able to learn what factor most helped the improvement. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:20 AM Subject: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable. One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90' ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates dramatically. When the antennas were installed and configured for a 5Mhz channel, I was able to aim them to -55, but still they go down during parts of the day. I have a second antenna hung on the 200ft end, at about 185', connected to a second R5H set up for H-Pol which I am going to light up as soon as I get the other end mounted H-Pol. Any other suggestions for getting this stable? I also notice some strangeness when doing bandwidth tests. I can get a steady 8mbps downstream from the 200ft end to the 50' end, but from the 50' end to the 200ft end, the transfer starts at about 6mbps, then slowly drops down to 0, and the client radio (the 50' end) drops. My assumption is multipath reflections off of the water at the lower end, but I cannot be sure. The water is tidal, with as much as a 3' change from low to high, and is connected to the ocean, so there can be considerable chop and wave action on the surface. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 5/15/2009 6:16 AM WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So: The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its a bunch of sales/marketing guys who have no actual idea how the product works and cannot answer in depth technical questions. I can get all of the sales and marketing information that they present on the website or from talking to my usual vendors. What I want is a Product Engineering Show where engineers come and demonstrate their products and I can see actual comparisons of performance, ask detailed questions, etc. For example: I want to have talks from engineers who can answer questions. I want to have talks by real operators on how they implement OSPF to redistribute BGP across their networks. I want to hear talks from people that combine Motorola Canopy, Ubiquiti, Ligowave, Mikrotik, and Netsys to create innovative solutions for providing data coverage. All should be able to show examples. Just my 2 cents... - Matt Forbes Mercy wrote: REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring. We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far below the 300+ members and many more non-members who subscribe to this list. We are leaving the survey up until Friday evening so members have seven days to fill out this brief survey. If you have not filled out the survey please go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wsWAhIYE3XfDaKLojwMeNQ_3d_3d Also a list serve has been set up specifically for the organization of the trade show, you can subscribe to this list by going to: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow One more reminder on Friday then your chance for helping us plan this is done. Thanks for your time. Forbes Mercy WISPA - Promotions Committee Chair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
AND we spells it gooad twooz! On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote: Matt, I find it incredably interesting and clever that you have managed to operate your network on private IP addresses. However, the problem you are running into now is one common reason others have given in to using public IP addresses. Having public IPs throughout your transport network is not necessary, we use all private IPs for all our radios. But there is a large risk not giving end users, or small groups of end users their own public IP space. The inherent problem is, that if one person causes an AUP violation, it risks ALL subs. There becomes a point where you grow large enough that your volume then increases the chances of someone making a violation, where that risk puts to many existing customers at risk to everyone else. The two most common situations are... Sending Email. and Reported as a BitTorrent users. Large ISPs are becomming much quicker to simply immediately block an IP assumed to be a potential threat. The risk can be reduced by devidign your network into multiple smaller groups and assigning multiple public IPs each to one of these groups. Now when there is a problem, fewer customers are effected, and lower odds that group will have one detected. I can tell you in our world, if we have a business sub get their traffic blocked/compromised because of the usage of another business, it quickly leads to letter of cancellation. Its a common reason that WISPs will eventually convert to public IPs, and leverage BGP to bypass being held hostage by upstream providers. But even still it adds a level of inflexibilty for internal network IP assignment. Ironically, you probably have less BitTorrent problems, considering your Private IP sceam. What this really is is a NetNeutrality issue. Yahoo,Google, and Hotmail have the rights to methods of Network Management. And there is a concensus between them that this method of network management is an acceptable best practice, and its your problem if you NAT all your users to a few IPs. You'll also see problems with poor rankings with IP Reputation methods of Anti-spam. Another issue to consider is that Hotmail, Yahoo, and Google prefer to know exactly where the end user resides, so they can better direct advertisement. NATing your customer base to a single NOC location, is distruptive to their long term advertizing goals for target marketing. Its likely this battle wont end here with this insodent. IF your problems are primarilly Email related, you can try to signup for feedback loops to help, and make sure SPF records are valid, valid PTRs and stuff. But if just to web sites, well, not sure their is an answer other than to change the source IP address for the traffic. In that scenario you may want to setup some sort of load balancing routine, to redirect outbound sessions to different source IPs or Proxy servers. A problem where we see it is with Hotels. We'll give a few IPs to the Hotel, and then NAT to all their rooms. When one of the overnight guests decides to download a copyrighted movie, we get an AUP notice, and ahve to react. Obviously for a Hotel, we ahve no way to contact that subscriber or know who it is for Hotel confidentiality reasons. Sometimes upstreams might just block that Public IP that serves them, if they didn't like our answer. Then the whole Hotel will have problems. (The preferred solution is for us to block access to the offending host site). This is one reason many Hotel Hotspot providers try to ask for full Class C PUBLIC IP blocks for their circuits. Then only the one room gets blocked if they violate AUP. This has not been a big problem, because my upstream is easy to work with and rarely blocks traffic. But this situation demonstrates my point. Good luck with it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address on our NAT server. If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I used to use publics, but it was a tremendous pain in the ass, and would be very difficult to implement on my current network design (routed subnets at every single location) so I have no interest in giving each customer their own public IP address. There are about 160 private subnets on the access points in my network, so I have no intention of switching to publics anytime soon. I also loathe PPPoE and have worked with a couple of people who tried to
Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
You mean like Image stream ? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Jenkins Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 4:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So: The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its a bunch of sales/marketing guys who have no actual idea how the product works and cannot answer in depth technical questions. I can get all of the sales and marketing information that they present on the website or from talking to my usual vendors. What I want is a Product Engineering Show where engineers come and demonstrate their products and I can see actual comparisons of performance, ask detailed questions, etc. For example: I want to have talks from engineers who can answer questions. I want to have talks by real operators on how they implement OSPF to redistribute BGP across their networks. I want to hear talks from people that combine Motorola Canopy, Ubiquiti, Ligowave, Mikrotik, and Netsys to create innovative solutions for providing data coverage. All should be able to show examples. Just my 2 cents... - Matt Forbes Mercy wrote: REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring. We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far below the 300+ members and many more non-members who subscribe to this list. We are leaving the survey up until Friday evening so members have seven days to fill out this brief survey. If you have not filled out the survey please go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wsWAhIYE3XfDaKLojwMeNQ_3d_3d Also a list serve has been set up specifically for the organization of the trade show, you can subscribe to this list by going to: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow One more reminder on Friday then your chance for helping us plan this is done. Thanks for your time. Forbes Mercy WISPA - Promotions Committee Chair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
I'd like to see a real good MPLS intro training session. (although not easy to do in an hour). That might be a good session to be demonstrated on a Mikrotik, considering it is a unique feature Mikrotik is offering. Not that I'm generally a fan to push MT or vendor specific content. There are many venues to get quality MT content for example, I'd rather WISPA push content that WISPs cant get anywhere else to push a stronger call to action to come. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Jenkins m...@smarterbroadband.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So: The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its a bunch of sales/marketing guys who have no actual idea how the product works and cannot answer in depth technical questions. I can get all of the sales and marketing information that they present on the website or from talking to my usual vendors. What I want is a Product Engineering Show where engineers come and demonstrate their products and I can see actual comparisons of performance, ask detailed questions, etc. For example: I want to have talks from engineers who can answer questions. I want to have talks by real operators on how they implement OSPF to redistribute BGP across their networks. I want to hear talks from people that combine Motorola Canopy, Ubiquiti, Ligowave, Mikrotik, and Netsys to create innovative solutions for providing data coverage. All should be able to show examples. Just my 2 cents... - Matt Forbes Mercy wrote: REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring. We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far below the 300+ members and many more non-members who subscribe to this list. We are leaving the survey up until Friday evening so members have seven days to fill out this brief survey. If you have not filled out the survey please go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wsWAhIYE3XfDaKLojwMeNQ_3d_3d Also a list serve has been set up specifically for the organization of the trade show, you can subscribe to this list by going to: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow One more reminder on Friday then your chance for helping us plan this is done. Thanks for your time. Forbes Mercy WISPA - Promotions Committee Chair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 5/15/2009 6:16 AM WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Long 5Ghz link over water
2009/10/28 Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net: Its relevent to disclose the radio OS type using. (You stated using a R5H a Mikrotik card, but weren't clear if using Mikrotik OS). The symptom you are explaining sounds similar to how some of my Mikrotik OS units had responsed to noise. Basically they kept dropping speed until they disconnected. It was like watching a clock tick down to zero, and repeat. I had this problem recently with 900Mhz and MIkrotik, and the problem was curred as soon as I switch to a different brand product. I'm suspect, but not verified, nor conclusive, that it could be a Mikrotik driver issue. The point I'm making is that you are likely getting some sort of noise or multi-path (self noise), but the overall problem may not be the noise/multi-path but instead the inabilty of your product to adequately deal with that noise/multipath RF conditions. Yup, it is Mikrotik 4.1 at both ends, on Routerboard 433AH boards, fed by a 24v DC plant (batteries and charger). The easiest place to do a science project probably isn't between two towers seperated by a 20 mile body of water, but it would make for a very interesting and meaningful science project. The link doesn't have traffic over it, the site is currently fed by a T1, so I have some time to play mad scientist without any negative effects to customers. Sure a Mimo card w/ Dual Pol (for single stream) or Space Diversity would likely help deal with Multipath. But what I wonder is whether the same bad results are replicated with other single channel products of similar spec. It would be interesting to put up a Tlink-45, get results of it's noise survey scan, and see if it overcomes the problem. Or even try a StarOS box. Its also relevent to understand how much of the issue is canceled RF, and how much is side effects of 802.11 CDMA? I'm wondering if a TDD system w/ good ARQ better handles it. I do have a TLink-45 pair sitting around (non connectorized) that I could test. Is there a hack to put a pigtail on these? If the power is turned down on the troublesome end, only possible during the times of day when the RX level is decent, the bandwidth test runs faster and longer before it drops to nothing. This might make the link usable, if Mikrotik had some sort of variable transmit power control to maintain 10-20db SNR. My point here is in an ideal world a radio should never have the characteristic to start at 6mb and slowly go to Zero. Instead it should stay at 6mbps, and just have a very high error count. Even if it has 50% packet loss it should stay associated, and with a TDD system w/ARQ it likely would.. When performing the test, the amount of retransmissions push the data rate down from 54 to progressively lower modulation speeds. I am running 5Mhz channels (tried 10, and 20) so this explains the progressive drop to low throughput and ultimate disconnection in my mind. Also note, if Using Mikrotik, they now support Atheros's threshold feature, to mask out weak signals, this can help reduce multipath signal. (although use cutiously as there can be significant fade of water with Fog/Clouds/evaporation/Solar and such.) Obviously if you switched to a TDD MIMO system, you'd optimize your chance for success, but you would not be able to learn what factor most helped the improvement. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
I was not so happy either when I found out the newest line of MT boards didn't work on my already functioning 24vdc system. I have however been successful with a simple LM7818 regulator with a couple of tantalum caps and a good heatsink to drop voltage from ~26v supply. They are 1 amp, and I am using a 493 with 2 high power cards. all seems well so far. it's on a mountain and i don't look forward to winter maintenance. extremely cheap solution if you are handy with a soldering iron. WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Verizon fiber
I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm: Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI) Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to me? For less than 10s of thousand$? If it helps, there is a small concrete vault nearby that the fiber runs thru. The farmer says the cover has been left open on that for years. You can look in and see a metal can (about 8 by 2') that the fiber runs thru. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Network Testing Application Development
Dennis, On a side note I'd mention that someone on-list had already created a really neat one, a few years back. It might make sense to look at that first. I got a copy somewhere. I'll go look for it, after I finish my last hour of BTOP protests :-) . Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess dmburg...@linktechs.net To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:12 PM Subject: [WISPA] Network Testing Application Development I am currently in development to make a install-less application that will allow an end user to simply click check net, it will preform several checks including pinging their gateway, your network edge, test dns resolution, list their ip information (for clueless users), as well as give them links to your internal speed test site and contact information.Right now we are looking at a per company cost of between $150 and $200 each. If you would like to be part of the discussions on this product development, please e-mail me offlist at dmburg...@linktechs.net. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org http://www.wispa.org/ Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training http://www.onlinemikrotiktraining.com Author of Learn RouterOS http://routerosbook.com/ ___ WISPA Membership Mailing List --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 5/15/2009 6:16 AM WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 22:08 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: Not that I'm generally a fan to push MT or vendor specific content. I disagree with your assessment here. More on that below. There are many venues to get quality MT content for example, I'd rather WISPA push content that WISPs cant get anywhere else to push a stronger call to action to come. I don't understand this statement at all. I am assuming you mean you would like to see content in this show that isn't being presented elsewhere. If so, what, SPECIFICALLY, would you suggest? I think the content should include some technical discussions with specific products or technologies. To use the example you brought up, MPLS, we could build a small MPLS network using Mikrotik and Cisco or any other product. There could be a couple of sessions explaining the technology, THEN we could provide a breakout session where people could come in and experiment under the direction of someone who is knowledgeable in the particular area. This could be a vendor, consultant or end user. It wouldn't matter WHO provided the configuration, but someone who could answer questions about the demo. I don't see this as pushing a vendor specific content as much as USING a known vendor for a particular technology. Along the same lines, I'd suggest a round table type discussion for other product offerings such as wireless polling, for example. You could have a Canopy guy and some normal people (sorry...just a JOKE). Back to reality, it could be Canopy, Mikrotik (nstreme) and maybe Alvarion or some others. Each could offer a short pitch of what makes their solution better (about 5 minute limit each) and the remainder of the session could be QA. I'm not recommending any particular content, but suggesting ideas for what I would consider appropriate vs inappropriate content. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber
I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route (not Verizon), that was to cover the bulk of the equipment costs to break in and then they could give me a good rate per megabyte. -Kevin On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:50 PM, John Valenti vale...@lir.msu.edu wrote: I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm: Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI) Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to me? For less than 10s of thousand$? If it helps, there is a small concrete vault nearby that the fiber runs thru. The farmer says the cover has been left open on that for years. You can look in and see a metal can (about 8 by 2') that the fiber runs thru. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber
At that rate you could run your own fiber, including license fees for the poll's or underground. Nick Olsen Brevard Wireless (321) 205-1100 x106 From: Kevin Neal ke...@safelink.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:12 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route (not Verizon), that was to cover the bulk of the equipment costs to break in and then they could give me a good rate per megabyte. -Kevin On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:50 PM, John Valenti wrote: I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm: Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI) Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to me? For less than 10s of thousand$? If it helps, there is a small concrete vault nearby that the fiber runs thru. The farmer says the cover has been left open on that for years. You can look in and see a metal can (about 8 by 2') that the fiber runs thru. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber
I was told that I needed to be in the $30k/month range before the long-haul provider I was talking to would consider giving me a port here So close, but yet so far. John Kevin Neal wrote: I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route (not Verizon), that was to cover the bulk of the equipment costs to break in and then they could give me a good rate per megabyte. -Kevin On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:50 PM, John Valenti vale...@lir.msu.edu wrote: I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm: Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI) Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to me? For less than 10s of thousand$? If it helps, there is a small concrete vault nearby that the fiber runs thru. The farmer says the cover has been left open on that for years. You can look in and see a metal can (about 8 by 2') that the fiber runs thru. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber
Did I mention I'd have to run 30+ miles of fiber just to get to this pop they'd put in? -Kevin On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Nick Olsen n...@brevardwireless.com wrote: At that rate you could run your own fiber, including license fees for the poll's or underground. Nick Olsen Brevard Wireless (321) 205-1100 x106 From: Kevin Neal ke...@safelink.net Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:12 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route (not Verizon), that was to cover the bulk of the equipment costs to break in and then they could give me a good rate per megabyte. -Kevin On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:50 PM, John Valenti wrote: I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm: Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI) Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to me? For less than 10s of thousand$? If it helps, there is a small concrete vault nearby that the fiber runs thru. The farmer says the cover has been left open on that for years. You can look in and see a metal can (about 8 by 2') that the fiber runs thru. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon fiber
John Vogel wrote: I was told that I needed to be in the $30k/month range before the long-haul provider I was talking to would consider giving me a port here So close, but yet so far. John Note: I didn't ask, but I kind of assumed that meant a commit to 1GE @ $30/mbps... Do you suppose that was a reasonable assumption? John WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] 5.8 Omni
I need a 5.8 Omni to feed some smaller sites via WDS, looking for some recommendations was hoping for 16 db but can't seem to find any. Regards Michael Baird WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
At Digikey or Mouser you should be able to find something similar but switching type that has a higher efficiency and current rating. I've used some modules for other voltages and they work great. Greg On 10/28/09 10:18 PM, Steve wrote: I was not so happy either when I found out the newest line of MT boards didn't work on my already functioning 24vdc system. I have however been successful with a simple LM7818 regulator with a couple of tantalum caps and a good heatsink to drop voltage from ~26v supply. They are 1 amp, and I am using a 493 with 2 high power cards. all seems well so far. it's on a mountain and i don't look forward to winter maintenance. extremely cheap solution if you are handy with a soldering iron. WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
Thanks for the comment but you are incorrect, there is a field for your comments on many of the questions, specifically the one you talked about. I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So: The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its a bunch of sales/marketing guys who have no actual idea how the product works and cannot answer in depth technical questions. I can get all of the sales and marketing information that they present on the website or from talking to my usual vendors. What I want is a Product Engineering Show where engineers come and demonstrate their products and I can see actual comparisons of performance, ask detailed questions, etc. For example: I want to have talks from engineers who can answer questions. I want to have talks by real operators on how they implement OSPF to redistribute BGP across their networks. I want to hear talks from people that combine Motorola Canopy, Ubiquiti, Ligowave, Mikrotik, and Netsys to create innovative solutions for providing data coverage. All should be able to show examples. Just my 2 cents... - Matt Forbes Mercy wrote: REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring. We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far below the 300+ members and many more non-members who subscribe to this list. We are leaving the survey up until Friday evening so members have seven days to fill out this brief survey. If you have not filled out the survey please go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wsWAhIYE3XfDaKLojwMeNQ_3d_3d Also a list serve has been set up specifically for the organization of the trade show, you can subscribe to this list by going to: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wispashow One more reminder on Friday then your chance for helping us plan this is done. Thanks for your time. Forbes Mercy WISPA - Promotions Committee Chair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ winmail.dat WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] More FCC news
I found this interesting. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/28/fcc_mulls_tv_spectrum_auction_for_broadband/ The US Federal Communications Commission is considering a plan that would reclaim some precious airwaves from the country's television broadcasters and reinvent them as wireless broadband. According to the /Wall Street Journal/ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703574604574499730302393274.html, the FCC intends to release the plan on Friday as part of an effort to ensure that there's enough wireless bandwidth for the America [/sic/] of the future. The record is very clear that we're facing a looming spectrum gap, said Blair Levin, who oversees the plan, part of a wider push to expand US broadband. The plan would involve the FCC buying spectrum back from TV folk and then auctioning it off to wireless folk. The FCC has already opened up the television white spaces as unlicensed spectrum, hoping to create a kind of WiFi on steroids http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/13/big_four_tv_networks_attack_google_microsoft_wireless_proposal/. But the new plan creates vast swathes of licensed wireless broadband, providing more bandwidth for the likes of ATT and Verizon. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Chimney Ratchet Mount
If I am thinking about the same thing you mention, try satellite accessory distributors. DSI, Skywalker, and Dow Electronics are just a few that come to mind. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: can...@believewireless.net p...@believewireless.net Reply-To: can...@believewireless.net, WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:13:15 -0400 We usually get these from Radio Shack but they are out. Anyone know who else carries these? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] cellular repeater/bidirectional amps
I maybe late to chime in, but when I asked about something similar, I heard a resounding problem with not communicating with the cell provider beforehand. It seems that if you put a high-end(not a small one like you and I have) repeater in before talking to the cell provider, you MAY be talking to the FCC. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: jp j...@saucer.midcoast.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:39:39 -0400 I've got a wi-ex zboost yx500-cel at home and it works great to bring cellular into my home which is otherwise a dead-zone. Now, since we're the local gurus of all thing wireless, one of our customers is wanting something comparable for a larger area in an rf unfriendly building (large metal building with various metal additions). It may be necessary to have multiple cellular boosters to provide the indoor coverage they need. I'm studying the various brands at Tessco, and they include the wi-ex series, Wilson, and Digital Antenna Inc. Seems these are amps, do I need to be concerned about feedback between systems if these are within earshot of each other? I know the outdoor antenna has to be sufficiently isolated from the indoor antenna to provide the gain, which shouldn't be a problem based on the type of construction. Has anyone does a project like this? -- /* Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ */ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
