[AFMUG] cambium outdoor 6GHz?

[Dev]

Anyone heard a timeline from them? Mimosa says firmware will get you up into 
low 6GHz, not sure about other vendors.
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Bill Prince]

  
  
You can teach your car which is which if you use the magic
  decoder process. It's a PITA, but it works.


bp

On 10/15/2020 2:22 PM, Ken Hohhof
  wrote:


  
  
  
  
  
And you used to have to pay the car dealer
  to reprogram your TPMS system if you replaced a sensor.  Then
  someone cracked the code and all the tire dealers will do it
  for free or you can buy a gizmo to do it yourself.
 

  From: AF
 On Behalf Of Colin
Stanners
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:52 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation
(electrical / ground)

 

  

  And an official Cisco SFP-10G-LR 
10Gbit SFP+ 1310nm 10km  is $3000 while the FS
equivalent is $30 CDN. Fun market.


   

  
   
  

  On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:13 PM Adam
Moffett 
wrote:


  
Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like
  $200+ 
Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is
  the other one bullshitting me. 
 

  On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof
wrote:


  
FS
  sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the
  spec temp range on the ones you got?
 
Someone
  else pointed me to these:
https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html
 
-30
  is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of
  course at -40 they’re the same.  You’d expect if
  you have them plugged into a switch there would be
  some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as
  the outdoor temp.
 
 

  
From:
  AF 
  On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
  Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49
  PM
  To: af@af.afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather
  Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)
  

 

  

  When
  I was designing for Carlson, we discovered
  cold is always the enemy, not heat.  


  

   


  
From:
Bill Prince 
  
  
Sent:
Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM
  
  
To:
af@af.afmug.com
  
  
  
Subject:
Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet
isolation (electrical / ground)
  

  
  
 
  


  Run
  fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.
   
  bp
  
  
On
10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners
wrote:
  
  

  
We
have a rural tower site where the
owner has a few houses on the
property, they ran conduit and cat5e
between the houses 

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Robert Andrews]

Bad air on the West Coast, now means 3 months of seriously dense smoke. 
Walk outside in the morning take a deep breath and smell all your 
neighbors houses floating in the air...


On 10/15/2020 12:37 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

Yeah, and the Trango heater solution sucked bigly.

Other than our long departed SmartBridges stuff, everything actually 
seems to run better in winter.  The microwave equipment is fine in the 
cold, and we have a lot less RF path problems than in summer with all 
the stupid crop related issues like multipath, and trees growing into 
the path.  You can also see a long ways in the crisp cool air, unlike in 
summer with the heat waves in the air, what I call “bad air”.


*From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 2:18 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

Was it Trango... yeah I think it was Trango that had a heater for some 
of the components on their SMs


That is one way around it.

*From:*Adam Moffett

*Sent:*Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:12 PM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one 
bullshitting me.


On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

FS sells a bazillion different SFPs. What is the spec temp range on
the ones you got?

Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html

-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C. Of course at -40
they’re the same. You’d expect if you have them plugged into a
switch there would be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold
as the outdoor temp.

*From:*AF  
*On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com 
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
ground)

When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the
enemy, not heat.

*From:*Bill Prince

*Sent:*Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
ground)

Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

bp



On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on
the property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and
the tower so the houses could get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big
metal structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances
that fried gear at the houses after storms, I believe even
through surge supressors (hich are made to protect against
single high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper
converters / switches at the tower, those worked until the
winter: when it got to -30 outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just
unlucky with those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?






-- 
AF mailing list

AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Wimberley Texas tower gig

[Jaime Solorza]

Thanks

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 12:09 PM Lewis Bergman 
wrote:

> I am not, but the guy I usually use for towers might be. If he is not, my
> shop in Bryan is closer and their tower contractor might.
> Butch Strickland
> 325-338-5082
> hkstrick2...@sbcglobal.net
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 10:46 AM Jaime Solorza 
> wrote:
>
>> Hola ..any one interested in a 110 ft tower erection job. Trylon self
>> supported.  They have crane.
>> Two antennas and alignment.
>> Let me know
>> Thanks
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>
>
> --
> Lewis Bergman
> 325-439-0533 Cell
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Ken Hohhof]

And you used to have to pay the car dealer to reprogram your TPMS system if you 
replaced a sensor.  Then someone cracked the code and all the tire dealers will 
do it for free or you can buy a gizmo to do it yourself.

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of Colin Stanners
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:52 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

And an official Cisco SFP-10G-LR  10Gbit SFP+ 1310nm 10km  is $3000 while the 
FS equivalent is $30 CDN. Fun market.

 

 

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:13 PM Adam Moffett mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+ 

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one bullshitting 
me. 

 

On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

FS sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the spec temp range on the ones 
you got?

 

Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html

 

-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 they’re the 
same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch there would be some 
heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the outdoor temp.

 

 

From: AF    On Behalf 
Of ch...@wbmfg.com  
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy, not 
heat.  

 

From: Bill Prince 

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

To: af@af.afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

 

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the property, 
they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so the houses could 
get Internet access.

 

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal 
structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at the 
houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are made to 
protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).

 

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters / 
switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30 
outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

 

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with 
those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?

 

 

 


  _  


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Colin Stanners]

And an official Cisco SFP-10G-LR  10Gbit SFP+ 1310nm 10km  is $3000 while
the FS equivalent is $30 CDN. Fun market.


On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:13 PM Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+
>
> Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one
> bullshitting me.
>
>
> On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> FS sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the spec temp range on the
> ones you got?
>
>
>
> Someone else pointed me to these:
>
> https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html
>
>
>
> -30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 they’re
> the same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch there would
> be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the outdoor temp.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF   *On Behalf
> Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
> ground)
>
>
>
> When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy,
> not heat.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Prince
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM
>
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
> ground)
>
>
>
> Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.
>
>
>
> bp
>
> 
>
> On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:
>
> We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the
> property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so
> the houses could get Internet access.
>
>
>
> But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal
> structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at
> the houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are
> made to protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).
>
>
>
> We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters /
> switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30
> outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with
> those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Colin Stanners]

I believe that those SFPs were specced to -40 (C) , but didn't directly
confirm as IIRC that detail is not indicated on/by the unit's model number.
These were small switches/converters of only a few watts, wouldn't heat
much.

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:08 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> FS sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the spec temp range on the
> ones you got?
>
>
>
> Someone else pointed me to these:
>
> https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html
>
>
>
> -30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 they’re
> the same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch there would
> be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the outdoor temp.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
> ground)
>
>
>
> When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy,
> not heat.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Prince
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM
>
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical /
> ground)
>
>
>
> Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.
>
>
>
> bp
>
> 
>
> On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:
>
> We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the
> property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so
> the houses could get Internet access.
>
>
>
> But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal
> structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at
> the houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are
> made to protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).
>
>
>
> We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters /
> switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30
> outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with
> those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Adam Moffett]

Is our theory that JDSU builds for the -40 temp and FS adds a resistor 
in just the right place?


On 10/15/2020 3:17 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
Was it Trango... yeah I think it was Trango that had a heater for some 
of the components on their SMs

That is one way around it.
*From:* Adam Moffett
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:12 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one 
bullshitting me.


On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


FS sells a bazillion different SFPs. What is the spec temp range on 
the ones you got?


Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html 



-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C. Of course at -40 
they’re the same. You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch 
there would be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the 
outdoor temp.


*From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the 
enemy, not heat.


*From:*Bill Prince

*Sent:*Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on
the property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and
the tower so the houses could get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big
metal structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances
that fried gear at the houses after storms, I believe even
through surge supressors (hich are made to protect against single
high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper
converters / switches at the tower, those worked until the
winter: when it got to -30 outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just
unlucky with those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 






--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Frontier Rep

[Cassidy B. Larson]

Jason,

I could run it through our wholesale centurylink group, hit me up.

-c

> On Oct 15, 2020, at 1:29 PM, Jason Wilson  wrote:
> 
> Looking for a Rep for Frontier and or CenturyLInk Preferably on the West 
> Coast.  This would be for DIA fiber service or Transport.
> 
> 
> Jason Wilson
> Remotely Located
> Providing High Speed Internet to out of the way places.
> 530-651-1736
> 530-748-9608 Cell
> www.remotelylocated.com --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Nate Burke]

I have been using the FS 1g/10g industrial spec SFPs in the Midwest for 
a couple years.  No problems at all.  Edgepoints up on grain legs, and 
Mikrotiks in outdoor boxes.


On 10/15/2020 2:12 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:


Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one 
bullshitting me.



On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


FS sells a bazillion different SFPs. What is the spec temp range on 
the ones you got?


Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html

-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 
they’re the same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a 
switch there would be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as 
the outdoor temp.


*From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the 
enemy, not heat.


*From:*Bill Prince

*Sent:*Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on
the property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and
the tower so the houses could get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big
metal structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances
that fried gear at the houses after storms, I believe even
through surge supressors (hich are made to protect against single
high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper
converters / switches at the tower, those worked until the
winter: when it got to -30 outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just
unlucky with those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com







-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Ken Hohhof]

Yeah, and the Trango heater solution sucked bigly.

 

Other than our long departed SmartBridges stuff, everything actually seems to 
run better in winter.  The microwave equipment is fine in the cold, and we have 
a lot less RF path problems than in summer with all the stupid crop related 
issues like multipath, and trees growing into the path.  You can also see a 
long ways in the crisp cool air, unlike in summer with the heat waves in the 
air, what I call “bad air”.

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 2:18 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

Was it Trango... yeah I think it was Trango that had a heater for some of the 
components on their SMs

That is one way around it.  

 

From: Adam Moffett 

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:12 PM

To: af@af.afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+ 

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one bullshitting 
me. 

 

On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

FS sells a bazillion different SFPs. What is the spec temp range on the ones 
you got?

Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html

-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C. Of course at -40 they’re the 
same. You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch there would be some 
heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the outdoor temp.

From: AF    On Behalf 
Of ch...@wbmfg.com  
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com  
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy, not 
heat. 

From: Bill Prince 

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

To: af@af.afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the property, 
they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so the houses could 
get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal 
structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at the 
houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are made to 
protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters / 
switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30 
outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with 
those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?







  _  


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





  _  

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

[AFMUG] Frontier Rep

[Jason Wilson]

Looking for a Rep for Frontier and or CenturyLInk Preferably on the West
Coast.  This would be for DIA fiber service or Transport.


Jason Wilson
Remotely Located
Providing High Speed Internet to out of the way places.
530-651-1736
530-748-9608 Cell
www.remotelylocated.com
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[chuck]

Was it Trango... yeah I think it was Trango that had a heater for some of the 
components on their SMs
That is one way around it.  

From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:12 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+ 


Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one bullshitting 
me. 




On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Adam Moffett]

Interesting.  The JDSU industrial temp SFP's are like $200+

Makes me wonder if one of them is robbing me or is the other one 
bullshitting me.



On 10/15/2020 3:07 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:


FS sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the spec temp range on 
the ones you got?


Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html 



-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 
they’re the same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch 
there would be some heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the 
outdoor temp.


*From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the 
enemy, not heat.


*From:*Bill Prince

*Sent:*Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

*To:*af@af.afmug.com 

*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / 
ground)


Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the
property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the
tower so the houses could get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big
metal structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that
fried gear at the houses after storms, I believe even through
surge supressors (hich are made to protect against single
high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper
converters / switches at the tower, those worked until the winter:
when it got to -30 outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just
unlucky with those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?





--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 




-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Ken Hohhof]

FS sells a bazillion different SFPs.  What is the spec temp range on the ones 
you got?

 

Someone else pointed me to these:

https://www.fs.com/products/12622.html

 

-30 is pretty cold, not sure if that’s F or C.  Of course at -40 they’re the 
same.  You’d expect if you have them plugged into a switch there would be some 
heating and the SFP wouldn’t be as cold as the outdoor temp.

 

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:49 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy, not 
heat.  

 

From: Bill Prince 

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM

To: af@af.afmug.com   

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

 

Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.

 

bp


On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the property, 
they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so the houses could 
get Internet access.

 

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal 
structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at the 
houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are made to 
protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).

 

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters / 
switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30 
outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

 

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with 
those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?

 

 





  _  

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[dave]

HOLY SNIKEYS!

On good big truck at 50MPH would end that crap LOL :)


On 10/15/20 9:00 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:


If they would let anybody just string up or bury anything anywhere 
they wanted to, then it would be done.  But you can't because it'll 
look like this.  Even if you took away all the rules and property 
rights barriers you have another problem in labor availability.  NY 
State tried dumping craploads of money into broadband and pounding 
their fist on the table wondering why it wasn't all getting built.  
Turns out the market only supplies so many linesmen & field 
engineers.  There are enough of them to meet demand in the current 
market, and dumping money into the demand side doesn't automatically 
make more of them available.  The union electricians who do the aerial 
make-ready are getting paid double time to lure them away from other 
projects across the Northeast.and last I knew there still weren't 
enough.


Electric Pole With Messy Wire That Look Dangerous Stock Photo, Picture 
And Royalty Free Image. Image 28858353.




On 10/15/2020 8:30 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber gods.  
Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural area, I expect 
everywhere.  What's that all about?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
To:af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take over.

waiting on the light beams from space

On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.

bp


On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't
matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a
rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like
the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best
effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.

I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of
shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly
clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the
assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would
calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of
spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and
you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other
people, so you're only dead part of the time.


-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran
under PTP rules.

Thank you,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com


-Original Message-
From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.

Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

The infamous "Vivato Rule".
http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf

Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed
this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are
2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you
mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog
beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to
make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in
the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of
powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more
useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor
wifi environment.

I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the
impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have
physically different coverage areas that are connected to different
radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.

One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better
coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP
from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power
and punch to it.

I am personally not aware of any companies actively 

Re: [AFMUG] Wimberley Texas tower gig

[Lewis Bergman]

I am not, but the guy I usually use for towers might be. If he is not, my
shop in Bryan is closer and their tower contractor might.
Butch Strickland
325-338-5082
hkstrick2...@sbcglobal.net

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 10:46 AM Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> Hola ..any one interested in a 110 ft tower erection job. Trylon self
> supported.  They have crane.
> Two antennas and alignment.
> Let me know
> Thanks
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>


-- 
Lewis Bergman
325-439-0533 Cell
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[chuck]

When I was designing for Carlson, we discovered cold is always the enemy, not 
heat.  

From: Bill Prince 
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:45 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.



bp
On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:

  We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the property, 
they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so the houses could 
get Internet access.

  But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal 
structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at the 
houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are made to 
protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).

  We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters / 
switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30 
outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

  Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with 
those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?




   



-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Bill Prince]

  
  
Run fiber. Goes farther, does not conduct.


bp

On 10/15/2020 10:12 AM, Colin Stanners
  wrote:


  
  
We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses
  on the property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses
  and the tower so the houses could get Internet access.


But with the size of the property and the tower being a
  big metal structure, that caused some voltage / ground
  imbalances that fried gear at the houses after storms, I
  believe even through surge supressors (hich are made to
  protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).


We put in some electrical isolation using
  copper-fiber-copper converters / switches at the tower, those
  worked until the winter: when it got to -30 outside the
  FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.


Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we
  just unlucky with those SFPs and should try something else in
  the cold?





  
  
  

  


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[chuck]

I haven't got one yet.  And since I am partnered with my upstream provider I 
would have to write the agreement.


-Original Message- 
From: Mark Radabaugh

Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:55 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin

This isn’t something you write - this is a copy of an invoice or contract 
with one of your upstream providers showing you are in the US.


Mark


On Oct 15, 2020, at 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I need:

(1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your 
signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of your 
Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include the page 
that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a connection is being 
provisioned, and the signature pages of the contract. Everything else can 
be redacted. You do not have to share with us any terms, pricing, etc.


Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
template?


--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 



--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Steve Jones]

theyre too helpful, i dont trust them

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:04 PM Adam Moffett  wrote:

> +1  I only called them once, but they were surprisingly helpful.
>
>
> On 10/15/2020 1:00 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>
> my guess is a call to them will get you square right quick
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:59 AM Adam Moffett  wrote:
>
>> A quote?  A sales agreement? A Work order?
>>
>> I don't know how far they'll stretch on "connectivity agreement", but
>> the point is to prove you're getting service in ARIN territory and not
>> taking the IP's to Bangladesh or something.  I'm pretty sure I've gotten
>> away with a signed quote.
>>
>>
>> On 10/15/2020 12:54 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
>> > I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.
>> > -Original Message- From: Adam Moffett Sent: Thursday, October
>> > 15, 2020 10:26 AM To: af@af.afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin
>> > I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think
>> > they're asking for the agreement between you and your carrier.
>> > Something that shows a service delivery point in North America.  I
>> > think I used a signed quote before.
>> >
>> > On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
>> >> I need:
>> >>
>> >> (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is
>> >> providing services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a
>> >> copy of your signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at
>> >> least one of your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the
>> >> document(s) include the page that indicates the two parties, the page
>> >> indicating a connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages
>> >> of the contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to
>> >> share with us any terms, pricing, etc.
>> >>
>> >> Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a
>> >> template?
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

[AFMUG] Cold-weather Ethernet isolation (electrical / ground)

[Colin Stanners]

We have a rural tower site where the owner has a few houses on the
property, they ran conduit and cat5e between the houses and the tower so
the houses could get Internet access.

But with the size of the property and the tower being a big metal
structure, that caused some voltage / ground imbalances that fried gear at
the houses after storms, I believe even through surge supressors (hich are
made to protect against single high-voltage direct strikes).

We put in some electrical isolation using copper-fiber-copper converters /
switches at the tower, those worked until the winter: when it got to -30
outside the FiberStore SFPs were unhappy.

Does anyone have good cold-weather solutions? Or were we just unlucky with
those SFPs and should try something else in the cold?
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Adam Moffett]

+1  I only called them once, but they were surprisingly helpful.


On 10/15/2020 1:00 PM, Steve Jones wrote:

my guess is a call to them will get you square right quick

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:59 AM Adam Moffett > wrote:


A quote?  A sales agreement? A Work order?

I don't know how far they'll stretch on "connectivity agreement", but
the point is to prove you're getting service in ARIN territory and
not
taking the IP's to Bangladesh or something.  I'm pretty sure I've
gotten
away with a signed quote.


On 10/15/2020 12:54 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com 
wrote:
> I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.
> -Original Message- From: Adam Moffett Sent: Thursday,
October
> 15, 2020 10:26 AM To: af@af.afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin
> I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think
> they're asking for the agreement between you and your carrier.
> Something that shows a service delivery point in North America.  I
> think I used a signed quote before.
>
> On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com 
wrote:
>> I need:
>>
>> (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is
>> providing services within the ARIN region, please scan and
attach a
>> copy of your signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at
>> least one of your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the
>> document(s) include the page that indicates the two parties,
the page
>> indicating a connection is being provisioned, and the signature
pages
>> of the contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not
have to
>> share with us any terms, pricing, etc.
>>
>> Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use
for a
>> template?
>>
>

-- 
AF mailing list

AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Steve Jones]

my guess is a call to them will get you square right quick

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:59 AM Adam Moffett  wrote:

> A quote?  A sales agreement? A Work order?
>
> I don't know how far they'll stretch on "connectivity agreement", but
> the point is to prove you're getting service in ARIN territory and not
> taking the IP's to Bangladesh or something.  I'm pretty sure I've gotten
> away with a signed quote.
>
>
> On 10/15/2020 12:54 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> > I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.
> > -Original Message- From: Adam Moffett Sent: Thursday, October
> > 15, 2020 10:26 AM To: af@af.afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin
> > I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think
> > they're asking for the agreement between you and your carrier.
> > Something that shows a service delivery point in North America.  I
> > think I used a signed quote before.
> >
> > On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> >> I need:
> >>
> >> (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is
> >> providing services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a
> >> copy of your signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at
> >> least one of your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the
> >> document(s) include the page that indicates the two parties, the page
> >> indicating a connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages
> >> of the contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to
> >> share with us any terms, pricing, etc.
> >>
> >> Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a
> >> template?
> >>
> >
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Adam Moffett]

A quote?  A sales agreement? A Work order?

I don't know how far they'll stretch on "connectivity agreement", but 
the point is to prove you're getting service in ARIN territory and not 
taking the IP's to Bangladesh or something.  I'm pretty sure I've gotten 
away with a signed quote.



On 10/15/2020 12:54 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.
-Original Message- From: Adam Moffett Sent: Thursday, October 
15, 2020 10:26 AM To: af@af.afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin
I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think 
they're asking for the agreement between you and your carrier. 
Something that shows a service delivery point in North America.  I 
think I used a signed quote before.


On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I need:

(1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is 
providing services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a 
copy of your signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at 
least one of your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the 
document(s) include the page that indicates the two parties, the page 
indicating a connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages 
of the contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to 
share with us any terms, pricing, etc.


Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
template?






--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Mark Radabaugh]

It doesn’t need to be complex - just something in writing from another ARIN 
provider saying they are selling connectivity to you in the US.

Mark

> On Oct 15, 2020, at 12:54 PM,   wrote:
> 
> I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.  
> -Original Message- From: Adam Moffett Sent: Thursday, October 15, 
> 2020 10:26 AM To: af@af.afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin 
> I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think they're 
> asking for the agreement between you and your carrier. Something that shows a 
> service delivery point in North America.  I think I used a signed quote 
> before.
> 
> On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
>> I need:
>> 
>> (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
>> services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your 
>> signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of your 
>> Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include the page 
>> that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a connection is being 
>> provisioned, and the signature pages of the contract. Everything else can be 
>> redacted. You do not have to share with us any terms, pricing, etc.
>> 
>> Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
>> template?
>> 
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Steve Jones]

youre upstream agreement, you need two to show multihomed, i forgot why tho

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:27 AM Adam Moffett  wrote:

> I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think they're
> asking for the agreement between you and your carrier. Something that
> shows a service delivery point in North America.  I think I used a
> signed quote before.
>
> On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> > I need:
> >
> > (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing
> > services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your
> > signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of
> > your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include
> > the page that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a
> > connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages of the
> > contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to share
> > with us any terms, pricing, etc.
> >
> > Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a
> > template?
> >
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Mark Radabaugh]

This isn’t something you write - this is a copy of an invoice or contract with 
one of your upstream providers showing you are in the US.

Mark

> On Oct 15, 2020, at 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
> 
> I need:
> 
> (1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
> services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your signed 
> connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of your Internet 
> Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include the page that 
> indicates the two parties, the page indicating a connection is being 
> provisioned, and the signature pages of the contract. Everything else can be 
> redacted. You do not have to share with us any terms, pricing, etc.
> 
> Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
> template? 
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[chuck]

I haven't got my first bill yet and there was no signed agreement.  

-Original Message- 
From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:26 AM 
To: af@af.afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] arin 

I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think they're 
asking for the agreement between you and your carrier. Something that 
shows a service delivery point in North America.  I think I used a 
signed quote before.


On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I need:

(1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your 
signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of 
your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include 
the page that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a 
connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages of the 
contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to share 
with us any terms, pricing, etc.


Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
template?




--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] arin

[Adam Moffett]

I last did this about 2 years ago, so bear with me: but I think they're 
asking for the agreement between you and your carrier. Something that 
shows a service delivery point in North America.  I think I used a 
signed quote before.


On 10/15/2020 12:16 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:

I need:

(1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your 
signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of 
your Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include 
the page that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a 
connection is being provisioned, and the signature pages of the 
contract. Everything else can be redacted. You do not have to share 
with us any terms, pricing, etc.


Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
template?




--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Setting up 4 45 ft. towers with antennas

[chuck]

Mosquito nurseries


From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:10 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Setting up 4 45 ft. towers with antennas

They pulled those out of irrigation canals...some people are pigs .. 
They have four very large Pecan farms from Clint down to east of Tornillo, 
Texas...lots of large and small canals seculded by trees and stupid people dump 
tires sad

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 8:53 PM Bill Prince  wrote:

  Hey. I could use some new tires for my pickup. Do you deliver?



bp
On 10/14/2020 6:39 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:

We have built 4 45ft. towers for internet and cameras on several large 
Pecan farms.  As a matter of fact, a drug dealer got his truck stuck on levee, 
stole a tractor from one farm.  The sheriff caught him about 20 miles 
away...the video was clear as hell..

 
  -- 
  AF mailing list
  AF@af.afmug.com
  http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com




-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

[AFMUG] arin

[chuck]

I need:

(1) To verify that your organization has connectivity and is providing 
services within the ARIN region, please scan and attach a copy of your 
signed connectivity agreement or current bill with at least one of your 
Internet Service Providers. Please ensure the document(s) include the page 
that indicates the two parties, the page indicating a connection is being 
provisioned, and the signature pages of the contract. Everything else can be 
redacted. You do not have to share with us any terms, pricing, etc.


Anyone have any boilerplate connectivity agreements I could use for a 
template? 



--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Zach Underwood]

Charter cable got alot of the 3.65ghz licenses in my area. If I was betting
I would say that it is not for internet service it is for there
mobile phone service. Right now they are an MVNO and I bet they could save
a ton of money doing there own cell service in there footprint.

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:30 AM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber
> gods.  Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural
> area, I expect everywhere.  What's that all about?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
> To: af@af.afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>
> It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take
> over.
>
> waiting on the light beams from space
>
> On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
> > or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.
> >
> > bp
> > 
> >
> > On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> >> This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't
> >> matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a
> >> rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like
> >> the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best
> >> effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.
> >>
> >> I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of
> >> shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly
> >> clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the
> >> assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would
> >> calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of
> >> spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and
> >> you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other
> >> people, so you're only dead part of the time.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
> >> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> >>
> >> I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran
> >> under PTP rules.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Brian Webster
> >> www.wirelessmapping.com
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
> >> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> >>
> >> Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.
> >>
> >> Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
> >> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> >>
> >> The infamous "Vivato Rule".
> >> http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf
> >>
> >> Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed
> >> this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
> >> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> >>
> >> There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are
> >> 2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you
> >> mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog
> >> beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to
> >> make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in
> >> the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of
> >> powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more
> >> useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor
> >> wifi environment.
> >>
> >> I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the
> >> impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have
> >> physically different coverage areas that are connected to different
> >> radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.
> >>
> >> One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better
> >> coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP
> >> from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power
> >> and punch to it.
> >>
> >> I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing analog
> >> beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets significantly
> >> more difficult for those designs to support the sort of advanced macs
> >> that came after 11n - 11ax supports MU-MIMO and OFDMA for example
> >> which would be challenging to support with an analog beamformer.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/13/20, 3:42 PM, "AF on 

Re: [AFMUG] Setting up 4 45 ft. towers with antennas

[Jaime Solorza]

They pulled those out of irrigation canals...some people are pigs ..
They have four very large Pecan farms from Clint down to east of Tornillo,
Texas...lots of large and small canals seculded by trees and stupid people
dump tires sad

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 8:53 PM Bill Prince  wrote:

> Hey. I could use some new tires for my pickup. Do you deliver?
>
>
> bp
> 
>
> On 10/14/2020 6:39 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:
>
> We have built 4 45ft. towers for internet and cameras on several large
> Pecan farms.  As a matter of fact, a drug dealer got his truck stuck on
> levee, stole a tractor from one farm.  The sheriff caught him about 20
> miles away...the video was clear as hell..
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

[AFMUG] Wimberley Texas tower gig

[Jaime Solorza]

Hola ..any one interested in a 110 ft tower erection job. Trylon self
supported.  They have crane.
Two antennas and alignment.
Let me know
Thanks
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Adam Moffett]

If they would let anybody just string up or bury anything anywhere they 
wanted to, then it would be done.  But you can't because it'll look like 
this.  Even if you took away all the rules and property rights barriers 
you have another problem in labor availability.  NY State tried dumping 
craploads of money into broadband and pounding their fist on the table 
wondering why it wasn't all getting built.  Turns out the market only 
supplies so many linesmen & field engineers.  There are enough of them 
to meet demand in the current market, and dumping money into the demand 
side doesn't automatically make more of them available. The union 
electricians who do the aerial make-ready are getting paid double time 
to lure them away from other projects across the Northeast.and last 
I knew there still weren't enough.


Electric Pole With Messy Wire That Look Dangerous Stock Photo, Picture 
And Royalty Free Image. Image 28858353.




On 10/15/2020 8:30 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber gods.  
Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural area, I expect 
everywhere.  What's that all about?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take over.

waiting on the light beams from space

On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.

bp


On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't
matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a
rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like
the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best
effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.

I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of
shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly
clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the
assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would
calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of
spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and
you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other
people, so you're only dead part of the time.


-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran
under PTP rules.

Thank you,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com


-Original Message-
From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.

Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

The infamous "Vivato Rule".
http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf

Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed
this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are
2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you
mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog
beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to
make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in
the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of
powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more
useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor
wifi environment.

I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the
impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have
physically different coverage areas that are connected to different
radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.

One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better
coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP
from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power
and punch to it.

I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing analog
beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets significantly
more difficult for those designs to 

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Ken Hohhof]

So maybe Mediacom will buy me out?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:39 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

It’s sometimes hard to tell the cable companies from the WISP’s these days.
There have been a number of big acquisitions of larger WISPs by cable companies 
- and so far the cable companies are not changing the names of the WISPs they 
purchase.

Mark

> On Oct 15, 2020, at 8:30 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
> 
> The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber gods. 
>  Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural area, I 
> expect everywhere.  What's that all about?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
> To: af@af.afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> 
> It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take over.
> 
> waiting on the light beams from space
> 
> On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
>> or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.
>> 
>> bp
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>> This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't 
>>> matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a 
>>> rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like 
>>> the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best 
>>> effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.
>>> 
>>> I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of 
>>> shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly 
>>> clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the 
>>> assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would 
>>> calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of 
>>> spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and 
>>> you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other 
>>> people, so you're only dead part of the time.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran 
>>> under PTP rules.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brian Webster
>>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.
>>> 
>>> Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> The infamous "Vivato Rule".
>>> http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf
>>> 
>>> Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed 
>>> this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
>>> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there 
>>> are
>>> 2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you 
>>> mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog 
>>> beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together 
>>> to make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based 
>>> beamforming in the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't 
>>> get this sort of powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital 
>>> beamforming is more useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be 
>>> useful in an indoor wifi environment.
>>> 
>>> I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the 
>>> impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have 
>>> physically different coverage areas that are connected to different 
>>> radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.
>>> 
>>> One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better 
>>> coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP 
>>> from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power 
>>> and punch to it.
>>> 
>>> I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing 
>>> analog beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets 
>>> significantly more difficult for those designs to support the sort 
>>> of 

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Mark Radabaugh]

It’s sometimes hard to tell the cable companies from the WISP’s these days.
There have been a number of big acquisitions of larger WISPs by cable companies 
- and so far the cable companies are not changing the names of the WISPs they 
purchase.

Mark

> On Oct 15, 2020, at 8:30 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
> 
> The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber gods. 
>  Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural area, I 
> expect everywhere.  What's that all about?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
> To: af@af.afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
> 
> It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take over.
> 
> waiting on the light beams from space
> 
> On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
>> or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.
>> 
>> bp
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>> This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't 
>>> matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a 
>>> rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like 
>>> the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best 
>>> effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.
>>> 
>>> I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of 
>>> shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly 
>>> clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the 
>>> assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would 
>>> calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of 
>>> spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and 
>>> you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other 
>>> people, so you're only dead part of the time.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran 
>>> under PTP rules.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brian Webster
>>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.
>>> 
>>> Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
>>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> The infamous "Vivato Rule".
>>> http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf
>>> 
>>> Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed 
>>> this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
>>> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>> 
>>> There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are
>>> 2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you 
>>> mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog 
>>> beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to 
>>> make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in 
>>> the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of 
>>> powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more 
>>> useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor 
>>> wifi environment.
>>> 
>>> I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the 
>>> impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have 
>>> physically different coverage areas that are connected to different 
>>> radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.
>>> 
>>> One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better 
>>> coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP 
>>> from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power 
>>> and punch to it.
>>> 
>>> I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing analog 
>>> beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets significantly 
>>> more difficult for those designs to support the sort of advanced macs 
>>> that came after 11n - 11ax supports MU-MIMO and OFDMA for example 
>>> which would be challenging to support with an analog beamformer.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/13/20, 3:42 PM, "AF on behalf of Jeremy Grip" 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> A few years 

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Ken Hohhof]

The fiber gods are slower than I expected, at least the last mile fiber gods.  
Meanwhile, cable companies won a bunch of PALs in our semi-rural area, I expect 
everywhere.  What's that all about?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:07 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take over.

waiting on the light beams from space

On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
> or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.
>
> bp
> 
>
> On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>> This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't 
>> matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a 
>> rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like 
>> the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best 
>> effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.
>>
>> I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of 
>> shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly 
>> clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the 
>> assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would 
>> calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of 
>> spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and 
>> you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other 
>> people, so you're only dead part of the time.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>
>> I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran 
>> under PTP rules.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Brian Webster
>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>
>> Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.
>>
>> Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
>> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>
>> The infamous "Vivato Rule".
>> http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf
>>
>> Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed 
>> this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
>> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?
>>
>> There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are
>> 2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you 
>> mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog 
>> beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to 
>> make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in 
>> the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of 
>> powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more 
>> useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor 
>> wifi environment.
>>
>> I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the 
>> impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have 
>> physically different coverage areas that are connected to different 
>> radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.
>>
>> One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better 
>> coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP 
>> from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power 
>> and punch to it.
>>
>> I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing analog 
>> beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets significantly 
>> more difficult for those designs to support the sort of advanced macs 
>> that came after 11n - 11ax supports MU-MIMO and OFDMA for example 
>> which would be challenging to support with an analog beamformer.
>>
>>
>> On 10/13/20, 3:42 PM, "AF on behalf of Jeremy Grip" 
>>  wrote:
>>
>>  A few years ago, when the electrical utility trashed the 900 
>> spectrum with “smart” meters, I did a forklift upgrade of a bunch of
>> 900 PtMP with some old Wavion beamforming sectors talking to ubnt 
>> clients in 2.4. I was surprised that I got just about the same 
>> coverage that I had with 900 (Trango) and of course better 
>> throughput. Those original Wavions were b/g; I’ve since found a 
>> couple of .11n versions from the brief last gasp of Alvarion 

Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

[Dave]

It doesnt matter about any of it because the fiber gods will soon take 
over.


waiting on the light beams from space

On 10/14/2020 1:34 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

or it's OK to shoot 10,000 long guns in random directions.

bp


On 10/14/2020 10:57 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
This rule seems based on the idea that radio interference doesn't 
matter if it's not 100% of the time. Like I can shoot you with a 
rifle as long as sometimes I point it at other people.  I feel like 
the FCC doesn't understand that broadband isn't a hobby or best 
effort service, people expect it to work reliably not intermittently.


I get the same feeling about other decisions.  Like their love of 
shared spectrum.  Or allowing FHSS to hop all over the band randomly 
clobbering other users but using high power spectral density, on the 
assumption that it's equivalent to the lower psd that you would 
calculate by spreading the same power over a much wider piece of 
spectrum.  Again, I'm allowed to shoot at you with a long gun, and 
you shouldn't mind because most of the time I'm shooting at other 
people, so you're only dead part of the time.



-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 12:38 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

I think it made it to 5 GHz too because SkyPilot had radios that ran 
under PTP rules.


Thank you,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com


-Original Message-
From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Grip
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:33 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

Well, it is more like a PtP to the client.

Anybody ever had hands on a GO AP?

-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:22 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

The infamous "Vivato Rule".
http://www.vivato.com/pdfs/Vivato_Technical_White_Paper.pdf

Some would say the FCC was asleep at the wheel when they allowed 
this.  It is apparently for 2.4 GHz only.


-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 8:45 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi Stds compliant beamforming sectors in 2.4?

There's a couple of things to break down here.  One is that there are 
2 major kinds of beamforming - analog and digital. The ones you 
mention (and I'll add Go Networks to the list) were using analog 
beamforming.  These are antenna arrays that can be phased together to 
make a stronger beam and is steerable.  The chip-based beamforming in 
the WiFi standard is a bit different and you don't get this sort of 
powerful beam out of it.  That kind of digital beamforming is more 
useful for nulls mu-mimo isolation that would be useful in an indoor 
wifi environment.


I'm not too familiar with the cnmedusa design, but I get the 
impression it is more of an array of fixed sectors that have 
physically different coverage areas that are connected to different 
radio chains.  So that is yet another sort of variation.


One thing that made the analog beamforming systems achieve better 
coverage was that the FCC allowed (maybe they still do?) higher EIRP 
from this specific type of system.  So it had physically more power 
and punch to it.


I am personally not aware of any companies actively developing analog 
beamforming systems like those older ones.  It gets significantly 
more difficult for those designs to support the sort of advanced macs 
that came after 11n - 11ax supports MU-MIMO and OFDMA for example 
which would be challenging to support with an analog beamformer.



On 10/13/20, 3:42 PM, "AF on behalf of Jeremy Grip" 
 wrote:


 A few years ago, when the electrical utility trashed the 900 
spectrum with “smart” meters, I did a forklift upgrade of a bunch of 
900 PtMP with some old Wavion beamforming sectors talking to ubnt 
clients in 2.4. I was surprised that I got just about the same 
coverage that I had with 900 (Trango) and of course better 
throughput. Those original Wavions were b/g; I’ve since found a 
couple of .11n versions from the brief last gasp of Alvarion (R.I.P.) 
that did even better. Anybody know if anybody’s currently producing a 
beamforming 2.4 sector that will talk to standards compliant 11n radios?


 I’m assuming that the beamforming saved this location—one tower 
plus a couple of other little nodes in a little spread out village in 
the middle of a dense National Forest of mixed tall evergreens and 
hardwood. I just don’t see how 2.4 could match the old 900 
penetration otherwise, but maybe somebody can enlighten me. It 
wouldn’t be worth it to try and change out all the clients--more than 
a few are 50’+ up in trees. If there was an ePMP medusa in 2.4 and 
that sex-change