Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Mathew Howard]

I've wondered about that too, back when we first started doing PPPoE with
MT, we were doing far slower connections, but the settings are still the
same... it's entirely possible that a different Queue type would work
better at the sort of speeds we're doing these days.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> It may be something everyone should be doing everywhere, I don't know.
> It's possible, perhaps even likely that the MT default PPPoE settings
> aren't optimal.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:41:56 AM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>
> The advice may or may not apply.  But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT I
> don't know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't apply.
>> I don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we should be
>> using across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you how to
>> tweak your UBNT wireless etup.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>>
>>
>> Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply...
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
>>> from default to wireless-default.
>>>
>>> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
>>> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>>>
>>> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>>>
>>> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
>>> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
>>> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
>>> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Keefe John]

3d print them

On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:


We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.

If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.

Muchas gracias !

Pablo

Paul McCall, Pres.

PDMNet / Florida Broadband

658 Old Dixie Highway

Vero Beach, FL 32962

772-564-6800 office

772-473-0352 cell

www.pdmnet.com 

pa...@pdmnet.net 

Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

[Brian Webster]

I would think this technology will also have uses in the cable industry for
their DOCSIS systems. Full duplex of any frequency has major implications. I
was hoping this wasn't just going to be theory and actually make it in to
the market. Think about all the backhaul capacity this could bring.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:21 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

 

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/541856/trick-that-doubles-wireless-data
-capacity-stands-up-in-cell-network-tests/

 

Rory Conaway . Triad Wireless . CEO

4226 S. 37th Street . Phoenix . AZ 85040

602-426-0542

r...@triadwireless.net

www.triadwireless.net  

 

"Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every
day, like those of a baseball player." ~Author Unknown

 

Re: [AFMUG] Real-Time cyber attacks

[Brian Webster]

I would guess that they just use that as a point for the center of the US when 
they don’t have any other good location data for the IP address.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 1:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Real-Time cyber attacks

 

That norse map is always fun to watch, St louis is always heavy, what is it 
thats there, is it just where alot of IPs are registered to?

 

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

Here's a version of that map without all that other crap on the screen:  
http://map.norsecorp.com/

I've shared a few of these kinds of maps on Midwest-IX and The Brothers WISP FB 
pages. There's at least four or five different entities compiling and 
presenting real-time attack information.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

 

  _  

From: "Rory Conaway" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 5:43:17 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] Real-Time cyber attacks

 

http://www.projectsafety.org/#!real-time-cyber-attacks/c16af

 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

602-426-0542

r...@triadwireless.net

www.triadwireless.net  

 

“Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every 
day, like those of a baseball player.” ~Author Unknown

 

 





 

-- 

If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Lewis Bergman]

If you look at the docs between pfifo and sfq there is a pretty large
difference from a downstream perspective.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 10:32 AM Matt  wrote:

> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
> from default to wireless-default.
>
> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>
> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>
> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Ken Hohhof]

I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut the burst 
from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at one tower while 
doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this tower had Trango APs and 
the highest burst speed you could get was about 8 Mbps, but when we upgraded to 
450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.

Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to merely 
what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their sustained 
speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds are 
consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough that most 
websites should still load at max speed available.

It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than real 
traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?


From: Daniel White 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection

 



 

I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.

 

Thank you,

 

Daniel White

afmu...@gmail.com

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn: Twitter

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

 

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

O 602-426-0542

www.triadwireless.net  

r...@triadwireless.net

 

 





This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
  www.avast.com 
 

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Josh Luthman]

That's true but I'm saying that customers won't understand you can reduce
it from 10h to 2h if you upgrade.  Even if the few that understand were
aware, they wouldn't shell out the extra money.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is that it says
> it's going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours... realistically, it's
> probably not going to make any difference, since they'll just go to bed and
> it'll be done when they look at it again either way.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman  > wrote:
>
>> I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.
>> All they do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few
>> seconds and I can use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.
>>
>> Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first
>> condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even
>> though the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our
>> servers!)  The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
>>> between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
>>> downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
>>> their evil ISP isn't cheating them.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>>
 I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut
 the burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at
 one tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this
 tower had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 8
 Mbps, but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50
 Mbps.

 Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
 merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
 sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds
 are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
 that most websites should still load at max speed available.

 It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than
 real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?


 *From:* Daniel White 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
 country?


 Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection



 [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]



 I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.



 Thank you,



 Daniel White

 afmu...@gmail.com

 Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

 Skype: danieldwhite
 Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
 



 *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
 country?



 This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
 thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of
 the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we
 all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5
 to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
 wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
 is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
 the country is where we need to be competing.



 *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*

 *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*

 *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*

 *www.triadwireless.net   *

 *r...@triadwireless.net *






 --
 [image: Avast logo] 

 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 www.avast.com 


>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Nate Burke]

There are private address on the interface, but not setup in DHCP.

On 9/30/2015 11:58 AM, David wrote:
Do you have any private ip addresses assigned to that bridge interface 
on the tower?



On 09/30/2015 10:25 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
Rogue DHCP Detection is setup, Needed with radios with no filters. No 
Rogue DHCP Detected.



On 9/30/2015 10:07 AM, David wrote:

Nate,
 Set up tower gateway to detect rouge dhcp server on the bridge 
interface and see if there is

router facing the wrong way.
 This happens because of DOH! moments of customers and if you have a 
CPE that doesnt have any filtering for this

its a bummer




On 09/30/2015 08:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding 
that they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems 
like there is something with how they're detecting the connection 
when they're setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns 
a Public IP Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more 
of an issue with EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or 
Dug deeper into it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 
that was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had 
him Default the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC 
in the bridge table, and got a DHCP Lease). He said his computer 
was connected to the WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  
He's never logged into the router, so I don't think he changed the 
setup.  This morning, it's back in bridge mode. I'm sending him a 
RB951 to get him online, but why would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the 
customer had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Ken Hohhof]

Today's Pearls Before Swine comic may be applicable:
http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2015/09/30


-Original Message- 
From: Andy Trimmell 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:57 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 


Even though mine was slower than others on the download I got mine to
99% my guess is because of upload.

WHAT IS THIS?
Based on the currently displayed results, connection grades show how you
stack up with others in your country and around the world. For example
if your value is 77% (giving you a B+) then only 23% of connections are
faster than yours. The scale is:

A = 80-100%
B = 60-79%
C = 40-59%
D = 20-39%
F = 0-19%

Plus/minus grades are given for the top/bottom 5% of each grade.

Andy Trimmell
Systems Engineer
Precision Data Solutions, LLC
Mooresville, IN 46158
317-831-3000 ext 211
www.pdsconnect.me



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
country?

On 9/30/15 09:45, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and 
make licensing more available, it would totally change things.





Part 101 is already easy IMO, what's the problem?

~Seth

[AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Paul McCall]

We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.

If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.

Muchas gracias !

Pablo

Paul McCall, Pres.
PDMNet / Florida Broadband
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800 office
772-473-0352 cell
www.pdmnet.com
pa...@pdmnet.net

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Justin Wilson - MTIN]

SFQ works the best for speeds about 4 megs (thats not scientific on the 4 
megs).  PFIFO is more random than SFQ.  I always tell folks there is more math 
involved with SFQ.  And more math in figuring out bits is better right? hehe.

Seriously, SFQ performs better.  You just don’t see how much better it performs 
until you are queing multi megs of traffic.
Justin Wilson
j...@mtin.net

---
http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO
xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth

http://www.midwest-ix.com  COO/Chairman
Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 1:55 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
> 
> I've wondered about that too, back when we first started doing PPPoE with MT, 
> we were doing far slower connections, but the settings are still the same... 
> it's entirely possible that a different Queue type would work better at the 
> sort of speeds we're doing these days.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mike Hammett  > wrote:
> It may be something everyone should be doing everywhere, I don't know. It's 
> possible, perhaps even likely that the MT default PPPoE settings aren't 
> optimal.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> From: "Josh Luthman"  >
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:41:56 AM
> 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
> 
> The advice may or may not apply.  But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT I 
> don't know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue.
> 
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 
> Direct: 937-552-2343 
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett  > wrote:
> Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't apply. I 
> don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we should be 
> using across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you how to tweak 
> your UBNT wireless etup.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> From: "Josh Luthman"  >
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
> 
> 
> Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply...
> 
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 
> Direct: 937-552-2343 
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt  > wrote:
> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
> from default to wireless-default.
> 
> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
> 
> What would advantages or reason for the change?
> 
> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Mathew Howard]

Is there any reason not to use SFQ instead of PFIFO?

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Justin Wilson - MTIN 
wrote:

> SFQ works the best for speeds about 4 megs (thats not scientific on the 4
> megs).  PFIFO is more random than SFQ.  I always tell folks there is more
> math involved with SFQ.  And more math in figuring out bits is better
> right? hehe.
>
> Seriously, SFQ performs better.  You just don’t see how much better it
> performs until you are queing multi megs of traffic.
> Justin Wilson
> j...@mtin.net
>
> ---
> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO
> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth
>
> http://www.midwest-ix.com  COO/Chairman
> Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric
>
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 1:55 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
>
> I've wondered about that too, back when we first started doing PPPoE with
> MT, we were doing far slower connections, but the settings are still the
> same... it's entirely possible that a different Queue type would work
> better at the sort of speeds we're doing these days.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> It may be something everyone should be doing everywhere, I don't know.
>> It's possible, perhaps even likely that the MT default PPPoE settings
>> aren't optimal.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:41:56 AM
>>
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>>
>> The advice may or may not apply.  But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT I
>> don't know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>>> Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't
>>> apply. I don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we
>>> should be using across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you
>>> how to tweak your UBNT wireless etup.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>>>
>>>
>>> Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply...
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
 from default to wireless-default.

 In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
 with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.

 What would advantages or reason for the change?

 I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
 complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
 or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
 sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Lewis Bergman]

Bingo, I was considering a fiber deployment recently and did some market
research. Very few were willing to pay even $50 for 50Mbs. Canceled project.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 9:47 AM Simon Westlake  wrote:

> Is 85% of the country unable to get 50Mbps or unwilling to pay for it?
>
> 50Mbps is towards the top end of what TWC offers to residential customers
> around here, and I would be willing to be the majority take a cheaper
> package.
>
> On 9/30/2015 9:45 AM, Rory Conaway wrote:
>
> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]
>
> �
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>
> �
>
> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.� The
> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.� I�m not sure of the source
> of the data but if that�s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that
> we all need to be looking at.� In this case, it�s a lowly Nanostation
> Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.� Even though there is about 40 customers
> on it, it wasn�t under a lot of load when this was taken.�� But the
> point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it
> also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be competing.� ��
>
> �
>
> *Rory Conaway **� Triad Wireless �** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street � Phoenix � AZ 85040*
>
> *O 602-426-0542*
>
> *www.triadwireless.net 
> � *
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net  *
>
> *�*
>
> �
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Chuck McCown]

Depends where they are.  If they have cable modem or good DSL in the area, 
perhaps not.  
If they have no cable and crappy DSL they do pay that much.  

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

Bingo, I was considering a fiber deployment recently and did some market 
research. Very few were willing to pay even $50 for 50Mbs. Canceled project.




On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 9:47 AM Simon Westlake  wrote:

  Is 85% of the country unable to get 50Mbps or unwilling to pay for it?

  50Mbps is towards the top end of what TWC offers to residential customers 
around here, and I would be willing to be the majority take a cheaper package.


  On 9/30/2015 9:45 AM, Rory Conaway wrote:



�

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

�

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.� The 
thing that surprised me was the 85% number.� I�m not sure of the source of 
the data but if that�s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all 
need to be looking at.� In this case, it�s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to 
an older XM Rocket.� Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it 
wasn�t under a lot of load when this was taken.�� But the point is, 
50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% 
of the country is where we need to be competing.� ��

�

Rory Conaway � Triad Wireless � CEO

4226 S. 37th Street � Phoenix � AZ 85040

O 602-426-0542

www.triadwireless.net� 

r...@triadwireless.net

�

�

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[George Skorup]

We don't do PPPoE and only limited use of simple queues. I've messed 
with interface queues before and the best performance always comes from 
only-hardware-queue. Meh.


On 9/30/2015 10:44 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
It may be something everyone should be doing everywhere, I don't know. 
It's possible, perhaps even likely that the MT default PPPoE settings 
aren't optimal.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


*From: *"Josh Luthman" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:41:56 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

The advice may or may not apply.  But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT 
I don't know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue.



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett > wrote:


Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't
apply. I don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice
that we should be using across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't
going to tell you how to tweak your UBNT wireless etup.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


*From: *"Josh Luthman" >
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types


Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't
apply...


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt
>
wrote:

Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing
queue type
from default to wireless-default.

In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is
pfifo
with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.

What would advantages or reason for the change?

I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by
one thing
or another complain about there connection.  I wander if
switching to
sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs
out.

Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

[Ken Hohhof]

Isn’t this XPIC minus the cross-polarization?  I wonder if this is strictly 
signal processing, in which case the difficulty would be not overloading the 
receiver front end (especially in a small inexpensive piece of gear like a 
handset)?  Or do they employ some kind of diplexer/circulator/isolator type of 
passive technology to knock out most of the xmt signal before it gets to the 
rcv active circuitry?  Again, more practical in a basestation than a handset.


From: Brian Webster 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 1:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

I would think this technology will also have uses in the cable industry for 
their DOCSIS systems. Full duplex of any frequency has major implications. I 
was hoping this wasn’t just going to be theory and actually make it in to the 
market. Think about all the backhaul capacity this could bring.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:21 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

 

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/541856/trick-that-doubles-wireless-data-capacity-stands-up-in-cell-network-tests/

 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

602-426-0542

r...@triadwireless.net

www.triadwireless.net

 

“Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every 
day, like those of a baseball player.” ~Author Unknown

 

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mathew Howard]

I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
their evil ISP isn't cheating them.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut the
> burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at one
> tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this tower
> had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 8 Mbps,
> but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.
>
> Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
> merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
> sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds
> are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
> that most websites should still load at max speed available.
>
> It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than
> real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?
>
>
> *From:* Daniel White 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
> country?
>
>
> Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]
>
>
>
> I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Daniel White
>
> afmu...@gmail.com
>
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>
>
>
> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing
> that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the
> data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all
> need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to
> an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
> the country is where we need to be competing.
>
>
>
> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>
> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>
> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> [image: Avast logo] 
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com 
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Josh Luthman]

I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.  All
they do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few seconds
and I can use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.

Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first
condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even
though the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our
servers!)  The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
> between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
> downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
> their evil ISP isn't cheating them.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut the
>> burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at one
>> tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this tower
>> had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 8 Mbps,
>> but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.
>>
>> Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
>> merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
>> sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds
>> are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
>> that most websites should still load at max speed available.
>>
>> It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than
>> real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?
>>
>>
>> *From:* Daniel White 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
>> country?
>>
>>
>> Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]
>>
>>
>>
>> I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel White
>>
>> afmu...@gmail.com
>>
>> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>>
>> Skype: danieldwhite
>> Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>>
>>
>>
>> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
>> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of
>> the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we
>> all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5
>> to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
>> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
>> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
>> the country is where we need to be competing.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>>
>> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>>
>> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>>
>> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>>
>> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> [image: Avast logo] 
>>
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> www.avast.com 
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mathew Howard]

True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is that it says
it's going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours... realistically, it's
probably not going to make any difference, since they'll just go to bed and
it'll be done when they look at it again either way.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.  All
> they do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few seconds
> and I can use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.
>
> Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first
> condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even
> though the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our
> servers!)  The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
>> between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
>> downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
>> their evil ISP isn't cheating them.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>>> I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut
>>> the burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at
>>> one tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this
>>> tower had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 8
>>> Mbps, but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50
>>> Mbps.
>>>
>>> Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
>>> merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
>>> sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds
>>> are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
>>> that most websites should still load at max speed available.
>>>
>>> It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than
>>> real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Daniel White 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
>>> country?
>>>
>>>
>>> Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel White
>>>
>>> afmu...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>>>
>>> Skype: danieldwhite
>>> Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
>>> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of
>>> the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we
>>> all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5
>>> to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
>>> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
>>> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
>>> the country is where we need to be competing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>>>
>>> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>>>
>>> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>>>
>>> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>>>
>>> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> [image: Avast logo] 
>>>
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> www.avast.com 
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mathew Howard]

Ah, yeah, good point. That's very true.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> That's true but I'm saying that customers won't understand you can reduce
> it from 10h to 2h if you upgrade.  Even if the few that understand were
> aware, they wouldn't shell out the extra money.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is that it says
>> it's going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours... realistically, it's
>> probably not going to make any difference, since they'll just go to bed and
>> it'll be done when they look at it again either way.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.
>>> All they do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few
>>> seconds and I can use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.
>>>
>>> Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first
>>> condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even
>>> though the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our
>>> servers!)  The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
 between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
 downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
 their evil ISP isn't cheating them.

 On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut
> the burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at
> one tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this
> tower had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 8
> Mbps, but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50
> Mbps.
>
> Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
> merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
> sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that 
> speeds
> are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
> that most websites should still load at max speed available.
>
> It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than
> real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?
>
>
> *From:* Daniel White 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
> country?
>
>
> Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]
>
>
>
> I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Daniel White
>
> afmu...@gmail.com
>
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
> country?
>
>
>
> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of
> the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we
> all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5
> to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
> the country is where we need to be competing.
>
>
>
> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>
> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>
> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> [image: Avast logo] 

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[David]

I have seen this before with consumer routers.
 Not sure exactly how it sees the wan interface upon boot, but I am 
sure its looking for the RFC1918 address on that interface.
I think it may be a discovery protocol like igmp and you may be able to 
set up a rule to drop that traffic from entering the bridge.




On 09/30/2015 02:26 PM, Nate Burke wrote:

There are private address on the interface, but not setup in DHCP.

On 9/30/2015 11:58 AM, David wrote:
Do you have any private ip addresses assigned to that bridge 
interface on the tower?



On 09/30/2015 10:25 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
Rogue DHCP Detection is setup, Needed with radios with no filters. 
No Rogue DHCP Detected.



On 9/30/2015 10:07 AM, David wrote:

Nate,
 Set up tower gateway to detect rouge dhcp server on the bridge 
interface and see if there is

router facing the wrong way.
 This happens because of DOH! moments of customers and if you have 
a CPE that doesnt have any filtering for this

its a bummer




On 09/30/2015 08:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding 
that they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems 
like there is something with how they're detecting the connection 
when they're setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns 
a Public IP Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more 
of an issue with EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or 
Dug deeper into it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 
that was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had 
him Default the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC 
in the bridge table, and got a DHCP Lease). He said his computer 
was connected to the WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  
He's never logged into the router, so I don't think he changed the 
setup.  This morning, it's back in bridge mode. I'm sending him a 
RB951 to get him online, but why would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the 
customer had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mathew Howard]

But if you tell them they can pay an extra $10 a month and it'll finish in
an hour, they'll most likely say "he can wait" ...or the son might call up
and whine that they shouldn't have to pay that much because they're already
paying more than his friend (who happens to live in the middle a major
city...)

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Nate Burke  wrote:

> The one I just got recently was "My son says the internet is too slow, All
> his friends have already downloaded the new Call of Duty Game, and are
> playing it, and he's still waiting for it to download, and it says it still
> has 5 hours left!"
>
>
> On 9/30/2015 2:23 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
>
> Ah, yeah, good point. That's very true.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Josh Luthman  > wrote:
>
>> That's true but I'm saying that customers won't understand you can reduce
>> it from 10h to 2h if you upgrade.  Even if the few that understand were
>> aware, they wouldn't shell out the extra money.
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is that it says
>>> it's going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours... realistically, it's
>>> probably not going to make any difference, since they'll just go to bed and
>>> it'll be done when they look at it again either way.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.
 All they do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few
 seconds and I can use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.

 Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first
 condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even
 though the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our
 servers!)  The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.


 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard 
 wrote:

> I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference
> between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large
> downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure
> their evil ISP isn't cheating them.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut
>> the burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at
>> one tower while doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this
>> tower had Trango APs and the highest burst speed you could get was about 
>> 8
>> Mbps, but when we upgraded to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 
>> 30-50
>> Mbps.
>>
>> Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to
>> merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their
>> sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that 
>> speeds
>> are consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough
>> that most websites should still load at max speed available.
>>
>> It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather
>> than real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net?
>>
>>
>> *From:* Daniel White 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
>> country?
>>
>>
>> Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png]
>>
>>
>>
>> I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel White
>>
>> afmu...@gmail.com
>>
>> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>>
>> Skype: danieldwhite
>> Social: LinkedIn : Twitter
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
>> country?
>>
>>
>>
>> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
>> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source 
>> of
>> the data but if that’s correct, 

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Craig House]

Paul. Do you have 2.4 FSk with or without caps ?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 16:38, Ryan Ray  wrote:
> 
> How much for 200 PMP100's? lol
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Josh Luthman  
>> wrote:
>> The radios are worth a few bucks.  Look at the value of your 3 year old 
>> smart phonejack squat.
>> 
>> 
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Its sad about the only value these things have now is the cups
>>> 
 On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David  wrote:
 Let me check my stash in the back..
 �you have to take the whole shell though :)
 
 
 
> On 09/30/2015 02:46 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
> That�s above my skillset J
> 
> �
> 
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
> 
> �
> 
> 3d print them
> 
> On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
> 
> We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
> 
> �
> 
> If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
> 
> �
> 
> Muchas gracias !
> 
> �
> 
> Pablo
> 
> �
> 
> Paul McCall, Pres.
> 
> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
> 
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
> 
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
> 
> 772-564-6800 office
> 
> 772-473-0352 cell
> 
> www.pdmnet.com
> 
> pa...@pdmnet.net
> 
> �
> 
> �
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
>>> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
> 

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Nate Burke]

The one I just got recently was "My son says the internet is too slow, 
All his friends have already downloaded the new Call of Duty Game, and 
are playing it, and he's still waiting for it to download, and it says 
it still has 5 hours left!"



On 9/30/2015 2:23 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:

Ah, yeah, good point. That's very true.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:


That's true but I'm saying that customers won't understand you can
reduce it from 10h to 2h if you upgrade.  Even if the few that
understand were aware, they wouldn't shell out the extra money.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mathew Howard
> wrote:

True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is
that it says it's going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours...
realistically, it's probably not going to make any difference,
since they'll just go to bed and it'll be done when they look
at it again either way.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman
> wrote:

I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large
downloads.  All they do is start it and walk away.  I
believe it's a line - a few seconds and I can use it or
minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.

Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got
their first condo/rental place.  First customer was
yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even though the speed tests in
the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our servers!)
 The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard
> wrote:

I have serious doubts that most people could even tell
the difference between 10mbps and 50mbps without
running a speedtest (aside from large downloads)...
They just need to run speedtests constantly to make
sure their evil ISP isn't cheating them.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof
> wrote:

I am starting to hate the obsession with
speedtests. Recently we cut the burst from 100
MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds
worth) at one tower while doubling everyone’s
sustained speeds. Previously this tower had Trango
APs and the highest burst speed you could get was
about 8 Mbps, but when we upgraded to 450 the
speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.
Of course we got whining from people who saw their
speedtests drop to merely what they were paying
for. Didn’t matter that we doubled their sustained
speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.
And that speeds are consistent even at peak usage
times. Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough that most
websites should still load at max speed available.
It’s like some people get Internet just to run
speedtests, rather than real traffic. Are some
people addicted to speedtest.net
?
*From:* Daniel White 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85%
of the rest of the country?

Just got this… and yes this is my home internet
connection

http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png

I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85%
benchmark.

Thank you,

Daniel White

afmu...@gmail.com __

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn
:
Twitter 

*From:* Af 

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Adam Moffett]

My suspicion is that people observe that something doesn't work or 
something is loading slowly.  Then they run the speed test and find a 
reason not to like what they see.
I think some folks run the speed test while their video is buffering and 
don't understand that while video is buffering, some of the speed is 
being used by that.  Or web browsing is slow because of issues on their 
PC and then they run the speed test and get 5mbps and decide that's not 
enoughperhaps because they saw or read something that told them they 
need 10 or 50 or 100.


On 9/30/2015 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference 
between 10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from 
large downloads)... They just need to run speedtests constantly to 
make sure their evil ISP isn't cheating them.


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof > wrote:


I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we
cut the burst from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8
seconds worth) at one tower while doubling everyone’s sustained
speeds.  Previously this tower had Trango APs and the highest
burst speed you could get was about 8 Mbps, but when we upgraded
to 450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.
Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop
to merely what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we
doubled their sustained speed, which is a huge deal for video
streaming.  And that speeds are consistent even at peak usage
times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough that most websites should
still load at max speed available.
It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather
than real traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net
?
*From:* Daniel White 
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of
the country?

Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection

http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706527705.png

I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.

Thank you,

Daniel White

afmu...@gmail.com __

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn :
Twitter 

*From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning. 
The thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of

the source of the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge
opportunity that we all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s
a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  Even though
there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively
easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the
country is where we need to be competing.

*Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •**CEO*

*4226 S. 37^th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*

*O 602-426-0542 *

*www.triadwireless.net  *

*r...@triadwireless.net *

**




Avast logo   

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com 

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Josh Luthman]

My house does a little traffic constantly (primarily upstream) and I
changed it to SFQ around 2ish.  I see no difference in CPU usage - it still
parallels with the amount of throughput.

Not sure what the throughput change would be, though.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Lewis Bergman 
wrote:

> If you look at the docs between pfifo and sfq there is a pretty large
> difference from a downstream perspective.
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 10:32 AM Matt  wrote:
>
>> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
>> from default to wireless-default.
>>
>> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
>> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>>
>> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>>
>> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
>> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
>> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
>> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Daniel White]

With the speed package (I can pull up to 150Mbps down, but evening get 65Mbps 
or so) I have I can’t think of anything that has taken 2 hours to download… and 
realistically the servers are going to be your bottleneck anyways



Thank you,



Daniel White

  afmu...@gmail.com

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social:   LinkedIn:  
 Twitter



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 1:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?



That's true but I'm saying that customers won't understand you can reduce it 
from 10h to 2h if you upgrade.  Even if the few that understand were aware, 
they wouldn't shell out the extra money.






Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mathew Howard  > wrote:

True, the only thing they'll notice with large downloads is that it says it's 
going to take 2 hours instead of 10 hours... realistically, it's probably not 
going to make any difference, since they'll just go to bed and it'll be done 
when they look at it again either way.



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Josh Luthman  > wrote:

I really don't believe they'd notice a difference in large downloads.  All they 
do is start it and walk away.  I believe it's a line - a few seconds and I can 
use it or minutes/hours+ so they come back to it later.



Fiber company down here in Dayton started up and just got their first 
condo/rental place.  First customer was yesterday.  Gigabit speeds (even though 
the speed tests in the video peaked out at 250 megs - probably our servers!)  
The comment that stood out was $75 is too expensive.






Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard  > wrote:

I have serious doubts that most people could even tell the difference between 
10mbps and 50mbps without running a speedtest (aside from large downloads)... 
They just need to run speedtests constantly to make sure their evil ISP isn't 
cheating them.



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ken Hohhof  > wrote:

I am starting to hate the obsession with speedtests.  Recently we cut the burst 
from 100 MBytes to about 6 MBytes (actually 8 seconds worth) at one tower while 
doubling everyone’s sustained speeds.  Previously this tower had Trango APs and 
the highest burst speed you could get was about 8 Mbps, but when we upgraded to 
450 the speedtests temporarily went to 30-50 Mbps.



Of course we got whining from people who saw their speedtests drop to merely 
what they were paying for.  Didn’t matter that we doubled their sustained 
speed, which is a huge deal for video streaming.  And that speeds are 
consistent even at peak usage times.  Plus a 6 MByte burst is enough that most 
websites should still load at max speed available.



It’s like some people get Internet just to run speedtests, rather than real 
traffic.  Are some people addicted to speedtest.net  ?





From: Daniel White 

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:27 AM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?



Just got this… and yes this is my home internet connection







I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.



Thank you,



Daniel White

  afmu...@gmail.com

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social:   LinkedIn:  
 Twitter



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com  ] On Behalf 
Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?



This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.



Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

O 602-426-0542 

www.triadwireless.net 

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Ryan Ray]

How much for 200 PMP100's? lol


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> The radios are worth a few bucks.  Look at the value of your 3 year old
> smart phonejack squat.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Its sad about the only value these things have now is the cups
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David  wrote:
>>
>>> Let me check my stash in the back..
>>> �you have to take the whole shell though :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/30/2015 02:46 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>>
>>> That�s above my skillset J
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Keefe John
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> 3d print them
>>>
>>> On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>>
>>> We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Muchas gracias !
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Pablo
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> Paul McCall, Pres.
>>>
>>> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
>>>
>>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>>
>>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>>
>>> 772-564-6800 office
>>>
>>> 772-473-0352 cell
>>>
>>> www.pdmnet.com
>>>
>>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>> �
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Paul McCall]

That's above my skillset :)

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

3d print them
On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.

If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.

Muchas gracias !

Pablo

Paul McCall, Pres.
PDMNet / Florida Broadband
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800 office
772-473-0352 cell
www.pdmnet.com
pa...@pdmnet.net

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Josh Luthman]

I'm sure you could very easily pay Andrew Cox or Greg Sowell to print off
as many as you would.

The problem is that it would be much more expensive.  There has to be
dozens or hundreds of people with those boots on the shelves.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:

> That’s above my skillset J
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Keefe John
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
>
>
>
> 3d print them
>
> On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
>
> We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
>
>
>
> If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
>
>
>
> Muchas gracias !
>
>
>
> Pablo
>
>
>
> Paul McCall, Pres.
>
> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
>
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>
> 772-564-6800 office
>
> 772-473-0352 cell
>
> www.pdmnet.com
>
> pa...@pdmnet.net
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Josh Luthman]

The radios are worth a few bucks.  Look at the value of your 3 year old
smart phonejack squat.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Its sad about the only value these things have now is the cups
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David  wrote:
>
>> Let me check my stash in the back..
>> �you have to take the whole shell though :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 09/30/2015 02:46 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>
>> That�s above my skillset J
>>
>> �
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Keefe John
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
>>
>> �
>>
>> 3d print them
>>
>> On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>
>> We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
>>
>> �
>>
>> If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
>>
>> �
>>
>> Muchas gracias !
>>
>> �
>>
>> Pablo
>>
>> �
>>
>> Paul McCall, Pres.
>>
>> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
>>
>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>
>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>
>> 772-564-6800 office
>>
>> 772-473-0352 cell
>>
>> www.pdmnet.com
>>
>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>
>> �
>>
>> �
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Paul McCall]

Yes we do Craig.

Hitting you offlist

Paul

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Craig House
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:47 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

Paul. Do you have 2.4 FSk with or without caps ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 30, 2015, at 16:38, Ryan Ray 
> wrote:
How much for 200 PMP100's? lol


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
The radios are worth a few bucks.  Look at the value of your 3 year old smart 
phonejack squat.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
> wrote:
Its sad about the only value these things have now is the cups

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David 
> wrote:
Let me check my stash in the back..
�you have to take the whole shell though :)


On 09/30/2015 02:46 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
That�s above my skillset ☺
�
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
�
3d print them
On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
�
If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
�
Muchas gracias !
�
Pablo
�
Paul McCall, Pres.
PDMNet / Florida Broadband
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800 office
772-473-0352 cell
www.pdmnet.com
pa...@pdmnet.net
�
�




--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

not assholesjust pompass asses :)

  - Original Message - 
  From: Seth Mattinen 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 10:59 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar


  On 9/29/15 7:42 PM, George Skorup wrote:
  > And most IT guys are assholes. Ask me how I know. :)


  Oh by the way, you're welcome!

Re: [AFMUG] Link Status

[Dan Sullivan]

Hi George,

We do not have CRC error counts today and we would have to investigate this.  I 
will take this as a feature request.

Dan

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 10:53 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Link Status

Dan,

Can the hardware give CRC error counts? That would be nice to have in the GUI. 
It's very helpful on Canopy.
On 9/29/2015 8:09 AM, Dan Sullivan wrote:
Hi SmarterBroadband,
�
Today ePMP does not provide a �count� for how many times the ethernet link 
has gone up and down.
�
We do provide a trap every time an up or a down event happens via RFC1213.
�
Dan
ePMP Software Manager
�
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of SmarterBroadband
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 7:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Link Status
�
Is there anywhere in an ePMP or Mikrotik to see a Ethernet Link count.� i.e. 
how many time it has gone up and down �count� like in a Canopy unit.
�
I keep getting a ether1 link down and then link up in my Tik log (which causes 
an OSPF neighbor state change), but both radio and tik show no Ethernet errors 
so I cannot see if it is a port issue at one end.

[AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

[Rory Conaway]

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/541856/trick-that-doubles-wireless-data-capacity-stands-up-in-cell-network-tests/

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

"Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every 
day, like those of a baseball player." ~Author Unknown

Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar

[D. Ryan Spott]

http://kidbleach.info/ or less safe for work: http://eyebleach.com/

ryan

-- 
D. Ryan Spott | NGC457, llc
broadband | telco | colo | communities
PO Box 1734 Sultan, WA 98294
425-939-0047

> On Sep 29, 2015, at 19:41, Simon Westlake  wrote:
> 
> Well, I guess the simple solution to being stupid at clothes is to stop 
> getting dressed.
> 
>> On 9/29/2015 9:37 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> This thread apparently.  ;-)
>> 
>> Clothes for one. I'm sure my fiance has a couple more. I'm sure a few here 
>> have a few more as well, but I figured that was a good seed.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> From: "Simon Westlake" 
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 9:32:46 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar
>> 
>> I don't believe that Mike. What are you stupid at?
>> 
>> On 9/29/2015 9:31 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Naw, not all. I buy some things at which I'm not stupid at. I certainly do 
>> buy some things I am stupid at, though.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 9:25:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar
>> 
>> Ya.  All customers are stupid :)
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Sep 29, 2015 10:21 PM, "Simon Westlake"  wrote:
>>> That's not very nice!
>>> 
>>> On 9/29/2015 9:15 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>> Most customers are stupid.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>> 
>>> From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" 
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 4:17:01 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar
>>> 
>>> that a very non customercentric approach
>>> 
 On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Simon Westlake  
 wrote:
 The end game will be to enable a user to import their own data however 
 they want. When we will get to that point, I'm not sure. And all the 
 formatting of that data and everything else is still up in the air.
 
 I really want to let people self manage their systems though. I think it's 
 incredibly frustrating to wait on someone else to go back and forth on 
 something like an import, whether that data is from Platypus, Quickbooks 
 or whatever it might be. And it's a lot of manpower on our side to manage 
 all those imports, so it's mutually beneficial if we can make it happen.
 
> On 9/29/2015 3:34 PM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> Also, import from Platypus?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar
> 
> This should be an interesting answer
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Weekley
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:22 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar
> 
> Does it come with an "Import From Powercode" button?
> 
> Simon Westlake wrote:
>> Yeah. I'm not saying 'we promise, there will never be any bugs.' But,
>> we're not putting something out and saying 'ehh, it probably works. If
>> it doesn't, it's beta!'
>> 
>> The whole platform is built around automated testing. Every single
>> thing we can think of has an automated test written around it. So
>> anytime we change anything, we can run our test suite (which already
>> takes a very long time..) and know categorically if we've broken
>> anything. On desktop, mobile, the API, billing, one credit card
>> processor in particular - everything.
>> 
>> Makes it a lot easier to say 'we're very confident this works.'
>> 
>> I think, the other thing that is going to make this different is we're
>> not trying to make every single thing possible for every single
>> person. We brought an accountant on board to help design the billing
>> system. She directed us in the application of a lot of the billing
>> functionality so it could be reported properly and audited properly.
>> This means it's pretty likely at some point, somebody is going to ask
>> to do XYZ, and we're going to say no - not because we don't want to,
>> but because we've built a system that adheres to a specific set of
>> principles, and in the eyes of the system, deviating from those 
>> principles is fundamentally wrong.
>> 
>> The good side of that is that things just work in a sane way, and
>> we're really 

Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

[Mike Hammett]

Wow, so this isn't just bullshit? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:21:25 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex 



http://www.technologyreview.com/news/541856/trick-that-doubles-wireless-data-capacity-stands-up-in-cell-network-tests/
 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO 
4226 S. 37 th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040 
602-426-0542 
r...@triadwireless.net 
www.triadwireless.net 

“ Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every 
day, like those of a baseball player.” ~Author Unknown 

Re: [AFMUG] New ISP Billing Solution: Sonar

[Steve]

There going to be any sort of presentation / booth in Vegas? 

Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)

[Craig House]

We found a few here.  How much ?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 17:15, Paul McCall  wrote:
> 
> Yes we do Craig.
>  
> Hitting you offlist
>  
> Paul
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Craig House
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:47 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
>  
> Paul. Do you have 2.4 FSk with or without caps ?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 16:38, Ryan Ray  wrote:
> 
> How much for 200 PMP100's? lol
>  
>  
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Josh Luthman  
> wrote:
> The radios are worth a few bucks.  Look at the value of your 3 year old smart 
> phonejack squat.
> 
>  
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>  
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:16 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
>  wrote:
> Its sad about the only value these things have now is the cups
>  
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, David  wrote:
> Let me check my stash in the back..
> �you have to take the whole shell though :)
> 
> 
> 
> On 09/30/2015 02:46 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
> That�s above my skillset J
> �
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:13 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Need 100 seris CAPs :)
> �
> 3d print them
> 
> On 9/30/2015 2:05 PM, Paul McCall wrote:
> We are in need of a couple hundred end caps for Canopy cases.
> �
> If you have some, (only need caps), I can send a label for pickup.
> �
> Muchas gracias !
> �
> Pablo
> �
> Paul McCall, Pres.
> PDMNet / Florida Broadband
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
> 772-564-6800 office
> 772-473-0352 cell
> www.pdmnet.com
> pa...@pdmnet.net
> �
> �
>  
> 
> 
>  
> --
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>  
>  

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Mathew Howard]

I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
I'll see if I can figure out where exactly it is.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:

> Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to hit
> this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP industry.
>
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-out-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
>
>

[AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

[Nate Burke]

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-launches-geforce-now-game-streaming-service

No more Pesky Downloading games to your console, use the 'Netflix' of 
Video Games...


"To use GeForce NOW, you�ll need to meet a number of requirements. 
First, you�ll need an NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV, SHIELD portable, or 
SHIELD tablet (with the latest software updates installed) and a 
SHIELD-approved 5GHz router. The latest SHIELD Hub app from the Google 
Play store must be installed. And your broadband connection must offer 
download speeds of at least 12Mb/s. 20Mb/s is recommended for 720p / 60 
FPS quality, and 50Mb/s is recommended for 1080p / 60 FPS. You must also 
have a 60ms or lower ping time to a GeForce NOW server, though 40ms or 
lower is recommended. "


I like how they refer to that as 'Broadband Connection' Sounds more like 
DIA to me, since it's continuous sustained traffic. I'm guessing 
buffering or caching video games doesn't work well.

[AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Steve]

Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to hit this 
guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP industry.  

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-out-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Steve]

Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a lot 
of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece they can 
do on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article. 
ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com



- Original Message -
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
I'll see if I can figure out where exactly it is.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:

> Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to hit
> this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP industry.
>
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-out-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

[Super WISP]

I have the NVIDIA Shield TV and it works great with KODI installed, Emulators, 
and PC game streaming from my PC and through their service that has been free 
up till now.  I'm at the Comcast 75Mbps tier.  Unit is really fast for how 
small it is and it's actually wife approved :)

Mark Chamerlik 
WAV®, Inc 
Strategic Account Manager East Coast
630-818-1004 Direct
815-822-4490 Cell Phone
630-818-4450 Fax

ma...@wavonline.com (OR URGENT NEEDS TO tea...@wavonline.com)
 

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:59 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-launches-geforce-now-game-streaming-service

No more Pesky Downloading games to your console, use the 'Netflix' of Video 
Games...

"To use GeForce NOW, you�ll need to meet a number of requirements. 
First, you�ll need an NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV, SHIELD portable, or SHIELD 
tablet (with the latest software updates installed) and a SHIELD-approved 5GHz 
router. The latest SHIELD Hub app from the Google Play store must be installed. 
And your broadband connection must offer download speeds of at least 12Mb/s. 
20Mb/s is recommended for 720p / 60 FPS quality, and 50Mb/s is recommended for 
1080p / 60 FPS. You must also have a 60ms or lower ping time to a GeForce NOW 
server, though 40ms or lower is recommended. "

I like how they refer to that as 'Broadband Connection' Sounds more like DIA to 
me, since it's continuous sustained traffic. I'm guessing buffering or caching 
video games doesn't work well.



This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which
it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of
the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone at 630-818-1000.

Re: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

[Ken Hohhof]

Have you noticed the everyone cites the government's definition of 
"broadband" as a minimum of 25/3 when in fact the term used was "advanced 
broadband"?


How about we call gigabit "ludicrous speed".

And 10/1 shall be "chopped liver".


-Original Message- 
From: Nate Burke

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:59 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-launches-geforce-now-game-streaming-service

No more Pesky Downloading games to your console, use the 'Netflix' of
Video Games...

"To use GeForce NOW, you�ll need to meet a number of requirements.
First, you�ll need an NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV, SHIELD portable, or
SHIELD tablet (with the latest software updates installed) and a
SHIELD-approved 5GHz router. The latest SHIELD Hub app from the Google
Play store must be installed. And your broadband connection must offer
download speeds of at least 12Mb/s. 20Mb/s is recommended for 720p / 60
FPS quality, and 50Mb/s is recommended for 1080p / 60 FPS. You must also
have a 60ms or lower ping time to a GeForce NOW server, though 40ms or
lower is recommended. "

I like how they refer to that as 'Broadband Connection' Sounds more like
DIA to me, since it's continuous sustained traffic. I'm guessing
buffering or caching video games doesn't work well. 

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Rick Harnish]

I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.  Maybe 
that is who Matthew Howard works for.

http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed

I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack of 
knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from her 
yet.  

http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
260-307-4000 cell
Skype: rick.harnish.​
Twitter: @rharnish


> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> 
> Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a lot
> of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece they 
> can do
> on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article.
> ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mathew Howard" 
> To: "af" 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> 
> I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there, I'll 
> see if
> I can figure out where exactly it is.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
> 
> > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
> > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP industry.
> >
> >
> > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
> ou
> > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
> >
> >

Re: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

[Rick Harnish]

Oh duh, Litewire, why didn’t I know that.  ☺

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
260-307-4000 cell
Skype: rick.harnish.​
Twitter: @rharnish


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:02 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

Oh, I like that!

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Ken Hohhof 
> wrote:
Have you noticed the everyone cites the government's definition of "broadband" 
as a minimum of 25/3 when in fact the term used was "advanced broadband"?

How about we call gigabit "ludicrous speed".

And 10/1 shall be "chopped liver".


-Original Message- From: Nate Burke

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:59 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-launches-geforce-now-game-streaming-service

No more Pesky Downloading games to your console, use the 'Netflix' of
Video Games...

"To use GeForce NOW, you�ll need to meet a number of requirements.
First, you�ll need an NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV, SHIELD portable, or
SHIELD tablet (with the latest software updates installed) and a
SHIELD-approved 5GHz router. The latest SHIELD Hub app from the Google
Play store must be installed. And your broadband connection must offer
download speeds of at least 12Mb/s. 20Mb/s is recommended for 720p / 60
FPS quality, and 50Mb/s is recommended for 1080p / 60 FPS. You must also
have a 60ms or lower ping time to a GeForce NOW server, though 40ms or
lower is recommended. "

I like how they refer to that as 'Broadband Connection' Sounds more like
DIA to me, since it's continuous sustained traffic. I'm guessing
buffering or caching video games doesn't work well.

Re: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before

[Mathew Howard]

Oh, I like that!

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Have you noticed the everyone cites the government's definition of
> "broadband" as a minimum of 25/3 when in fact the term used was "advanced
> broadband"?
>
> How about we call gigabit "ludicrous speed".
>
> And 10/1 shall be "chopped liver".
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Nate Burke
>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:59 PM
> To: Animal Farm
> Subject: [AFMUG] And you thought gamers were grumpy about Latency Before
>
>
> http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-launches-geforce-now-game-streaming-service
>
> No more Pesky Downloading games to your console, use the 'Netflix' of
> Video Games...
>
> "To use GeForce NOW, you�ll need to meet a number of requirements.
> First, you�ll need an NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV, SHIELD portable, or
> SHIELD tablet (with the latest software updates installed) and a
> SHIELD-approved 5GHz router. The latest SHIELD Hub app from the Google
> Play store must be installed. And your broadband connection must offer
> download speeds of at least 12Mb/s. 20Mb/s is recommended for 720p / 60
> FPS quality, and 50Mb/s is recommended for 1080p / 60 FPS. You must also
> have a 60ms or lower ping time to a GeForce NOW server, though 40ms or
> lower is recommended. "
>
> I like how they refer to that as 'Broadband Connection' Sounds more like
> DIA to me, since it's continuous sustained traffic. I'm guessing
> buffering or caching video games doesn't work well.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Josh Luthman]

Jon Auer is Netwurx last I heard

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 30, 2015 8:00 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

> Nope, I'm not from Netwurx, but they are around there too... I'm not sure
> if they get closer to Sun Prairie than we do or not.
>
> That's not a connection I'd want to put in if it was in the least bit
> questionable though, seeing as he calls 3/1Mbps unusable...
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Rick Harnish  > wrote:
>
>> I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.
>> Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.
>>
>> http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed
>>
>> I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack
>> of knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from
>> her yet.
>>
>> http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241
>>
>> Respectfully,
>>
>> Rick Harnish
>> Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
>> 260-307-4000 cell
>> Skype: rick.harnish.​
>> Twitter: @rharnish
>>
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
>> > To: af@afmug.com
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
>> >
>> > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve
>> a lot
>> > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece
>> they can do
>> > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the
>> article.
>> > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > - Original Message -
>> > From: "Mathew Howard" 
>> > To: "af" 
>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
>> >
>> > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
>> I'll see if
>> > I can figure out where exactly it is.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
>> > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP
>> industry.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
>> > ou
>> > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Erich Kaiser]

I contacted RFD TV about their online streaming and the WISP Industry and
never got a response.   All you can do is try...


Erich Kaiser
North Central Tower
er...@northcentraltower.com
Office: 630-621-4804
Cell: 630-777-9291


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Rick Harnish 
wrote:

> No, I wasn't harsh.  I invited her to write an article about how WISPs and
> the agriculture industry have partnered across the country to bring
> broadband to rural Americans.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Rick Harnish
> Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
> 260-307-4000 cell
> Skype: rick.harnish.​
> Twitter: @rharnish
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:28 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > Ouch, that Farm Futures article is pretty awful.  Probably what passes
> for
> > journalism today.
> >
> > I hope you weren't too harsh on her.  Probably some gig economy writer
> paid
> > a penny a word or something?
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Rick Harnish
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:56 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.
> > Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.
> >
> > http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed
> >
> > I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack
> of
> > knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from
> > her
> > yet.
> >
> > http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Rick Harnish
> > Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
> > 260-307-4000 cell
> > Skype: rick.harnish.Twitter:
> > @rharnish
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
> > > To: af@afmug.com
> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> > >
> > > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can
> solve a
> > > lot
> > > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece
> > > they can do
> > > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the
> article.
> > > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Mathew Howard" 
> > > To: "af" 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> > >
> > > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
> > > I'll see if
> > > I can figure out where exactly it is.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
> > > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP
> > > > industry.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
> > > ou
> > > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Rick Harnish]

No, I wasn't harsh.  I invited her to write an article about how WISPs and the 
agriculture industry have partnered across the country to bring broadband to 
rural Americans.

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
260-307-4000 cell
Skype: rick.harnish.​
Twitter: @rharnish



> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:28 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> 
> Ouch, that Farm Futures article is pretty awful.  Probably what passes for
> journalism today.
> 
> I hope you weren't too harsh on her.  Probably some gig economy writer paid
> a penny a word or something?
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Rick Harnish
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:56 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> 
> I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.
> Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.
> 
> http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed
> 
> I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack of
> knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from
> her
> yet.
> 
> http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241
> 
> Respectfully,
> 
> Rick Harnish
> Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
> 260-307-4000 cell
> Skype: rick.harnish.Twitter:
> @rharnish
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a
> > lot
> > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece
> > they can do
> > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article.
> > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Mathew Howard" 
> > To: "af" 
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
> > I'll see if
> > I can figure out where exactly it is.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
> >
> > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
> > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP
> > > industry.
> > >
> > >
> > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
> > ou
> > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
> > >
> > >
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Jaime Solorza]

When we started setting up los guys wireless farmers and ranchers offered
their water tanks and towers to us to distribute our services to folks in
the lower valley.   They had windstream dsl in some areas or nothing at
all.  So the need and demand are definitely there.

On Sep 30, 2015 7:31 PM, "Rick Harnish"  wrote:
>
> No, I wasn't harsh.  I invited her to write an article about how WISPs
and the agriculture industry have partnered across the country to bring
broadband to rural Americans.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Rick Harnish
> Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
> 260-307-4000 cell
> Skype: rick.harnish.​
> Twitter: @rharnish
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:28 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > Ouch, that Farm Futures article is pretty awful.  Probably what passes
for
> > journalism today.
> >
> > I hope you weren't too harsh on her.  Probably some gig economy writer
paid
> > a penny a word or something?
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Rick Harnish
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:56 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> >
> > I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.
> > Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.
> >
> > http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed
> >
> > I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack
of
> > knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from
> > her
> > yet.
> >
> > http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Rick Harnish
> > Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
> > 260-307-4000 cell
> > Skype: rick.harnish.Twitter:
> > @rharnish
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
> > > To: af@afmug.com
> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> > >
> > > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can
solve a
> > > lot
> > > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece
> > > they can do
> > > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the
article.
> > > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Mathew Howard" 
> > > To: "af" 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
> > >
> > > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get
there,
> > > I'll see if
> > > I can figure out where exactly it is.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
> > > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP
> > > > industry.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
> > > ou
> > > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Jon Auer]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

> That's not a connection I'd want to put in if it was in the least bit
> questionable though, seeing as he calls 3/1Mbps unusable...
>

Hell, These days I don't like putting in anything less than 10/5Mbps.
And yes, we only have legacy Canopy 900 hitting that area, and we try very
very hard not to sell Canopy 900.

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

If only we all lived in a field*shrug*

  - Original Message - 
  From: Steve 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?


  Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a lot 
of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece they can 
do on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article. 
ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com



  - Original Message -
  From: "Mathew Howard" 
  To: "af" 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

  I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there,
  I'll see if I can figure out where exactly it is.

  On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:

  > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to hit
  > this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP industry.
  >
  >
  > 
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-out-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
  >
  >

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Jon Auer]

And here I thought my ears were burning from the fall breeze (just got back
from turning up a 11Ghz link as part of our network upgrades heading
towards that area...).

We have ePMP, PMP450, and AirMax ac (variously) to the north and east of
Sun Prairie (within 20 minutes drive), and PTP stuff in Madison proper (to
the southwest).
South of there is still largely PMP100 that we're working towards replacing
but there's little point in upgrading access without upgrading backhaul so
that's moving a bit like a freight train. Slow to get rolling but when it
arrives it comes with a ton of coal, I mean bandwidth...

Now, standard (but useless) disclaimer for the following political thoughts
when a random reporter finds this in google: I'm talking as random tech
person and not on behalf of any company I may or may not be associated with.

Sun Prairie has had muni acting as ISP for a long time, 10+ years.
Initially with fixed wireless and then transitioned into fiber. As usual
they are cherrypicking the high ARPU customers (businesses & MDUs) and
leaving the normal people behind (I see this around with ARRA/etc
projects).:
http://www.sunprairieutilities.com/fiberCMSpage.cfm?cms=87=0
There's a similar problem/situation in Madison with MUFN fiber. There just
seems to be too much drama around towns where muni department people have
ambitions of ISPhood.

So, I don't see us building out that way ever. I mean, if this dude poppped
a 160' 45G or SSV tower in his back yard, got all the zoning approvals, and
served up a long term lease on a silver platter, then sure, in a heartbeat.
PMP450 fed by 11Ghz from our fiber POP @222 in Madison coming right up.
Otherwise, the risk/reward doesn't make sense.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Jon Auer is Netwurx last I heard
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Sep 30, 2015 8:00 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:
>
>> Nope, I'm not from Netwurx, but they are around there too... I'm not sure
>> if they get closer to Sun Prairie than we do or not.
>>
>> That's not a connection I'd want to put in if it was in the least bit
>> questionable though, seeing as he calls 3/1Mbps unusable...
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Rick Harnish <
>> rharn...@fibertothefarm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.
>>> Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.
>>>
>>> http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed
>>>
>>> I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack
>>> of knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from
>>> her yet.
>>>
>>> http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241
>>>
>>> Respectfully,
>>>
>>> Rick Harnish
>>> Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
>>> 260-307-4000 cell
>>> Skype: rick.harnish.​
>>> Twitter: @rharnish
>>>
>>>
>>> > -Original Message-
>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
>>> > To: af@afmug.com
>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
>>> >
>>> > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can
>>> solve a lot
>>> > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece
>>> they can do
>>> > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the
>>> article.
>>> > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > - Original Message -
>>> > From: "Mathew Howard" 
>>> > To: "af" 
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
>>> >
>>> > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get
>>> there, I'll see if
>>> > I can figure out where exactly it is.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
>>> > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP
>>> industry.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
>>> > ou
>>> > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>>
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Ken Hohhof]

In case it matters, remember the archives of this list are public and 
searchable on Google.

From: Jon Auer 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:00 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

And here I thought my ears were burning from the fall breeze (just got back 
from turning up a 11Ghz link as part of our network upgrades heading towards 
that area...).

We have ePMP, PMP450, and AirMax ac (variously) to the north and east of Sun 
Prairie (within 20 minutes drive), and PTP stuff in Madison proper (to the 
southwest). 
South of there is still largely PMP100 that we're working towards replacing but 
there's little point in upgrading access without upgrading backhaul so that's 
moving a bit like a freight train. Slow to get rolling but when it arrives it 
comes with a ton of coal, I mean bandwidth...

Now, standard (but useless) disclaimer for the following political thoughts 
when a random reporter finds this in google: I'm talking as random tech person 
and not on behalf of any company I may or may not be associated with.

Sun Prairie has had muni acting as ISP for a long time, 10+ years. Initially 
with fixed wireless and then transitioned into fiber. As usual they are 
cherrypicking the high ARPU customers (businesses & MDUs) and leaving the 
normal people behind (I see this around with ARRA/etc projects).: 
http://www.sunprairieutilities.com/fiberCMSpage.cfm?cms=87=0 
There's a similar problem/situation in Madison with MUFN fiber. There just 
seems to be too much drama around towns where muni department people have 
ambitions of ISPhood.

So, I don't see us building out that way ever. I mean, if this dude poppped a 
160' 45G or SSV tower in his back yard, got all the zoning approvals, and 
served up a long term lease on a silver platter, then sure, in a heartbeat. 
PMP450 fed by 11Ghz from our fiber POP @222 in Madison coming right up. 
Otherwise, the risk/reward doesn't make sense. 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:

  Jon Auer is Netwurx last I heard

  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Sep 30, 2015 8:00 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

Nope, I'm not from Netwurx, but they are around there too... I'm not sure 
if they get closer to Sun Prairie than we do or not.


That's not a connection I'd want to put in if it was in the least bit 
questionable though, seeing as he calls 3/1Mbps unusable...


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Rick Harnish  
wrote:

  I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close.  
Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.

  http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed

  I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack 
of knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from her 
yet.

  http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241

  Respectfully,

  Rick Harnish
  Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
  260-307-4000 cell
  Skype: rick.harnish.​
  Twitter: @rharnish



  > -Original Message-
  > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
  > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
  > To: af@afmug.com
  > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
  >
  > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve 
a lot
  > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece 
they can do
  > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the 
article.
  > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
  >
  >
  >
  > - Original Message -
  > From: "Mathew Howard" 
  > To: "af" 
  > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
  > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
  >

  > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there, 
I'll see if
  > I can figure out where exactly it is.
  >
  > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
  >
  > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
  > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP 
industry.
  > >
  > >
  > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
  > ou
  > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
  > >
  > >

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Ken Hohhof]

Ouch, that Farm Futures article is pretty awful.  Probably what passes for 
journalism today.


I hope you weren't too harsh on her.  Probably some gig economy writer paid 
a penny a word or something?



-Original Message- 
From: Rick Harnish

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close. 
Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.


http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed

I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack of 
knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from her 
yet.


http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
260-307-4000 cell
Skype: rick.harnish.Twitter: 
@rharnish




-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a 
lot
of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece 
they can do

on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article.
ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com



- Original Message -
From: "Mathew Howard" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there, 
I'll see if

I can figure out where exactly it is.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:

> Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
> hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP 
> industry.

>
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
ou
> t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
>
> 

[AFMUG] National Broadband Map

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

Ok - two articles that I read today both cite the national broadband map for 
"information".
I wanted to pass along some information I received in a state of Alabama 
broadband meeting / briefing today.

At a conference recently an Alabama state staffer discussed with personnel from 
the FCC the National Broadband Map.
Staffer was told the fcc currently had *one* employee working on that map and 
to not expect it to be updated anytime soon.

There was, and I quote, "little to no funding..." for the project.

FYI.
grain of salt.
take it or leave it.


  - Original Message - 
  From: Ken Hohhof 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:28 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?


  Ouch, that Farm Futures article is pretty awful.  Probably what passes for 
  journalism today.

  I hope you weren't too harsh on her.  Probably some gig economy writer paid 
  a penny a word or something?


  -Original Message- 
  From: Rick Harnish
  Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 6:56 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

  I contacted Peter Maher at Netwurx about the article.  They are close. 
  Maybe that is who Matthew Howard works for.

  http://www.netwurx.net/wireless-high-speed

  I also wrote an email to Jessica Michael at Farm Futures about her lack of 
  knowledge about the Wisp industry yesterday.  I haven't heard back from her 
  yet.

  http://farmfutures.com/blogs-rural-internet-options-smart-office-10241

  Respectfully,

  Rick Harnish
  Broadband Consultant & Industry Analyst
  260-307-4000 cell
  Skype: rick.harnish.Twitter: 
  @rharnish


  > -Original Message-
  > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
  > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:43 PM
  > To: af@afmug.com
  > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
  >
  > Contact Ars... have them update the site saying that Wireless can solve a 
  > lot
  > of these problems for a fraction of the price.   It'll be a good piece 
  > they can do
  > on the wireless industry.  Find the name of the guy who wrote the article.
  > ahhh his email is  jon.brod...@arstechnica.com
  >
  >
  >
  > - Original Message -
  > From: "Mathew Howard" 
  > To: "af" 
  > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:28:01 PM
  > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?
  >
  > I'll just skimmed through the article... We might be able to get there, 
  > I'll see if
  > I can figure out where exactly it is.
  >
  > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Steve  wrote:
  >
  > > Would be a good followup Ars story if someone with a 450 was able to
  > > hit this guy up with faster than DSL speeds!  Good PR for the WISP 
  > > industry.
  > >
  > >
  > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/man-builds-house-then-finds-
  > ou
  > > t-cable-internet-will-cost-117000/
  > >
  > > 

Re: [AFMUG] Any of you guys service this guy in the news?

[Mathew Howard]

You definitely wouldn't want to put him on Canopy 900.
I can't say that I've ever heard anything good about Frontier DSL around
here... so it's likely he isn't really getting 3/1 most of the time.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Jon Auer  wrote:

>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> That's not a connection I'd want to put in if it was in the least bit
>> questionable though, seeing as he calls 3/1Mbps unusable...
>>
>
> Hell, These days I don't like putting in anything less than 10/5Mbps.
> And yes, we only have legacy Canopy 900 hitting that area, and we try very
> very hard not to sell Canopy 900.
>

[AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Nate Burke]

I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that 
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like there 
is something with how they're detecting the connection when they're 
setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public IP 
Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue with 
EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that 
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him Default 
the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge 
table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was connected to the 
WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never logged into the 
router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This morning, it's back 
in bridge mode.  I'm sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why 
would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer 
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Mike Hammett]

I'm glad they're finally doing bridge mode in more than a couple devices. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Nate Burke"  
To: "Animal Farm"  
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:57:38 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode 

I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that 
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode. It seems like there 
is something with how they're detecting the connection when they're 
setup. I'm not doing anything special. DHCP Assigns a Public IP 
Address from the tower. Although it seems to be more of an issue with 
EPMP than FSK/450. Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it? 

Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that 
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old). I had him Default 
the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge 
table, and got a DHCP Lease). He said his computer was connected to the 
WIFI, but was showing limited connection. He's never logged into the 
router, so I don't think he changed the setup. This morning, it's back 
in bridge mode. I'm sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why 
would the router choose bridge mode? 

I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer 
had done something before I got there. Now I'm not sure. 

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Daniel White]

You have to imagine that most of these devices get installed on cable modems
or DSL modems already doing NAT.  So using this configuration, it resolves
double NAT issues.

Maybe just a better incentive to move into the managed router space.  Plenty
of compelling solutions out there now.

Thank you,

Daniel White
afmu...@gmail.com
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
Skype: danieldwhite

> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:21 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode
> 
> Newer Netgear firmware when it detects the router is behind another router
> will go into "Wireless AP" mode where all 5 ports are bridged and the
> management IP changes from 192.168.1.1 to some 10.x.x.x address.  I don't
> know how it detects this, maybe when it gets an RFC1918 address via DHCP?
> 
> I don't remember exactly the sequence how this takes place, I think I've
had
> to actually select Wireless AP from the GUI.  And I would not expect it to
> change on its own if the router has been configured, only when it detects
> that it is in initial configuration mode (like after pressing the "Restore
Factory
> Configuration" button).
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Nate Burke
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:57 AM
> To: Animal Farm
> Subject: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode
> 
> I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that
they
> need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like there is
> something with how they're detecting the connection when they're setup.
> I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public IP Address from the
> tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue with EPMP than FSK/450.
> Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it?
> 
> Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that was
> in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him Default the
> router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge table, and
> got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was connected to the WIFI, but
was
> showing limited connection.  He's never logged into the router, so I don't
> think he changed the setup.  This morning, it's back in bridge mode.  I'm
> sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why would the router choose
> bridge mode?
> 
> I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer had
done
> something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Rory Conaway]

[http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I'm not sure of the source of the data but if 
that's correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it's a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn't under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
O 602-426-0542
www.triadwireless.net
r...@triadwireless.net

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Nate Burke]

Isn't there some 'always available' Private IP Address on the Ethernet 
line of the EPMP.  Could it be detecting this somehow?



On 9/30/2015 9:20 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Newer Netgear firmware when it detects the router is behind another 
router will go into "Wireless AP" mode where all 5 ports are bridged 
and the management IP changes from 192.168.1.1 to some 10.x.x.x 
address.  I don't know how it detects this, maybe when it gets an 
RFC1918 address via DHCP?


I don't remember exactly the sequence how this takes place, I think 
I've had to actually select Wireless AP from the GUI.  And I would not 
expect it to change on its own if the router has been configured, only 
when it detects that it is in initial configuration mode (like after 
pressing the "Restore Factory Configuration" button).



-Original Message- From: Nate Burke
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:57 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like there
is something with how they're detecting the connection when they're
setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public IP
Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue with
EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it?

Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him Default
the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge
table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was connected to the
WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never logged into the
router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This morning, it's back
in bridge mode.  I'm sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why
would the router choose bridge mode?

I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Josh Luthman]

15% of the country speed tests a greater than 52 mbps (down only I'm
assuming).  That includes a bunch of fiber customers I'm sure.  The problem
is the statistic of how many live in major cities - I think 97% of the
population lives in a metro area?


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Simon Westlake 
wrote:

> Is 85% of the country unable to get 50Mbps or unwilling to pay for it?
>
> 50Mbps is towards the top end of what TWC offers to residential customers
> around here, and I would be willing to be the majority take a cheaper
> package.
>
> On 9/30/2015 9:45 AM, Rory Conaway wrote:
>
> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]
>
> �
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>
> �
>
> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.� The
> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.� I�m not sure of the source
> of the data but if that�s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that
> we all need to be looking at.� In this case, it�s a lowly Nanostation
> Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.� Even though there is about 40 customers
> on it, it wasn�t under a lot of load when this was taken.�� But the
> point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it
> also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be competing.� ��
>
> �
>
> *Rory Conaway **� Triad Wireless �** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street � Phoenix � AZ 85040*
>
> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>
> * www.triadwireless.net
> � *
>
> * r...@triadwireless.net *
>
> *�*
>
> �
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Adam Moffett]

Don't know.it's usually when there's a private IP on the WAN interface.
Router firmware bug?

On 9/30/2015 9:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that 
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like 
there is something with how they're detecting the connection when 
they're setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public 
IP Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue 
with EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into 
it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that 
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him 
Default the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the 
bridge table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was 
connected to the WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never 
logged into the router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This 
morning, it's back in bridge mode. I'm sending him a RB951 to get him 
online, but why would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer 
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Simon Westlake]

Is 85% of the country unable to get 50Mbps or unwilling to pay for it?

50Mbps is towards the top end of what TWC offers to residential 
customers around here, and I would be willing to be the majority take a 
cheaper package.


On 9/30/2015 9:45 AM, Rory Conaway wrote:


http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The 
thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I�m not sure of the 
source of the data but if that�s correct, then there is a huge 
opportunity that we all need to be looking at.  In this case, it�s a 
lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is 
about 40 customers on it, it wasn�t under a lot of load when this was 
taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit 
with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need 
to be competing.


*Rory Conaway **� Triad Wireless �**CEO*

*4226 S. 37^th Street � Phoenix � AZ 85040*

*O 602-426-0542*

*www.triadwireless.net  *

*r...@triadwireless.net *

**

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[David]

Nate,
 Set up tower gateway to detect rouge dhcp server on the bridge 
interface and see if there is

router facing the wrong way.
 This happens because of DOH! moments of customers and if you have a 
CPE that doesnt have any filtering for this

its a bummer




On 09/30/2015 08:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that 
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like 
there is something with how they're detecting the connection when 
they're setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public 
IP Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue 
with EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into 
it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that 
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him 
Default the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the 
bridge table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was 
connected to the WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never 
logged into the router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This 
morning, it's back in bridge mode. I'm sending him a RB951 to get him 
online, but why would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer 
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

[Stefan Englhardt]

I guess it will heavily depend on the distance of the link as signal strength 
difference

of incoming and outgoing signal will increase.





Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. September 2015 15:51
An: af@afmug.com
Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex



Wow, so this isn't just bullshit?



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



  _

From: "Rory Conaway"  >
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:21:25 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] Kumu Networks demonstrates same channel full-duplex

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/541856/trick-that-doubles-wireless-data-capacity-stands-up-in-cell-network-tests/



Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

602-426-0542

r...@triadwireless.net 

www.triadwireless.net 



“Things could be worse. Suppose your errors were counted and published every 
day, like those of a baseball player.” ~Author Unknown

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Ken Hohhof]

Newer Netgear firmware when it detects the router is behind another router 
will go into "Wireless AP" mode where all 5 ports are bridged and the 
management IP changes from 192.168.1.1 to some 10.x.x.x address.  I don't 
know how it detects this, maybe when it gets an RFC1918 address via DHCP?


I don't remember exactly the sequence how this takes place, I think I've had 
to actually select Wireless AP from the GUI.  And I would not expect it to 
change on its own if the router has been configured, only when it detects 
that it is in initial configuration mode (like after pressing the "Restore 
Factory Configuration" button).



-Original Message- 
From: Nate Burke

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:57 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like there
is something with how they're detecting the connection when they're
setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public IP
Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue with
EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it?

Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him Default
the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge
table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was connected to the
WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never logged into the
router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This morning, it's back
in bridge mode.  I'm sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why
would the router choose bridge mode?

I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure. 

[AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Rory Conaway]

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I'm not sure of the source of the data but if 
that's correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it's a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn't under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
O 602-426-0542
www.triadwireless.net
r...@triadwireless.net

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Chuck McCown]

50 Mbps CIR...
This is starting to become an issue at the FCC.  When they are trying to 
allocate welfare funds (aka USF and CAF) they are trying to decide who is 
worthy.  Folks with FTTH say that CIR has to be the standard.  Anyone can do 50 
Mbps MIR with a variety of low cost options these days.  

From: Rory Conaway 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:44 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

O 602-426-0542

www.triadwireless.net  

r...@triadwireless.net

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Matt]

Not sure what queue type PPPoE defaults too, likely default-small
which seems to be pfifo with 10 packets on my pppoe server.  What I am
thinking is of a queue type that would be rate-limiting say an online
backup at say 0.5 megabits per second upstream, the max for there
pppoe profile.  A different new stream would come along and the queue
type would push that one initially to front of queue so as to give it
a fair chance to get started while pushing existing connections to
back of queue.  Not sure if that makes sense or is possible.  Even if
it is it might simply max out the CPUs on the CCR mikrotik router
keeping track of all this for hundreds of pppoe sessions.


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
> I thought Mikrotik PPPoE queues were always default-small, or is that
> because I use RADIUS?
>
> Personally I use RED but I think there are several choices that will work
> well, as long as you don't make the queue size too small.  (10 packets is
> too small, around 50 is good.)
>
> I suspect your users who max out their upstream are just seeing what happens
> when you max out your upstream, it will make things seem sluggish even if
> there is plenty of downstream left.  That's how the Internet works.  Not
> sure you're doing anything wrong.
>
> BTW, the reason I use RED is that as the queue fills up, the probability of
> a packet being dropped increases, hopefully invoking TCP congestion control
> to slow the rate of the traffic gracefully.  That said, it's probably not a
> popular choice.
>
>
> -Original Message- From: Matt
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:32 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>
>
> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
> from default to wireless-default.
>
> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>
> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>
> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Sterling Jacobson]

I totally agree!

There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into the 
country and 'level up'.

I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle mile 
fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this.

If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and make 
licensing more available, it would totally change things.

Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it is to 
put stuff in the ground.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I'm not sure of the source of the data but if 
that's correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it's a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn't under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
O 602-426-0542
www.triadwireless.net
r...@triadwireless.net

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks

[Josh Baird]

Ok, so I have a little more information now.

The city that owns these tanks forbids us to mount /anything/ directly to
the tank it's self.  They also forbid us to scrape any paint to ground
anything.  There is a thick rubber guard that covers the rails where the
antennas are mounted.  The antennas are mounted on top of this rubber guard
(not directly to the metal).  The antennas will have short CAT-5 runs to a
tower-top box, and then fiber/DC down the tower to our battery/charger.

In this scenario, should we just try to make sure everything is isolated
from the tank as much as possible and float the ground?  I was planning on
using GigEAPC-HV surge protectors at the top for all of the radios.  If the
surge protectors are not grounded, is there any point in even using them
seeing that they won't have any ground to discharge the surge to?  Will
they provide any benefit at all?  I was also planning on using DC surge
suppressors between the DC cable that runs up the tank (one at the bottom,
one at the top).  Again, will they be useful at all if we are floating the
ground?

Thanks,

Josh

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:

> We have had pretty good luck with that style of tank.
>
> As to the question - we bonded the #6 to the steel railing and mounting
> points at the top, the ladders on the way down, the tank ‘waist’ railing,
> the inside ladder, the electrical ground, our cabinet and the associated
> surge suppressors, and the steel water line entering the ground.
>
> Mark
>
> On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:38 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:
>
> The tanks are like these:
>
> http://www.mscivilengineers.com/images/12.jpg
>
> I'm not sure what the bottom looks like, though.  I'll have to go out and
> check them.  So, you ran #6 all the way down the tank and bonded it inside
> of your enclosure/cabinet/whatever?
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
>> What type of tank?
>>
>> The hydropillar and waterspherioid style are generally well grounded.
>>
>> I have seen some of the steel tank on a concrete pedestal style where the
>> tank is not directly grounded to the pedestal but has a ‘spark gap’ between
>> the tank and the base.  I’m not sure if the purpose was to distribute the
>> strike around the tank into the rebar in the column, or if it was an
>> attempt to isolate the steel for corrosion reasons.   The tank we are on
>> like that consistently has the most lightning damage.   I eventually ran a
>> #6 copper from the top of the tank to the railing and down inside to tie
>> everything together.  It’s improved the situation considerably but it’s
>> still not perfect.
>>
>> Mark Radabaugh
>> Amplex
>> 27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
>> Millbury, OH 43447
>> 419-837-5015 x1021
>> m...@amplex.net
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:19 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, I would think the tank itself is ground.
>>
>> On 9/28/2015 10:16 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>>
>> Common point grounding at the power ground would be the NEC answer.
>>
>> I would do that for power grounds and surge suppressor grounds because
>> most surges come via the power lines.
>>
>> For antenna mounting grounds etc, I would make sure they were in good
>> contact (bonded, perhaps with a separate bonding wire) to the tank or
>> railing or whatever metal structure you are attaching to.
>>
>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2015 8:13 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks
>>
>> We are going to be installing on several water tanks that do not have any
>> other carriers on them.  I'm assuming there is probably not a ground ring
>> or system in place at these sites.  The electrical service is likely
>> grounded independently using a ground rod at the pole.
>>
>> These sites will have batteries and a charger at the bottom and fiber/DC
>> up the tower. Admittingly, I'm fairly (ok, very) stupid when it comes to
>> grounding systems.  I understand that everything *should* be bonded
>> together.  However, if the tank it's self doesn't have a sufficient
>> grounding system already in place, what is the best strategy here?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks

[Chuck McCown]

The surge suppressors will still block transverse impulses but they will not be 
able to recognize longitudinal (common mode) impulses without a ground.  Isn’t 
there a lightening rod or obstruction light up there that you could ground to?

From: Josh Baird 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:11 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks

Ok, so I have a little more information now. 

The city that owns these tanks forbids us to mount /anything/ directly to the 
tank it's self.  They also forbid us to scrape any paint to ground anything.  
There is a thick rubber guard that covers the rails where the antennas are 
mounted.  The antennas are mounted on top of this rubber guard (not directly to 
the metal).  The antennas will have short CAT-5 runs to a tower-top box, and 
then fiber/DC down the tower to our battery/charger.

In this scenario, should we just try to make sure everything is isolated from 
the tank as much as possible and float the ground?  I was planning on using 
GigEAPC-HV surge protectors at the top for all of the radios.  If the surge 
protectors are not grounded, is there any point in even using them seeing that 
they won't have any ground to discharge the surge to?  Will they provide any 
benefit at all?  I was also planning on using DC surge suppressors between the 
DC cable that runs up the tank (one at the bottom, one at the top).  Again, 
will they be useful at all if we are floating the ground?

Thanks,

Josh

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:

  We have had pretty good luck with that style of tank.

  As to the question - we bonded the #6 to the steel railing and mounting 
points at the top, the ladders on the way down, the tank ‘waist’ railing, the 
inside ladder, the electrical ground, our cabinet and the associated surge 
suppressors, and the steel water line entering the ground.

  Mark


On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:38 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:


The tanks are like these: 

http://www.mscivilengineers.com/images/12.jpg


I'm not sure what the bottom looks like, though.  I'll have to go out and 
check them.  So, you ran #6 all the way down the tank and bonded it inside of 
your enclosure/cabinet/whatever?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:

  What type of tank? 

  The hydropillar and waterspherioid style are generally well grounded.

  I have seen some of the steel tank on a concrete pedestal style where the 
tank is not directly grounded to the pedestal but has a ‘spark gap’ between the 
tank and the base.  I’m not sure if the purpose was to distribute the strike 
around the tank into the rebar in the column, or if it was an attempt to 
isolate the steel for corrosion reasons.   The tank we are on like that 
consistently has the most lightning damage.   I eventually ran a #6 copper from 
the top of the tank to the railing and down inside to tie everything together.  
It’s improved the situation considerably but it’s still not perfect.


  Mark Radabaugh
  Amplex
  27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
  Millbury, OH 43447
  419-837-5015 x1021
  m...@amplex.net 


On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:19 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:


Yeah, I would think the tank itself is ground.  


On 9/28/2015 10:16 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

  Common point grounding at the power ground would be the NEC answer.

  I would do that for power grounds and surge suppressor grounds 
because most surges come via the power lines.  

  For antenna mounting grounds etc, I would make sure they were in good 
contact (bonded, perhaps with a separate bonding wire) to the tank or railing 
or whatever metal structure you are attaching to.  

  From: Josh Baird 
  Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 8:13 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks

  We are going to be installing on several water tanks that do not have 
any other carriers on them.  I'm assuming there is probably not a ground ring 
or system in place at these sites.  The electrical service is likely grounded 
independently using a ground rod at the pole.   

  These sites will have batteries and a charger at the bottom and 
fiber/DC up the tower. Admittingly, I'm fairly (ok, very) stupid when it comes 
to grounding systems.  I understand that everything *should* be bonded 
together.  However, if the tank it's self doesn't have a sufficient grounding 
system already in place, what is the best strategy here?   

  Thanks,

  Josh

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Nate Burke]

Rogue DHCP Detection is setup, Needed with radios with no filters. No 
Rogue DHCP Detected.



On 9/30/2015 10:07 AM, David wrote:

Nate,
 Set up tower gateway to detect rouge dhcp server on the bridge 
interface and see if there is

router facing the wrong way.
 This happens because of DOH! moments of customers and if you have a 
CPE that doesnt have any filtering for this

its a bummer




On 09/30/2015 08:57 AM, Nate Burke wrote:
I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding 
that they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems 
like there is something with how they're detecting the connection 
when they're setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a 
Public IP Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an 
issue with EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug 
deeper into it?


Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that 
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him 
Default the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the 
bridge table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was 
connected to the WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's 
never logged into the router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  
This morning, it's back in bridge mode. I'm sending him a RB951 to 
get him online, but why would the router choose bridge mode?


I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the 
customer had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

[AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Matt]

Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
from default to wireless-default.

In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.

What would advantages or reason for the change?

I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Mike Hammett]

It may be something everyone should be doing everywhere, I don't know. It's 
possible, perhaps even likely that the MT default PPPoE settings aren't 
optimal. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:41:56 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types 


The advice may or may not apply. But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT I don't 
know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue. 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't apply. I 
don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we should be using 
across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you how to tweak your 
UBNT wireless etup. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types 




Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply... 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt < matt.mailingli...@gmail.com > wrote: 


Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type 
from default to wireless-default. 

In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo 
with 50 packets. Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes. 

What would advantages or reason for the change? 

I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have 
complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing 
or another complain about there connection. I wander if switching to 
sfq might help there? Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out. 

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Ken Hohhof]

I thought Mikrotik PPPoE queues were always default-small, or is that 
because I use RADIUS?


Personally I use RED but I think there are several choices that will work 
well, as long as you don't make the queue size too small.  (10 packets is 
too small, around 50 is good.)


I suspect your users who max out their upstream are just seeing what happens 
when you max out your upstream, it will make things seem sluggish even if 
there is plenty of downstream left.  That's how the Internet works.  Not 
sure you're doing anything wrong.


BTW, the reason I use RED is that as the queue fills up, the probability of 
a packet being dropped increases, hopefully invoking TCP congestion control 
to slow the rate of the traffic gracefully.  That said, it's probably not a 
popular choice.



-Original Message- 
From: Matt

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:32 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
from default to wireless-default.

In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.

What would advantages or reason for the change?

I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out. 

[AFMUG] Today on ISP Radio

[Dennis Burgess]

Daniel White - www.ispradio.com

Thanks,

[DennisBurgessSignature]
www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - 
dmburg...@linktechs.net

Re: [AFMUG] having issues posting

[David]

Nver mind it was MIDI thingy
LOL


On 09/30/2015 10:05 AM, David wrote:

I did a traceroute to the server and it looks like something up stream..
I am getting incoming posts but I cannot post.
At first I thought it was my PDNS in my server but noo..

dave@Borg2:~$ traceroute 54.210.210.89
traceroute to 54.210.210.89 (54.210.210.89), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  162.212.24.25 (162.212.24.25)  0.211 ms  0.167 ms  0.125 ms
 2  12.250.105.37 (12.250.105.37)  2.462 ms  2.446 ms  2.447 ms
 3  12.122.157.118 (12.122.157.118)  16.318 ms  16.338 ms  16.287 ms
 4  cr2.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.157.97)  13.660 ms  13.665 ms 13.651 ms
 5  ggr2.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.138.193)  116.585 ms  116.600 ms  
116.590 ms

 6  12.251.40.10 (12.251.40.10)  15.866 ms  13.054 ms  13.045 ms
 7  54.240.229.104 (54.240.229.104)  37.698 ms * *
 8  54.240.229.4 (54.240.229.4)  38.623 ms 54.240.229.18 
(54.240.229.18)  38.173 ms *
 9  54.240.229.0 (54.240.229.0)  39.472 ms 54.240.229.160 
(54.240.229.160)  40.370 ms *
10  54.240.228.145 (54.240.228.145)  39.179 ms 54.240.229.168 
(54.240.229.168)  38.260 ms 54.240.229.162 (54.240.229.162) 38.790 ms

11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * 205.251.245.234 (205.251.245.234)  40.643 ms
16  205.251.245.240 (205.251.245.240)  67.268 ms 205.251.245.242 
(205.251.245.242)  39.506 ms 205.251.245.55 (205.251.245.55) 40.258 ms

17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *
dave@Borg2:~$

ANY IDEAS


--

Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

[Ken Hohhof]

AFAIK, it would be based on what IP address gets handed out to the router 
via DHCP.


And the instructions indicate you have to accept Wireless Access Point mode 
as part of the setup:

http://kb.netgear.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/23784/~/how-to-automatically-configure-a-netgear-router-to-ap-mode-(ap-mode


-Original Message- 
From: Nate Burke

Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:54 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

Isn't there some 'always available' Private IP Address on the Ethernet
line of the EPMP.  Could it be detecting this somehow?


On 9/30/2015 9:20 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Newer Netgear firmware when it detects the router is behind another router 
will go into "Wireless AP" mode where all 5 ports are bridged and the 
management IP changes from 192.168.1.1 to some 10.x.x.x address.  I don't 
know how it detects this, maybe when it gets an RFC1918 address via DHCP?


I don't remember exactly the sequence how this takes place, I think I've 
had to actually select Wireless AP from the GUI.  And I would not expect 
it to change on its own if the router has been configured, only when it 
detects that it is in initial configuration mode (like after pressing the 
"Restore Factory Configuration" button).



-Original Message- From: Nate Burke
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:57 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] SOHO Routers setting up in bridge mode

I've been running into issues recently with SOHO routers deciding that
they need to be in Bridge mode instead of Nat Mode.  It seems like there
is something with how they're detecting the connection when they're
setup.  I'm not doing anything special.  DHCP Assigns a Public IP
Address from the tower.  Although it seems to be more of an issue with
EPMP than FSK/450.  Has anyone else seen this, or Dug deeper into it?

Last night I was working with a Customer who had an Netgear N300 that
was in bridge mode (Customer and router <1 week old).  I had him Default
the router, and it came up in router mode (Single MAC in the bridge
table, and got a DHCP Lease).  He said his computer was connected to the
WIFI, but was showing limited connection.  He's never logged into the
router, so I don't think he changed the setup.  This morning, it's back
in bridge mode.  I'm sending him a RB951 to get him online, but why
would the router choose bridge mode?

I think I've also seen this with a Linksys, but I thought the customer
had done something before I got there.  Now I'm not sure.

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Daniel White]

Just got this. and yes this is my home internet connection

 



 

I wonder what speed you need to get about the 85% benchmark.

 

Thank you,

 

Daniel White

  afmu...@gmail.com

Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590

Skype: danieldwhite
Social:   LinkedIn:
 Twitter

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

 

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing
that surprised me was the 85% number.  I'm not sure of the source of the
data but if that's correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all
need to be looking at.  In this case, it's a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an
older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn't
under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a
relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the
country is where we need to be competing.

 

Rory Conaway . Triad Wireless . CEO

4226 S. 37th Street . Phoenix . AZ 85040

O 602-426-0542

www.triadwireless.net    

r...@triadwireless.net  

 

 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Mike Hammett]

Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't apply. I 
don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we should be using 
across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you how to tweak your 
UBNT wireless etup. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types 


Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply... 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt < matt.mailingli...@gmail.com > wrote: 


Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type 
from default to wireless-default. 

In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo 
with 50 packets. Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes. 

What would advantages or reason for the change? 

I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have 
complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing 
or another complain about there connection. I wander if switching to 
sfq might help there? Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out. 

[AFMUG] having issues posting

[David]

I did a traceroute to the server and it looks like something up stream..
I am getting incoming posts but I cannot post.
At first I thought it was my PDNS in my server but noo..

dave@Borg2:~$ traceroute 54.210.210.89
traceroute to 54.210.210.89 (54.210.210.89), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  162.212.24.25 (162.212.24.25)  0.211 ms  0.167 ms  0.125 ms
 2  12.250.105.37 (12.250.105.37)  2.462 ms  2.446 ms  2.447 ms
 3  12.122.157.118 (12.122.157.118)  16.318 ms  16.338 ms  16.287 ms
 4  cr2.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.157.97)  13.660 ms  13.665 ms 13.651 ms
 5  ggr2.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.138.193)  116.585 ms  116.600 ms 
116.590 ms

 6  12.251.40.10 (12.251.40.10)  15.866 ms  13.054 ms  13.045 ms
 7  54.240.229.104 (54.240.229.104)  37.698 ms * *
 8  54.240.229.4 (54.240.229.4)  38.623 ms 54.240.229.18 
(54.240.229.18)  38.173 ms *
 9  54.240.229.0 (54.240.229.0)  39.472 ms 54.240.229.160 
(54.240.229.160)  40.370 ms *
10  54.240.228.145 (54.240.228.145)  39.179 ms 54.240.229.168 
(54.240.229.168)  38.260 ms 54.240.229.162 (54.240.229.162)  38.790 ms

11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * 205.251.245.234 (205.251.245.234)  40.643 ms
16  205.251.245.240 (205.251.245.240)  67.268 ms 205.251.245.242 
(205.251.245.242)  39.506 ms 205.251.245.55 (205.251.245.55)  40.258 ms

17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *
dave@Borg2:~$

ANY IDEAS


--

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks

[Josh Baird]

Good question, I"ll have to check.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> The surge suppressors will still block transverse impulses but they will
> not be able to recognize longitudinal (common mode) impulses without a
> ground.  Isn’t there a lightening rod or obstruction light up there that
> you could ground to?
>
> *From:* Josh Baird 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:11 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks
>
> Ok, so I have a little more information now.
>
> The city that owns these tanks forbids us to mount /anything/ directly to
> the tank it's self.  They also forbid us to scrape any paint to ground
> anything.  There is a thick rubber guard that covers the rails where the
> antennas are mounted.  The antennas are mounted on top of this rubber guard
> (not directly to the metal).  The antennas will have short CAT-5 runs to a
> tower-top box, and then fiber/DC down the tower to our battery/charger.
>
> In this scenario, should we just try to make sure everything is isolated
> from the tank as much as possible and float the ground?  I was planning on
> using GigEAPC-HV surge protectors at the top for all of the radios.  If the
> surge protectors are not grounded, is there any point in even using them
> seeing that they won't have any ground to discharge the surge to?  Will
> they provide any benefit at all?  I was also planning on using DC surge
> suppressors between the DC cable that runs up the tank (one at the bottom,
> one at the top).  Again, will they be useful at all if we are floating the
> ground?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Josh
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>
>> We have had pretty good luck with that style of tank.
>>
>> As to the question - we bonded the #6 to the steel railing and mounting
>> points at the top, the ladders on the way down, the tank ‘waist’ railing,
>> the inside ladder, the electrical ground, our cabinet and the associated
>> surge suppressors, and the steel water line entering the ground.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:38 AM, Josh Baird  wrote:
>>
>> The tanks are like these:
>>
>> http://www.mscivilengineers.com/images/12.jpg
>>
>> I'm not sure what the bottom looks like, though.  I'll have to go out and
>> check them.  So, you ran #6 all the way down the tank and bonded it inside
>> of your enclosure/cabinet/whatever?
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Mark Radabaugh  wrote:
>>
>>> What type of tank?
>>>
>>> The hydropillar and waterspherioid style are generally well grounded.
>>>
>>> I have seen some of the steel tank on a concrete pedestal style where
>>> the tank is not directly grounded to the pedestal but has a ‘spark gap’
>>> between the tank and the base.  I’m not sure if the purpose was to
>>> distribute the strike around the tank into the rebar in the column, or if
>>> it was an attempt to isolate the steel for corrosion reasons.   The tank we
>>> are on like that consistently has the most lightning damage.   I eventually
>>> ran a #6 copper from the top of the tank to the railing and down inside to
>>> tie everything together.  It’s improved the situation considerably but it’s
>>> still not perfect.
>>>
>>> Mark Radabaugh
>>> Amplex
>>> 27800 Lemoyne, Ste F
>>> Millbury, OH 43447
>>> 419-837-5015 x1021
>>> m...@amplex.net
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2015, at 10:19 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, I would think the tank itself is ground.
>>>
>>> On 9/28/2015 10:16 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>>>
>>> Common point grounding at the power ground would be the NEC answer.
>>>
>>> I would do that for power grounds and surge suppressor grounds because
>>> most surges come via the power lines.
>>>
>>> For antenna mounting grounds etc, I would make sure they were in good
>>> contact (bonded, perhaps with a separate bonding wire) to the tank or
>>> railing or whatever metal structure you are attaching to.
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Baird 
>>> *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2015 8:13 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Grounding strategies for water tanks
>>>
>>> We are going to be installing on several water tanks that do not have
>>> any other carriers on them.  I'm assuming there is probably not a ground
>>> ring or system in place at these sites.  The electrical service is likely
>>> grounded independently using a ground rod at the pole.
>>>
>>> These sites will have batteries and a charger at the bottom and fiber/DC
>>> up the tower. Admittingly, I'm fairly (ok, very) stupid when it comes to
>>> grounding systems.  I understand that everything *should* be bonded
>>> together.  However, if the tank it's self doesn't have a sufficient
>>> grounding system already in place, what is the best strategy here?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Josh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Josh Luthman]

Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply...


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt  wrote:

> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
> from default to wireless-default.
>
> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>
> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>
> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types

[Josh Luthman]

The advice may or may not apply.  But if your issue is between Ubnt/MT I
don't know if I'd take ePMP documentation to be fixing the issue.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Bad advice to assume that if you're not using ePMP then it doesn't apply.
> I don't know, but perhaps that's a general best practice that we should be
> using across more vendors. Cambium sure isn't going to tell you how to
> tweak your UBNT wireless etup.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:35:05 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Queue Types
>
>
> Well if you're not using ePMP that documentation really doesn't apply...
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt 
> wrote:
>
>> Saw in the ePMP knowledge base that they recommend changing queue type
>> from default to wireless-default.
>>
>> In one of my mikrotik pppoe servers I look and see default is pfifo
>> with 50 packets.  Wireless-default is sfq with 5s and 1514bytes.
>>
>> What would advantages or reason for the change?
>>
>> I don't user epmp yet but on my PPPoE server I frequently have
>> complaints from users that have there upstream maxed out by one thing
>> or another complain about there connection.  I wander if switching to
>> sfq might help there?  Or it might simply max my Mikrotik CPUs out.
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Josh Luthman]

More PTP spectrum in lower bands?  Why???


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
wrote:

> I totally agree!
>
>
>
> There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into
> the country and ‘level up’.
>
>
>
> I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle
> mile fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this.
>
>
>
> If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and make
> licensing more available, it would totally change things.
>
>
>
> Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it is
> to put stuff in the ground.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
> country?
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>
>
>
> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing
> that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the
> data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all
> need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to
> an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
> the country is where we need to be competing.
>
>
>
> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>
> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>
> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>
> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>
> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Sterling Jacobson]

Penetration and near or no line of site PTP links.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:49 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

More PTP spectrum in lower bands?  Why???


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
I totally agree!

There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into the 
country and ‘level up’.

I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle mile 
fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this.

If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and make 
licensing more available, it would totally change things.

Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it is to 
put stuff in the ground.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket.  
Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load 
when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to 
hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing.

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO
4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040
O 602-426-0542
www.triadwireless.net
r...@triadwireless.net

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Josh Luthman]

Oh I guess low is a relative word.  I was thinking 1 GHz, 3 GHz, etc

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 30, 2015 12:50 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> Long hops at high capacities? Something sub 10 GHz where you can do
> something like 100 MHz channels.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:49:10 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
> country?
>
> More PTP spectrum in lower bands?  Why???
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
>> I totally agree!
>>
>>
>>
>> There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into
>> the country and ‘level up’.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle
>> mile fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this.
>>
>>
>>
>> If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and
>> make licensing more available, it would totally change things.
>>
>>
>>
>> Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it
>> is to put stuff in the ground.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
>> country?
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?
>>
>>
>>
>> This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning.  The
>> thing that surprised me was the 85% number.  I’m not sure of the source of
>> the data but if that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we
>> all need to be looking at.  In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5
>> to an older XM Rocket.  Even though there is about 40 customers on it, it
>> wasn’t under a lot of load when this was taken.   But the point is, 50Mbps
>> is a relatively easy number to hit with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of
>> the country is where we need to be competing.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Rory Conaway **• Triad Wireless •** CEO*
>>
>> *4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040*
>>
>> *O 602-426-0542 <602-426-0542>*
>>
>> *www.triadwireless.net   *
>>
>> *r...@triadwireless.net *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mike Hammett]

Long hops at high capacities? Something sub 10 GHz where you can do something 
like 100 MHz channels. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:49:10 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 


More PTP spectrum in lower bands? Why??? 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Sterling Jacobson < sterl...@avative.net > 
wrote: 





I totally agree! 

There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into the 
country and ‘level up’. 

I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle mile 
fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this. 

If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and make 
licensing more available, it would totally change things. 

Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it is to 
put stuff in the ground. 





From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 

http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning. The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number. I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at. In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket. Even 
though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load when 
this was taken. But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit 
with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing. 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO 
4226 S. 37 th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040 
O 602-426-0542 
www.triadwireless.net 
r...@triadwireless.net 

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Seth Mattinen]

On 9/30/15 09:45, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and
make licensing more available, it would totally change things.




Part 101 is already easy IMO, what's the problem?

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Andy Trimmell]

Even though mine was slower than others on the download I got mine to
99% my guess is because of upload.

WHAT IS THIS?
Based on the currently displayed results, connection grades show how you
stack up with others in your country and around the world. For example
if your value is 77% (giving you a B+) then only 23% of connections are
faster than yours. The scale is:

A = 80-100%
B = 60-79%
C = 40-59%
D = 20-39%
F = 0-19%

Plus/minus grades are given for the top/bottom 5% of each grade.

Andy Trimmell
Systems Engineer
Precision Data Solutions, LLC
Mooresville, IN 46158
317-831-3000 ext 211
www.pdsconnect.me



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the
country?

On 9/30/15 09:45, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and 
> make licensing more available, it would totally change things.
>


Part 101 is already easy IMO, what's the problem?

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country?

[Mike Hammett]

I dunno where the space is, but we probably can't be too picky with where we're 
looking for licensed PtP space at large enough channels. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:52:56 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 


Oh I guess low is a relative word. I was thinking 1 GHz, 3 GHz, etc 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Sep 30, 2015 12:50 PM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Long hops at high capacities? Something sub 10 GHz where you can do something 
like 100 MHz channels. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:49:10 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 


More PTP spectrum in lower bands? Why??? 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Sterling Jacobson < sterl...@avative.net > 
wrote: 





I totally agree! 

There are huge areas of opportunity for wireless to get these speeds into the 
country and ‘level up’. 

I think one of the bottlenecks is still getting that backhaul and middle mile 
fiber connectivity for cheaper to feed this. 

If the FCC could open more PTP frequency space in the lower bands and make 
licensing more available, it would totally change things. 

Fiber construction costs are kind of stuck where they are being what it is to 
put stuff in the ground. 





From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:45 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 

http://www.speedtest.net/result/4706097948.png



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:45 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 50mbps is faster than 85% of the rest of the country? 

This was a speedtest taken by one of my customers this morning. The thing that 
surprised me was the 85% number. I’m not sure of the source of the data but if 
that’s correct, then there is a huge opportunity that we all need to be looking 
at. In this case, it’s a lowly Nanostation Loco M5 to an older XM Rocket. Even 
though there is about 40 customers on it, it wasn’t under a lot of load when 
this was taken. But the point is, 50Mbps is a relatively easy number to hit 
with 802.11ac and it also means, 85% of the country is where we need to be 
competing. 

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO 
4226 S. 37 th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040 
O 602-426-0542 
www.triadwireless.net 
r...@triadwireless.net