Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

youre in violation of the AUP is the primary point, sales pitch being
secondary.

Normally I would prefer to say

"We have your service address, you let us into your business, you are
bothering us, we have pictures from the install to identify the flammable
shit, our operations manager happens to be a fucking arsonist, like the
type that has no problem burning a house down with a family in it and you
are just a business that is closed, do you really think we wont come burn
your joint to the ground? we will put an gas can in your bedroom, Insurance
doesnt pay for arson, you will be made pretty in prison. BTW, we sell
Fortigate"

That is much more concise and to the point :-)

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> I would make that whole thing about 1/3 the length, and not put a sales
> pitch in the same email as a "You are in violation of AUP" stuff.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:46 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> is it too obvious this is a sales pitch for a managed Fortigate?
>>
>> Since installation of your internet service, we, as an Internet Service
>> Provider, have received an abnormal number of reports of abusive activity
>> emanating from your service connection. The complaints are primarily spam
>> emails and "brute force" attempts to penetrate multiple secured networks.
>> In all likelihood there are one or more devices behind your router that
>> have been victimized by malware in one form or another. If you are offering
>> public access to the internet via your internet connection, while
>> technically a violation of our Acceptable use policy, we tend to give a
>> good deal of leniency to businesses such as yours, up until the point we
>> begin to continually receive complaints associated with your connection.
>> However, given the nature of the complaints tied to your IP address (the
>> publicly visible identifier of your connection) we do have to address this
>> issue, as the volume of the reports at this point has exceeded a threshold
>> that we are able to ignore. Eventually this will result in our public
>> reputation as a service provider being one that allows malicious, and
>> potentially illegal activity from our customer base, this can result in all
>> our customers experiencing issues with things such as undeliverable emails
>> and restricted access to common internet destinations.
>> We prefer to not have to enforce our Acceptable Use Policies and a
>> component of out Terms of Service that we require all our customers to
>> agree to as part of our service contract, however, at this point we must
>> resolve the current issue to avoid this.
>> We request that you review your internal network, for any devices that
>> may be housing malicious software. We recommend at minimum, utilizing
>> programs such as Malware bytes AntiMalware as well as any of the multitude
>> of commercially available Antivirus Solutions. We do also recommend the
>> implementation of a quality hardware Unified Threat Management (UTM)
>> solution to manage all traffic from your connection. We primarily utilize a
>> Fortigate brand solution, but there are many other cost effective hardware
>> firewall solutions that off a Quality UTM product.
>> Please address this issue at your earliest convenience. As prior stated,
>> we do prefer to not have to enforce the components of our Terms of Service
>> that all our customers agree to, but we have reached an impasse due to the
>> high volume of complaints we have received regarding your connection. If
>> you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to communicate with
>> us directly via our customer portal or by utilizing our customer service
>> solutions available via telephone during normal business hours
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:20 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> yeah, its a bar.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>>
 Did the OP state the customer was a bar?  I missed that.


 *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
 *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:19 PM
 *To:* af@afmug.com
 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

 It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I
 haven't run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks,
 Waves Coffee, and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny
 filter as you describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95%
 of them without connecting to my VPN.

 Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly
 restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger
 King).

 If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that,
 with their own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's
 responsibility to configure the user's 

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Eric Kuhnke]

I would make that whole thing about 1/3 the length, and not put a sales
pitch in the same email as a "You are in violation of AUP" stuff.




On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:46 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> is it too obvious this is a sales pitch for a managed Fortigate?
>
> Since installation of your internet service, we, as an Internet Service
> Provider, have received an abnormal number of reports of abusive activity
> emanating from your service connection. The complaints are primarily spam
> emails and "brute force" attempts to penetrate multiple secured networks.
> In all likelihood there are one or more devices behind your router that
> have been victimized by malware in one form or another. If you are offering
> public access to the internet via your internet connection, while
> technically a violation of our Acceptable use policy, we tend to give a
> good deal of leniency to businesses such as yours, up until the point we
> begin to continually receive complaints associated with your connection.
> However, given the nature of the complaints tied to your IP address (the
> publicly visible identifier of your connection) we do have to address this
> issue, as the volume of the reports at this point has exceeded a threshold
> that we are able to ignore. Eventually this will result in our public
> reputation as a service provider being one that allows malicious, and
> potentially illegal activity from our customer base, this can result in all
> our customers experiencing issues with things such as undeliverable emails
> and restricted access to common internet destinations.
> We prefer to not have to enforce our Acceptable Use Policies and a
> component of out Terms of Service that we require all our customers to
> agree to as part of our service contract, however, at this point we must
> resolve the current issue to avoid this.
> We request that you review your internal network, for any devices that may
> be housing malicious software. We recommend at minimum, utilizing programs
> such as Malware bytes AntiMalware as well as any of the multitude of
> commercially available Antivirus Solutions. We do also recommend the
> implementation of a quality hardware Unified Threat Management (UTM)
> solution to manage all traffic from your connection. We primarily utilize a
> Fortigate brand solution, but there are many other cost effective hardware
> firewall solutions that off a Quality UTM product.
> Please address this issue at your earliest convenience. As prior stated,
> we do prefer to not have to enforce the components of our Terms of Service
> that all our customers agree to, but we have reached an impasse due to the
> high volume of complaints we have received regarding your connection. If
> you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to communicate with
> us directly via our customer portal or by utilizing our customer service
> solutions available via telephone during normal business hours
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:20 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> yeah, its a bar.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>>> Did the OP state the customer was a bar?  I missed that.
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:19 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>>>
>>> It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I
>>> haven't run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks,
>>> Waves Coffee, and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny
>>> filter as you describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95%
>>> of them without connecting to my VPN.
>>>
>>> Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly
>>> restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger
>>> King).
>>>
>>> If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that,
>>> with their own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's
>>> responsibility to configure the user's in-premises wifi/"last 20 meters"
>>> connection to client devices. Define a hard demarc point at "This is the
>>> 100BaseTX port to the WAN of your router, here is your ca5e cable, please
>>> let us know if you see any packet loss or downtime".
>>>
>>> Unless you have some sort of managed services division that charges
>>> extra and deals with the hassle of maintaining the end user's firewall/wifi.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>>
 If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web
 browsing, POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything 
 else?

 I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.
 Probably can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular
 ISPs block destination port 25.

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

is it too obvious this is a sales pitch for a managed Fortigate?

Since installation of your internet service, we, as an Internet Service
Provider, have received an abnormal number of reports of abusive activity
emanating from your service connection. The complaints are primarily spam
emails and "brute force" attempts to penetrate multiple secured networks.
In all likelihood there are one or more devices behind your router that
have been victimized by malware in one form or another. If you are offering
public access to the internet via your internet connection, while
technically a violation of our Acceptable use policy, we tend to give a
good deal of leniency to businesses such as yours, up until the point we
begin to continually receive complaints associated with your connection.
However, given the nature of the complaints tied to your IP address (the
publicly visible identifier of your connection) we do have to address this
issue, as the volume of the reports at this point has exceeded a threshold
that we are able to ignore. Eventually this will result in our public
reputation as a service provider being one that allows malicious, and
potentially illegal activity from our customer base, this can result in all
our customers experiencing issues with things such as undeliverable emails
and restricted access to common internet destinations.
We prefer to not have to enforce our Acceptable Use Policies and a
component of out Terms of Service that we require all our customers to
agree to as part of our service contract, however, at this point we must
resolve the current issue to avoid this.
We request that you review your internal network, for any devices that may
be housing malicious software. We recommend at minimum, utilizing programs
such as Malware bytes AntiMalware as well as any of the multitude of
commercially available Antivirus Solutions. We do also recommend the
implementation of a quality hardware Unified Threat Management (UTM)
solution to manage all traffic from your connection. We primarily utilize a
Fortigate brand solution, but there are many other cost effective hardware
firewall solutions that off a Quality UTM product.
Please address this issue at your earliest convenience. As prior stated, we
do prefer to not have to enforce the components of our Terms of Service
that all our customers agree to, but we have reached an impasse due to the
high volume of complaints we have received regarding your connection. If
you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to communicate with
us directly via our customer portal or by utilizing our customer service
solutions available via telephone during normal business hours

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:20 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> yeah, its a bar.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> Did the OP state the customer was a bar?  I missed that.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:19 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>>
>> It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I
>> haven't run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks,
>> Waves Coffee, and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny
>> filter as you describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95%
>> of them without connecting to my VPN.
>>
>> Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly
>> restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger
>> King).
>>
>> If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that, with
>> their own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's
>> responsibility to configure the user's in-premises wifi/"last 20 meters"
>> connection to client devices. Define a hard demarc point at "This is the
>> 100BaseTX port to the WAN of your router, here is your ca5e cable, please
>> let us know if you see any packet loss or downtime".
>>
>> Unless you have some sort of managed services division that charges extra
>> and deals with the hassle of maintaining the end user's firewall/wifi.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>>
>>> If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web browsing,
>>> POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything else?
>>>
>>> I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.
>>> Probably can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular
>>> ISPs block destination port 25.
>>>
>>> Open Internet should not apply to a coffee shop hotspot, I don’t think
>>> you are required to transport anything and everything in that situation.
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:58 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>>>
>>> If it is a customer 

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

yeah, its a bar.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Did the OP state the customer was a bar?  I missed that.
>
>
> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:19 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>
> It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I
> haven't run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks,
> Waves Coffee, and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny
> filter as you describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95%
> of them without connecting to my VPN.
>
> Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly
> restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger
> King).
>
> If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that, with
> their own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's
> responsibility to configure the user's in-premises wifi/"last 20 meters"
> connection to client devices. Define a hard demarc point at "This is the
> 100BaseTX port to the WAN of your router, here is your ca5e cable, please
> let us know if you see any packet loss or downtime".
>
> Unless you have some sort of managed services division that charges extra
> and deals with the hassle of maintaining the end user's firewall/wifi.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web browsing,
>> POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything else?
>>
>> I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.
>> Probably can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular
>> ISPs block destination port 25.
>>
>> Open Internet should not apply to a coffee shop hotspot, I don’t think
>> you are required to transport anything and everything in that situation.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:58 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>>
>> If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee
>> shop, bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't
>> stop running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No
>> way to find out who has the infected laptops/devices.
>>
>> One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put
>> all such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static
>> assignments. Consider that block forever sullied.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it
>>> makes me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one
>>> off i go upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen
>>> to make me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your
 network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.


 torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly
 leaving something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is
 just bad practice.


 On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
 thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse
> reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this
> sullied IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or
> impacting others on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats
> for sure. suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no 
> DMCA.
>
> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this
> affirmatively with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a
> leased fortigate UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than
> their static IP residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>
> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to 
> and
> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>
> --
> 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.
>


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
If you only see yourself as part of 

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Ken Hohhof]

Did the OP state the customer was a bar?  I missed that.


From: Eric Kuhnke 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:19 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I haven't 
run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks, Waves Coffee, 
and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny filter as you 
describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95% of them without 
connecting to my VPN.


Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly 
restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger 
King).


If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that, with their 
own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's responsibility 
to configure the user's in-premises wifi/"last 20 meters" connection to client 
devices. Define a hard demarc point at "This is the 100BaseTX port to the WAN 
of your router, here is your ca5e cable, please let us know if you see any 
packet loss or downtime".


Unless you have some sort of managed services division that charges extra and 
deals with the hassle of maintaining the end user's firewall/wifi.






On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

  If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web browsing, 
POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything else?

  I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.  Probably 
can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular ISPs block 
destination port 25.

  Open Internet should not apply to a coffee shop hotspot, I don’t think you 
are required to transport anything and everything in that situation.


  From: Eric Kuhnke 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:58 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

  If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee shop, 
bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't stop 
running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No way to 
find out who has the infected laptops/devices. 

  One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put all 
such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static assignments. 
Consider that block forever sullied.


  On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes 
me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go 
upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make me a 
sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

  Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your 
network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.



  torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly leaving 
something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is just bad 
practice.



  On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse 
reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied 
IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others 
on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure. 
suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA. 

Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this 
affirmatively with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased 
fortigate UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static 
IP residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?

Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a 
service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going 
elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and 
theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues


-- 

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.





-- 

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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Eric Kuhnke]

It'll break basic functionality. At least in the Pacific Northwest I
haven't run into an open coffee shop wifi (Blenz, McDonalds, Starbucks,
Waves Coffee, and a dozen other competitors) that operates a default-deny
filter as you describe. In fact it's even possible to torrent through 95%
of them without connecting to my VPN.

Even the fast food burger restaurants don't seem to have particularly
restrictive firewalls in place on their free wifi (Jack in the Box, Burger
King).

If the bar owner referenced in the original wants to try to do that, with
their own firewall, they can certainly try...  But it's not the ISP's
responsibility to configure the user's in-premises wifi/"last 20 meters"
connection to client devices. Define a hard demarc point at "This is the
100BaseTX port to the WAN of your router, here is your ca5e cable, please
let us know if you see any packet loss or downtime".

Unless you have some sort of managed services division that charges extra
and deals with the hassle of maintaining the end user's firewall/wifi.




On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web browsing,
> POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything else?
>
> I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.
> Probably can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular
> ISPs block destination port 25.
>
> Open Internet should not apply to a coffee shop hotspot, I don’t think you
> are required to transport anything and everything in that situation.
>
>
> *From:* Eric Kuhnke 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:58 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>
> If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee
> shop, bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't
> stop running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No
> way to find out who has the infected laptops/devices.
>
> One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put
> all such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static
> assignments. Consider that block forever sullied.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes
>> me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go
>> upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make
>> me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your
>>> network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.
>>>
>>>
>>> torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly
>>> leaving something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is
>>> just bad practice.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse
 reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this
 sullied IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or
 impacting others on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats
 for sure. suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.

 Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this
 affirmatively with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a
 leased fortigate UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than
 their static IP residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?

 Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
 service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
 elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
 theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues

 --
 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.

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Ken Hohhof]

If this is an open WiFi hotspot, why can’t you allow basic web browsing, 
POP/IMAP, and SMTP port 587 but not 25, and block everything else?

I often find that at hotpots I can’t use telnet, SSH, Winbox, etc.  Probably 
can’t connect to destination port 25 either.  Heck, most regular ISPs block 
destination port 25.

Open Internet should not apply to a coffee shop hotspot, I don’t think you are 
required to transport anything and everything in that situation.


From: Eric Kuhnke 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee shop, 
bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't stop 
running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No way to 
find out who has the infected laptops/devices. 

One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put all 
such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static assignments. 
Consider that block forever sullied.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

  I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes me 
feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go 
upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make me a 
sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer

  On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your network 
and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.



torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly leaving 
something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is just bad 
practice.



On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

  We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports 
on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP 
clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others on 
the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure. suprisingly, 
its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA. 

  Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively 
with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate UTM 
option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP residing on 
every blacklist can we get nailed?

  Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a 
service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going 
elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and 
theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues


  -- 

  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.





  -- 

  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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Eric Kuhnke]

Create like a /26, SWIP it as a description for your same ISP entity, but
"Free coffee shop wifi - unauthenticated access" in the description with
its own abuse address or whatever, and give the customers /30s inside that.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:17 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> isnt SWIP a minimum /29 though?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
> wrote:
>
>> If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee
>> shop, bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't
>> stop running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No
>> way to find out who has the infected laptops/devices.
>>
>> One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put
>> all such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static
>> assignments. Consider that block forever sullied.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it
>>> makes me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one
>>> off i go upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen
>>> to make me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your
 network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.


 torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly
 leaving something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is
 just bad practice.


 On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
 thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse
> reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this
> sullied IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or
> impacting others on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats
> for sure. suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no 
> DMCA.
>
> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this
> affirmatively with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a
> leased fortigate UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than
> their static IP residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>
> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to 
> and
> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>
> --
> 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.
>


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

isnt SWIP a minimum /29 though?


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee
> shop, bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't
> stop running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No
> way to find out who has the infected laptops/devices.
>
> One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put
> all such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static
> assignments. Consider that block forever sullied.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes
>> me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go
>> upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make
>> me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your
>>> network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.
>>>
>>>
>>> torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly
>>> leaving something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is
>>> just bad practice.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse
 reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this
 sullied IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or
 impacting others on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats
 for sure. suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.

 Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this
 affirmatively with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a
 leased fortigate UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than
 their static IP residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?

 Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
 service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
 elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
 theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues

 --
 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.

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
>


-- 
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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Eric Kuhnke]

If it is a customer that operates a open public wifi AP like a coffee shop,
bar, restaurant, there is not a lot that you can do. Customer won't stop
running open wifi, people won't stop bringing in infected laptops. No way
to find out who has the infected laptops/devices.

One possible solution if sufficient ARIN IP space is available is to put
all such customers in their own special swamp netblock as static
assignments. Consider that block forever sullied.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:54 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes
> me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go
> upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make
> me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
> wrote:
>
>> Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your
>> network and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.
>>
>>
>> torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly leaving
>> something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is just bad
>> practice.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse
>>> reports on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this
>>> sullied IP clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or
>>> impacting others on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats
>>> for sure. suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>>>
>>> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
>>> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
>>> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
>>> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>>>
>>> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
>>> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
>>> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
>>> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

I know its bad practice, I normally enjoy turning customers off, it makes
me feel godlike and powerful, alot of times when i get to shut one off i go
upstairs and drag mu woman from her bed by her hair to the kitchen to make
me a sammich. but for whatever reason i like this customer

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your network
> and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.
>
>
> torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly leaving
> something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is just bad
> practice.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
>> on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
>> clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
>> on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
>> suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>>
>> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
>> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
>> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
>> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>>
>> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
>> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
>> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
>> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
>


-- 
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] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Josh Reynolds]

Define "NID"
On Apr 27, 2016 5:47 PM, "Jaime Fink"  wrote:

> Our Mimosa Gigabit NID should be out soon too (few weeks).
>
> For backhaul we don't recommend a separate surge suppressor up on the
> tower, there's a surge suppressor GDT circuit inside the B5/B5c (as well as
> in our PoE if it's being utilized).
>
> Definitely attach a proper ground directly to the radios of course at the
> ground point on the radios themselves on towers.
>
> Jaime Fink
> CPO & Co-Founder
> Mimosa
>
> On Apr 27, 2016, at 6:34 PM, Sean Heskett  wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> The Gig-E HV works just fine with Mimosa gear.
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jay Weekley 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the
>>> Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] 802.3af/at PoE lighting

[Josh Reynolds]

Plus you don't need a certified electrician in most jurisdictions, but in
some they may have to be low voltage qualified
On Apr 27, 2016 8:42 PM, "Eric Kuhnke"  wrote:

> well, you only need to put 1 AC outlet wherever the 48-port PoE switch is,
> vs running 120VAC everywhere around a ceiling. So that's a 48:1 ratio at
> least.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
>
>> Since you still need AC outlets I can't imagine the savings would be all
>> that significant. The industry seems to be headed to figuring out how to
>> get the enormous installed base to LED. Since electricians are the Obrien
>> pulling the CAT5 now I can't see how you get the cost down.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016, 7:53 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:
>>
>>> http://www2.cree.com/smartcast-landing-page
>>>
>>> Would you build it?
>>>
>>> Seems to make sense, considering the low cost of midspan PoE injectors
>>> these days. Or even old 802.3af 100Mbps switches you can get used (Cisco
>>> 3560, 3750).
>>>
>>> One of the neat things about doing PoE lighting is that you could
>>> control all the lights in a building via a shell script and SSH session
>>> into a PoE switch, turning on and off ports based on cron jobs, schedules,
>>> as a result of a script server receiving some event, etc. This could be
>>> done with a $50 box running Linux.
>>>
>>> No need to run any vendor proprietary software of any sort.
>>>
>>> One of the things I realized when thinking about this is that it could
>>> dramatically lower labor costs to install lighting in a large building.
>>> You'd be looking at the hourly labor rate for low-cost "low voltage" alarm
>>> cabling/cat5e pulling install technicians and not licensed electricians
>>> (apprentice or journeyman). Electricians would of course need to do the
>>> rest of a building's 120/240VAC, but not the lighting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 802.3af/at PoE lighting

[Eric Kuhnke]

well, you only need to put 1 AC outlet wherever the 48-port PoE switch is,
vs running 120VAC everywhere around a ceiling. So that's a 48:1 ratio at
least.



On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Lewis Bergman 
wrote:

> Since you still need AC outlets I can't imagine the savings would be all
> that significant. The industry seems to be headed to figuring out how to
> get the enormous installed base to LED. Since electricians are the Obrien
> pulling the CAT5 now I can't see how you get the cost down.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016, 7:53 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:
>
>> http://www2.cree.com/smartcast-landing-page
>>
>> Would you build it?
>>
>> Seems to make sense, considering the low cost of midspan PoE injectors
>> these days. Or even old 802.3af 100Mbps switches you can get used (Cisco
>> 3560, 3750).
>>
>> One of the neat things about doing PoE lighting is that you could control
>> all the lights in a building via a shell script and SSH session into a PoE
>> switch, turning on and off ports based on cron jobs, schedules, as a result
>> of a script server receiving some event, etc. This could be done with a $50
>> box running Linux.
>>
>> No need to run any vendor proprietary software of any sort.
>>
>> One of the things I realized when thinking about this is that it could
>> dramatically lower labor costs to install lighting in a large building.
>> You'd be looking at the hourly labor rate for low-cost "low voltage" alarm
>> cabling/cat5e pulling install technicians and not licensed electricians
>> (apprentice or journeyman). Electricians would of course need to do the
>> rest of a building's 120/240VAC, but not the lighting.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

we had lost power by the time i got home from the towerand so had the rest 
of north alabama.
i still plan to watch that eight hours of footage starting at 3 pm at some 
point
i mean, i didn't "see" any of it.  i was too busy going to downtown trying to 
find out if my dad's office had been hit.
i saw our tower down about four blocks away :(

  - Original Message - 
  From: Glen Waldrop 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 5:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.


  I was south of all of the really bad stuff, north of some of the moderately 
bad stuff.

  Damn near lost two family members in that storm. One’s apartment complex 
survived and the neighbor’s didn’t, the other had moved just a few days prior 
to her apartment complex being erased. A third was just a few blocks from the 
intersection of 15th and McFarland.

  I’ve got family spread out over the entire run of the storm. It is amazing 
how it all fell together. They all just happened to not be there when it rolled 
through.

  I sat here with my TV on one channel, streaming another, just watching, 
keeping in touch with everyone and keeping one eye to our south west to see if 
anything was coming our way. Started around lunch time, didn’t stop until at 
least 11pm.

  Crazy day.



  From: CBB - Jay Fuller 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:25 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.


  This is what was happening in my home town..

  http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman

  What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.

  Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late 
last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were 
starting to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks

  Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q

  I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
  drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
  our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from that 
day.

  Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week

Re: [AFMUG] 802.3af/at PoE lighting

[Lewis Bergman]

Since you still need AC outlets I can't imagine the savings would be all
that significant. The industry seems to be headed to figuring out how to
get the enormous installed base to LED. Since electricians are the Obrien
pulling the CAT5 now I can't see how you get the cost down.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016, 7:53 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> http://www2.cree.com/smartcast-landing-page
>
> Would you build it?
>
> Seems to make sense, considering the low cost of midspan PoE injectors
> these days. Or even old 802.3af 100Mbps switches you can get used (Cisco
> 3560, 3750).
>
> One of the neat things about doing PoE lighting is that you could control
> all the lights in a building via a shell script and SSH session into a PoE
> switch, turning on and off ports based on cron jobs, schedules, as a result
> of a script server receiving some event, etc. This could be done with a $50
> box running Linux.
>
> No need to run any vendor proprietary software of any sort.
>
> One of the things I realized when thinking about this is that it could
> dramatically lower labor costs to install lighting in a large building.
> You'd be looking at the hourly labor rate for low-cost "low voltage" alarm
> cabling/cat5e pulling install technicians and not licensed electricians
> (apprentice or journeyman). Electricians would of course need to do the
> rest of a building's 120/240VAC, but not the lighting.
>
>
>
>
>

[AFMUG] CMM for 2016 What's in the box?

[Scott Vander Dussen]

I built a CMM for 2016!

Highlights:

* Gigabit everything

* BiDi fiber support for 6 devices

* Sync/Power up to 24 devices

* Power 24v and 48v devices

* Temperature monitoring

* Fan ventilation controlled by rain/condensation sensor

* Fan seizure notification

* LED light strip controlled by door

* Door alarm trigger

* Hoist pull loop

* 20" x 18" x 10"

* 36lbs

* Price circa $2100

Photo here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6582330/WebJunk/SMM.jpg
Parts list here: 
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6582330/WebJunk/SMM%20Details.pdf

Any suggestions to make this more awesome?

[http://www.flutecrate.com/uploads/1/0/2/0/10200817/5243300_orig.jpg]

[AFMUG] 802.3af/at PoE lighting

[Eric Kuhnke]

http://www2.cree.com/smartcast-landing-page

Would you build it?

Seems to make sense, considering the low cost of midspan PoE injectors
these days. Or even old 802.3af 100Mbps switches you can get used (Cisco
3560, 3750).

One of the neat things about doing PoE lighting is that you could control
all the lights in a building via a shell script and SSH session into a PoE
switch, turning on and off ports based on cron jobs, schedules, as a result
of a script server receiving some event, etc. This could be done with a $50
box running Linux.

No need to run any vendor proprietary software of any sort.

One of the things I realized when thinking about this is that it could
dramatically lower labor costs to install lighting in a large building.
You'd be looking at the hourly labor rate for low-cost "low voltage" alarm
cabling/cat5e pulling install technicians and not licensed electricians
(apprentice or journeyman). Electricians would of course need to do the
rest of a building's 120/240VAC, but not the lighting.

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Mathew Howard]

I'm using the GigE-PoE with ours (we run almost everything on DC)... which
is a better way to go, in my opinion.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Jason McKemie <
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> The Gig-E HV works just fine with Mimosa gear.
>
>
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jay Weekley 
> wrote:
>
>> What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the
>> Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

[George Skorup]

Above my pay grade. I'm sure Forrest can tell you why. Probably an 
internal ground path thing.


On 4/27/2016 5:54 PM, Scott Vander Dussen wrote:

George-
I understand what you're saying, that's not the issue.  Please see attached 
photo, basically I'm asking why switching the wires on the Site Monitor's 
Switch input works one way but not the other.

`S

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:47 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

C=common
NC=normally closed (connected to common when the coil is not energized) 
NO=normally open (opposite of NC)

The SiteMonitor base currently has no internal automatic logic control to 
toggle the on-board relay when the switch contact is closed. I'm guessing that 
was your assumption. That would be a good feature for Forrest to implement.

The "switch" on the base is an open/closed contact monitor (aka input).
Is there continuity or not.

Unless I'm just that dense and cannot understand what you've described here. 
Entirely possible.

On 4/27/2016 4:15 PM, Scott Vander Dussen wrote:

Weird, stripped off my PNG attachment?  Here's the link:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6582330/WebJunk/sitemonitor.png

`S

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vander
Dussen
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:11 PM
To: 'AF Cambium List (af@afmug.com)' 
Subject: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

Enclosure with a door relay switch.  When the door is open the relay switch 
turns on a light, and trips the site monitor's switch input to send an alert 
that the door is open.

When the circuit is connected as show in the attached PNG the site monitor 
always reads the switch input as 1 or connected regardless of the state of the 
door switch relay.  When we reverse the wires going into the site monitor 
switch input everything works perfectly.  So when the door relay switch's C is 
connected to the right hand side of the switch input and the NO is connected to 
the left it works as expected.

This totally does NOT make sense to me at all :/

I thought perhaps the Site Monitor was bridging the switch inputs and the 
negative rail of the power source internally.  To test that theory I connected 
a different power supply directly to the Site Monitor that was separate from 
the power supply used for the light and network switch and also connected to 
the door relay switch.  But even in this state it performed the exact same.  I 
must be missing something?

Scott

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Jaime Fink]

Our Mimosa Gigabit NID should be out soon too (few weeks).

For backhaul we don't recommend a separate surge suppressor up on the tower, 
there's a surge suppressor GDT circuit inside the B5/B5c (as well as in our PoE 
if it's being utilized).

Definitely attach a proper ground directly to the radios of course at the 
ground point on the radios themselves on towers.

Jaime Fink
CPO & Co-Founder
Mimosa

On Apr 27, 2016, at 6:34 PM, Sean Heskett 
> wrote:

+1

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jason McKemie 
> 
wrote:
The Gig-E HV works just fine with Mimosa gear.

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jay Weekley 
>
 wrote:
What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the 
Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Sean Heskett]

+1

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jason McKemie <
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> The Gig-E HV works just fine with Mimosa gear.
>
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jay Weekley  > wrote:
>
>> What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the
>> Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Glen Waldrop]

I was south of all of the really bad stuff, north of some of the moderately bad 
stuff.

Damn near lost two family members in that storm. One’s apartment complex 
survived and the neighbor’s didn’t, the other had moved just a few days prior 
to her apartment complex being erased. A third was just a few blocks from the 
intersection of 15th and McFarland.

I’ve got family spread out over the entire run of the storm. It is amazing how 
it all fell together. They all just happened to not be there when it rolled 
through.

I sat here with my TV on one channel, streaming another, just watching, keeping 
in touch with everyone and keeping one eye to our south west to see if anything 
was coming our way. Started around lunch time, didn’t stop until at least 11pm.

Crazy day.



From: CBB - Jay Fuller 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:25 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.


This is what was happening in my home town..

http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman

What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.

Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late last 
night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were starting 
to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks

Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q

I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from that 
day.

Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Eric Kuhnke]

Spam and botnet activity is far more harmful to the health of your network
and the IP reputation of your netblocks than anything DMCA related.


torrents and DMCA notifications don't hurt the network. Knowingly leaving
something that is a repository of virii/worms/trojans online is just bad
practice.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
> on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
> clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
> on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
> suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>
> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>
> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>
> --
> 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] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

[George Skorup]

C=common
NC=normally closed (connected to common when the coil is not energized)
NO=normally open (opposite of NC)

The SiteMonitor base currently has no internal automatic logic control 
to toggle the on-board relay when the switch contact is closed. I'm 
guessing that was your assumption. That would be a good feature for 
Forrest to implement.


The "switch" on the base is an open/closed contact monitor (aka input). 
Is there continuity or not.


Unless I'm just that dense and cannot understand what you've described 
here. Entirely possible.


On 4/27/2016 4:15 PM, Scott Vander Dussen wrote:

Weird, stripped off my PNG attachment?  Here's the link:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6582330/WebJunk/sitemonitor.png

`S

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vander Dussen
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:11 PM
To: 'AF Cambium List (af@afmug.com)' 
Subject: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

Enclosure with a door relay switch.  When the door is open the relay switch 
turns on a light, and trips the site monitor's switch input to send an alert 
that the door is open.

When the circuit is connected as show in the attached PNG the site monitor 
always reads the switch input as 1 or connected regardless of the state of the 
door switch relay.  When we reverse the wires going into the site monitor 
switch input everything works perfectly.  So when the door relay switch's C is 
connected to the right hand side of the switch input and the NO is connected to 
the left it works as expected.

This totally does NOT make sense to me at all :/

I thought perhaps the Site Monitor was bridging the switch inputs and the 
negative rail of the power source internally.  To test that theory I connected 
a different power supply directly to the Site Monitor that was separate from 
the power supply used for the light and network switch and also connected to 
the door relay switch.  But even in this state it performed the exact same.  I 
must be missing something?

Scott

Re: [AFMUG] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Jason McKemie]

The Gig-E HV works just fine with Mimosa gear.

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Jay Weekley  wrote:

> What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the
> Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?
>

[AFMUG] Grounding Mimosa backhauls

[Jay Weekley]

What is a good surge suppression unit for the Mimosa backhauls? Will the 
Wireless Beehive Gig-E product work?

Re: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

[Scott Vander Dussen]

Weird, stripped off my PNG attachment?  Here's the link:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6582330/WebJunk/sitemonitor.png

`S

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vander Dussen
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 2:11 PM
To: 'AF Cambium List (af@afmug.com)' 
Subject: [AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

Enclosure with a door relay switch.  When the door is open the relay switch 
turns on a light, and trips the site monitor's switch input to send an alert 
that the door is open.

When the circuit is connected as show in the attached PNG the site monitor 
always reads the switch input as 1 or connected regardless of the state of the 
door switch relay.  When we reverse the wires going into the site monitor 
switch input everything works perfectly.  So when the door relay switch's C is 
connected to the right hand side of the switch input and the NO is connected to 
the left it works as expected.

This totally does NOT make sense to me at all :/

I thought perhaps the Site Monitor was bridging the switch inputs and the 
negative rail of the power source internally.  To test that theory I connected 
a different power supply directly to the Site Monitor that was separate from 
the power supply used for the light and network switch and also connected to 
the door relay switch.  But even in this state it performed the exact same.  I 
must be missing something?

Scott

[AFMUG] PacketFlux Site Monitor Switch

[Scott Vander Dussen]

Enclosure with a door relay switch.  When the door is open the relay switch 
turns on a light, and trips the site monitor's switch input to send an alert 
that the door is open.

When the circuit is connected as show in the attached PNG the site monitor 
always reads the switch input as 1 or connected regardless of the state of the 
door switch relay.  When we reverse the wires going into the site monitor 
switch input everything works perfectly.  So when the door relay switch's C is 
connected to the right hand side of the switch input and the NO is connected to 
the left it works as expected.

This totally does NOT make sense to me at all :/

I thought perhaps the Site Monitor was bridging the switch inputs and the 
negative rail of the power source internally.  To test that theory I connected 
a different power supply directly to the Site Monitor that was separate from 
the power supply used for the light and network switch and also connected to 
the door relay switch.  But even in this state it performed the exact same.  I 
must be missing something?

Scott

[AFMUG] Beloit

[George Skorup]

If anyone can hit the Beloit, WI / South Beloit, IL area, please hit me 
up off list.

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Jay Weekley]

Or aimed at the sky to hit the satellite.

Brian Sullivan wrote:
My favorite is when they NAIL the mount back onto the roof (out of 
alignment).� Or when they re-hang the surge suppressor upside down.


On 4/27/2016 12:42 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Then weeks and months after the storms, people have roofers and 
siding contractors come out to do repairs, and:

�
90% of the time they call AFTER the roofers have moved or damaged our 
equipment

�
10% of the time they call when the roofers show up and want us to 
come out right now this minute, remove the dish, wait around while 
the put new shingles under it, then remount and align it, so they 
don�t go a day without Internet

�
�
*From:* George Skorup 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:30 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not 
like last year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit 
down there. I will have no more of it.


On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
�
*From:* CBB - Jay Fuller 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
�
This is what was happening in my home town..
�
http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
�
What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds 
early that morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts 
of our state were without power during that huge outbreak.� After 
the outbreak, we didn't have power for nearly a week.

�
Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on 
youtube late last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as 
the on-air guys were starting to get some damage reports in - - 
their tone really changed

�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
�
Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
�
I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power 
since that morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.�� There is a picture of the sky from about 
30 minutes before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.�� My dad's office shows several damage 
photos from that day.

�
Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this 
todayand really this week

�
�
�
�
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Jay Weekley]

We've paid our dues.

George Skorup wrote:
We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not 
like last year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit 
down there. I will have no more of it.


On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
�
*From:* CBB - Jay Fuller 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
�
This is what was happening in my home town..
�
http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
�
What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds 
early that morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of 
our state were without power during that huge outbreak.� After the 
outbreak, we didn't have power for nearly a week.

�
Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube 
late last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the 
on-air guys were starting to get some damage reports in - - their 
tone really changed

�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
�
Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
�
I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power 
since that morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.�� There is a picture of the sky from about 
30 minutes before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.�� My dad's office shows several damage 
photos from that day.

�
Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this 
todayand really this week

�
�
�
�
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

[Wireless Administrator]

Here’s more information from one of the major water meter manufacturers:

 

https://www.neptunetg.com/globalassets/products/literature/12-ntg-242-faq-r450-system-09.12.pdf

 

Steve B.

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:20 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

 

I believe public utilities do not have to pay for their licenses like 
commercial two way radio operators and others but I am not sure if that still 
holds.   I think there is a fee for license search and process but it should 
not be hat expensive for public utilities.   I remember a "discussion" I had 
with Comsearch over the price they charged for a frequency search.  We needed 
two additional 900MHz licenses for PTP SCADA backbone links and somewhere they 
mentioned spectrum analysis.   I asked if they sent someone to check out the 
spectrum in the paths of intended sites.  They said no.   So dumb me, asked how 
do you know which frequencies are clean if we are on the border with Mexico? 
Even our police department had issues with the Chihuahua Cattle Associations' 
system for a week a few years back and so did our military with an STL shot in 
the 230MHz range across border.   Never got an answer.




Jaime Solorza

Wireless Systems Architect

915-861-1390

 

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

Cool thanks for all the tips and resources guys.  They are amicable to working 
with us (they don't want any bad press either) so we should be able to work out 
a solution.

 

I've also forwarded some contacts for license coordinators.

 

Thanks guys!  Luckily 900mhz is less than 1% of our customer base.  But for 
that 1% it's all they've got for getting Internet.

 

-Sean 

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Travis Allen  wrote:

Sean,


One of our local utilities uses licensed 220mhz for bh, but still uses 900mhz 
for meter to meter and meter to Collection point communication.  It does cut 
down on some of the noise though this way.  Most of the utilities around us 
monitor through their own wires, no noise that way.  I understand that the data 
rate is really slow, just a few hundred bits per second, but they don't need a 
ton of speed.  


We have two utilities using 900mhz in our service area, one monitors their 
meters every hour!  And one monitors at 9am 12pm and 5pm.  The second one is 
much better for us, much less noise.  They can make that choice so if they have 
to use 900mhz, try to get them to not monitor during your busy time for 
residential(after 5pm).

 

 

Travis Allen
Total Highspeed Internet Solutions
totalhighspeed.com
417-851-1107

 

  _  

From: "Sean Heskett" 
To: af@afmug.com, memb...@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 3:05:56 PM
Subject: [WISPA Members] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

 

can anyone point me in the direction of what licensed spectrum is available and 
how to obtain the spectrum for electrical and water utility companies that want 
to do advanced metering.

 

our local co-op is about to deploy a 900Mhz system and they stated that they 
couldn't get any licensed spectrum.

 

Any and all advice is greatly appreciate!

 

Thanks,

Sean

 


___
Members mailing list
memb...@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

Its a business, I believe a bar. The connection was for their gaming
machines, which have their own fortigate VPN solution behind their router
which is a mikrotik. I had to get them set up because their tech screwed up
the mikrotik, I told them all I was doing was getting their masquerade and
routing up, they needed to have their IT get anything else done

I dont believe theyre running a mailserver and they needed the static for
the illinois gaming thing.

Im assuming a call will get them to address it, just curious if they dont.
We are always Law Enforcement compliant

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> More info please.  Is this a business or residential customer?  Do they
> run their own mailserver?  And is the static IP at their request or your
> convenience?  (I’m assuming they are not using your mailserver to send
> their spam.)
>
> If it’s a business with their own mailserver, they may unknowingly have an
> open mail relay or something.  Or sending bulk mail may be central to their
> business.  Or they may be sending legit or borderline legit mail that
> others flag as spam (back when I did more hosting, I found it odd that most
> of my spam problems were from churches or companies marketing to churches).
>
> On the one hand, many spam blacklists will automatically remove the IP
> address after a month or so if nefarious activity ceases.  Some you will
> have to request removal.
>
> On the other hand, there is some risk of having your entire IP block
> blacklisted if they decide you are a spam-friendly ISP.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_contract
>
> If it’s a business, I would work with them to see if they maybe just need
> to close off an open relay or something.  Or if they send bulk mail, inform
> them of the CAN SPAM Act.  I usually push those customers toward a bulk
> mail service, which can do a much better job of handing bounces and removal
> requests.  Some people don’t realize that a high percentage of bounces will
> get you blacklisted by large domains like yahoo, gmail, aol, etc., on the
> assumption if you have that many bad addresses on your list, you must be a
> spammer.  And of course honoring removal requests is a requirement of the
> CAN SPAM Act.
>
> If it’s a residence, or a business not operating their own mailserver,
> block traffic from their IP address to destination port 25.  The only
> reason they would need that is (1) they are operating a mailserver, or (2)
> they are hosting a spambot.
>
> If they are violating your TOS, and especially if they are doing things
> even worse then sending spam, and they refuse to work with you and make a
> good faith effort to solve the problems, then you should dump them as a
> customer.  Yes, the next step might be a warrant, but the LEA serving the
> warrant might bust down the door of your NOC and seize all your equipment,
> depending on what this customer is doing or suspected of doing.  That would
> be a very bad day.
>
>
>
> *From:* mailto:p...@believewireless.net 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:16 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs
>
> Reach out and let them know. Tell them you have been informed that someone
> is trying to steal their
> identity, looking to use their debit cards, rapists are viewing pics of
> the lady of the house online and
> pedophiles have been interested in molesting their kids. But, hey, you are
> just letting them know
> and not tell them how to protect their kids or family.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
>> on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
>> clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
>> on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
>> suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>>
>> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
>> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
>> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
>> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>>
>> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
>> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
>> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
>> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
>



-- 
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] 5 years ago today.....

[Matt Corcoran]

And mount the tripod 120 degrees from how the feet are suppose to lay.

From: Af > on behalf of Brian 
Sullivan >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:45 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.

My favorite is when they NAIL the mount back onto the roof (out of 
alignment).� Or when they re-hang the surge suppressor upside down.

On 4/27/2016 12:42 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Then weeks and months after the storms, people have roofers and siding 
contractors come out to do repairs, and:
�
90% of the time they call AFTER the roofers have moved or damaged our equipment
�
10% of the time they call when the roofers show up and want us to come out 
right now this minute, remove the dish, wait around while the put new shingles 
under it, then remount and align it, so they don�t go a day without Internet
�
�
From: George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:30 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not like last 
year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit down there. I will 
have no more of it.

On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
�
From: CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
�
This is what was happening in my home town..
�
http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
�
What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.� After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.
�
Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late last 
night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were starting 
to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed
�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
�
Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
�
I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.�� There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.�� My dad's office shows several damage photos from 
that day.
�
Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week
�
�
�
�
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Brian Sullivan]

My favorite is when they NAIL the mount back onto the roof (out of 
alignment).  Or when they re-hang the surge suppressor upside down.


On 4/27/2016 12:42 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Then weeks and months after the storms, people have roofers and siding 
contractors come out to do repairs, and:
90% of the time they call AFTER the roofers have moved or damaged our 
equipment
10% of the time they call when the roofers show up and want us to come 
out right now this minute, remove the dish, wait around while the put 
new shingles under it, then remount and align it, so they don�t go a 
day without Internet

*From:* George Skorup 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:30 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not 
like last year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit 
down there. I will have no more of it.


On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
�
*From:* CBB - Jay Fuller 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
�
�
This is what was happening in my home town..
�
http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
�
What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds 
early that morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of 
our state were without power during that huge outbreak.� After the 
outbreak, we didn't have power for nearly a week.

�
Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube 
late last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the 
on-air guys were starting to get some damage reports in - - their 
tone really changed

�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
�
Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
�
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
�
I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power 
since that morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.�� There is a picture of the sky from about 
30 minutes before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.�� My dad's office shows several damage 
photos from that day.

�
Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this 
todayand really this week

�
�
�
�
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Ken Hohhof]

Then weeks and months after the storms, people have roofers and siding 
contractors come out to do repairs, and:

90% of the time they call AFTER the roofers have moved or damaged our equipment

10% of the time they call when the roofers show up and want us to come out 
right now this minute, remove the dish, wait around while the put new shingles 
under it, then remount and align it, so they don’t go a day without Internet


From: George Skorup 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:30 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.

We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not like last 
year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit down there. I will 
have no more of it.


On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

  So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
  �
  From: CBB - Jay Fuller 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
  �
  �
  This is what was happening in my home town..
  �
  http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
  �
  What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.� After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.
  �
  Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late 
last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were 
starting to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed
  �
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
  �
  Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
  �
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
  �
  I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
  drove right into it.�� There is a picture of the sky from about 30 
minutes before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
  our conference room.�� My dad's office shows several damage photos from 
that day.
  �
  Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week
  �
  �
  �
  �
  �
  �

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[George Skorup]

We had a very mild winter and a very early spring. I hope it's not like 
last year all over again. You guys keep all that tornado shit down 
there. I will have no more of it.


On 4/27/2016 10:37 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:

So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?
*From:* CBB - Jay Fuller 
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.
This is what was happening in my home town..
http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds 
early that morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of 
our state were without power during that huge outbreak.  After the 
outbreak, we didn't have power for nearly a week.
Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube 
late last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air 
guys were starting to get some damage reports in - - their tone really 
changed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power 
since that morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 
minutes before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos 
from that day.
Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this 
todayand really this week

[AFMUG] Fw: Lifeline Consumer Recertification: Elect USAC by May 2

[Chuck McCown]

Not sure if WISPs qualify, but it might be worth trying for since the lifeline 
program is being expanded to pay for broadband.  You may as well get a piece of 
that action if you can.  


From: Lifeline Program 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:17 AM
To: ch...@directcom.com 
Subject: Lifeline Consumer Recertification: Elect USAC by May 2

  Annual recertification is required for all 
Lifeline Program carriers.

  View this message as a web page - Manage my 
subscription - Opt in
 


 
   
 
  Lifeline Consumer Recertification:
  Elect USAC by May 2
 

  Did you know that your carrier can elect USAC to 
conduct the annual re-certification process on its behalf? 




  USAC's recertification service comes at no cost 
to you, and
  guarantees compliance with all Lifeline Program 
recertification rules. 




  If you'd like to elect USAC, complete the 
recertification election spreadsheet and send it to USAC via email by Monday, 
May 2, 2016.
 

  About the Consumer (Subscriber) Recertification 
Process
 

  Your carrier is required to recertify each of 
your Lifeline subscribers' eligibility annually. You can either elect USAC (by 
May 2, 2016), or conduct your own recertification process. 




  Important note: USAC does not provide live 
customer support and will direct subscribers to your customer service for 
assistance. 
 
   
 
  Need Help? Contact Us!
 

  For more information about the 2016 
recertification election process, visit the Recertification Election Option and 
Recertify Subscribers pages on our website, or contact us via email.



 
   
 
   
 


  © 1997-2016, Universal Service Administrative Company, All Rights 
Reserved.  
  This message was sent to ch...@directcom.com from: Lifeline Program, 
outre...@usac.org, USAC | 2000 L Street NW Suite 200 | Washington, DISTRICT OF 
COLUMBIA 20036  

Manage Your Subscription 
 

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Chuck McCown]

We have been renting them out for $8/mo
Nice thing is we can totally get in and troubleshoot anything.
And the parents can control which devices and which services they allow their 
kids to use.  

From: Sean Heskett 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:39 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

Best router ever!  Highly recommend them. 

We sell it as a managed wifi service instead of selling just the router.  
Customer pays $99 "setup fee" and $12/mo.  Clients love them and so do our 
support staff.

-Sean 

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Gino Villarini  wrote:

  We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and 
gigabit speeds on the LAN.   
  I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with 
them or others? 

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Cassidy B. Larson]

How much is “Compass” to manage it?  Any APIs available?  Is there a monthly 
fee per device for Compass?


> On Apr 27, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> 
> Under $140.  Not exactly sure.
> 
> From: Gino Villarini 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:15 AM
> To: Animal Farm  ; af@afmug.com 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways
> 
> what is the cost of them?
> 
> Sent from Outlook Mobile 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM -0700, "Chuck McCown"  > wrote:
> 
>> I have a pretty large home with aluminum sheeting on the subfloor to help 
>> with the hydronic heating.
>> I have one GigaCenter 844E on the middle floor and it covers the whole 
>> house.  We repeatedly sell out of the things at the office.
>> 
>> From: Gino Villarini 
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:48 AM
>> To: Animal Farm 
>> Subject: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways
>> 
>> We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and 
>> gigabit speeds on the LAN.
>> I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with 
>> them or others?

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Gino Villarini]

thanks! ill reach out to Calix or do they have disti?

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

> Best router ever!  Highly recommend them.
>
> We sell it as a managed wifi service instead of selling just the router.
> Customer pays $99 "setup fee" and $12/mo.  Clients love them and so do our
> support staff.
>
> -Sean
>
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Gino Villarini  wrote:
>
>> We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi
>> and gigabit speeds on the LAN.
>> I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience
>> with them or others?
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Sean Heskett]

Best router ever!  Highly recommend them.

We sell it as a managed wifi service instead of selling just the router.
Customer pays $99 "setup fee" and $12/mo.  Clients love them and so do our
support staff.

-Sean

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Gino Villarini  wrote:

> We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and
> gigabit speeds on the LAN.
> I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with
> them or others?
>

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Jaime Solorza]

yep tis the season...hey Lewis B...how you hanging out in your area?
winds left but headed back to usold trees are a falling...

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:25 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller  wrote:

>
> This is what was happening in my home town..
>
>
> http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman
>
> What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early
> that morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state
> were without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we
> didn't have power for nearly a week.
>
> Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late
> last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were
> starting to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks
>
> Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q
>
> I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since
> that morning as this thing spun up - i almost
> drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes
> before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
> our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from
> that day.
>
> Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this
> todayand really this week
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Chuck McCown]

Under $140.  Not exactly sure.  

From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:15 AM
To: Animal Farm ; af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

what is the cost of them?


Sent from Outlook Mobile





On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM -0700, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:


  I have a pretty large home with aluminum sheeting on the subfloor to help 
with the hydronic heating.  
  I have one GigaCenter 844E on the middle floor and it covers the whole house. 
 We repeatedly sell out of the things at the office.  

  From: Gino Villarini 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:48 AM
  To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

  We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and 
gigabit speeds on the LAN.   
  I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with 
them or others? 

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Gino Villarini]

what is the cost of them?

Sent from Outlook Mobile




On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM -0700, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:














I have a pretty large home with aluminum sheeting on the subfloor to help 
with the hydronic heating.  
I have one GigaCenter 844E on the middle floor and it covers the whole 
house.  We repeatedly sell out of the things at the office.  


 

From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:48 AM
To: Animal Farm 

Subject: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home 
Gateways
 

We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC 
wifi and gigabit speeds on the LAN.   
I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with 
them or others? 

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

[Jaime Solorza]

I believe public utilities do not have to pay for their licenses like
commercial two way radio operators and others but I am not sure if that
still holds.   I think there is a fee for license search and process but it
should not be hat expensive for public utilities.   I remember a
"discussion" I had with Comsearch over the price they charged for a
frequency search.  We needed two additional 900MHz licenses for PTP SCADA
backbone links and somewhere they mentioned spectrum analysis.   I asked if
they sent someone to check out the spectrum in the paths of intended
sites.  They said no.   So dumb me, asked how do you know which frequencies
are clean if we are on the border with Mexico? Even our police department
had issues with the Chihuahua Cattle Associations' system for a week a few
years back and so did our military with an STL shot in the 230MHz range
across border.   Never got an answer.

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Sean Heskett  wrote:

> Cool thanks for all the tips and resources guys.  They are amicable to
> working with us (they don't want any bad press either) so we should be able
> to work out a solution.
>
> I've also forwarded some contacts for license coordinators.
>
> Thanks guys!  Luckily 900mhz is less than 1% of our customer base.  But
> for that 1% it's all they've got for getting Internet.
>
> -Sean
>
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Travis Allen 
> wrote:
>
>> Sean,
>>
>> One of our local utilities uses licensed 220mhz for bh, but still uses
>> 900mhz for meter to meter and meter to Collection point communication.  It
>> does cut down on some of the noise though this way.  Most of the utilities
>> around us monitor through their own wires, no noise that way.  I understand
>> that the data rate is really slow, just a few hundred bits per second, but
>> they don't need a ton of speed.
>>
>> We have two utilities using 900mhz in our service area, one monitors
>> their meters every hour!  And one monitors at 9am 12pm and 5pm.  The second
>> one is much better for us, much less noise.  They can make that choice so
>> if they have to use 900mhz, try to get them to not monitor during your busy
>> time for residential(after 5pm).
>>
>>
>> Travis Allen
>> Total Highspeed Internet Solutions
>> totalhighspeed.com
>> 417-851-1107
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Sean Heskett" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com, memb...@wispa.org
>> *Sent: *Monday, April 25, 2016 3:05:56 PM
>> *Subject: *[WISPA Members] Licensed spectrum for utility companies
>>
>> can anyone point me in the direction of what licensed spectrum is
>> available and how to obtain the spectrum for electrical and water utility
>> companies that want to do advanced metering.
>>
>> our local co-op is about to deploy a 900Mhz system and they stated that
>> they couldn't get any licensed spectrum.
>>
>> Any and all advice is greatly appreciate!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sean
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Members mailing list
>> memb...@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Chuck McCown]

I have a pretty large home with aluminum sheeting on the subfloor to help with 
the hydronic heating.  
I have one GigaCenter 844E on the middle floor and it covers the whole house.  
We repeatedly sell out of the things at the office.  

From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:48 AM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and 
gigabit speeds on the LAN.   
I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with them 
or others? 

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Larry Smith]

On Wed April 27 2016 10:48, Gino Villarini wrote:
> We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and
> gigabit speeds on the LAN.
> I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with
> them or others?

All of our fiber is pretty much Calix.  Their support is absolutely excellent.
During one point in our startup they actually sent a tech here and he worked
with us for about three days showing us how to program the ONT's, manage
the system and such.

 They are a bit expensive, but just plain work really well.

-- 
Larry Smith
lesm...@ecsis.net

Re: [AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Jesse DuPont]

  
  
I have an Ethernet GigaCenter I'm about to do some testing with, but
a colleague of mine said the GUI of it isn't as mature as
traditional residential AC/GigE routers because Calix really wants
you to manage it via Consumer Connect - their cloud-based ACS system
(TR069). Hopefully know more next week.


  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Jesse DuPont

  Network
  Architect
  email: jesse.dup...@celeritycorp.net
  Celerity Networks LLC
  Celerity
  Broadband LLC
Like us! facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc
  Like us! facebook.com/celeritybroadband
  

  

On 4/27/16 9:48 AM, Gino Villarini
  wrote:


  We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that
supports 802.11AC wifi and gigabit speeds on the LAN.  
I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost?
  Experience with them or others? 
  


  

[AFMUG] Calix or others 802.11ac Home Gateways

[Gino Villarini]

We are looking for a Home Gateway / Router that supports 802.11AC wifi and
gigabit speeds on the LAN.
I have read that Calix is a good option, what is the cost? Experience with
them or others?

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

[Sean Heskett]

Cool thanks for all the tips and resources guys.  They are amicable to
working with us (they don't want any bad press either) so we should be able
to work out a solution.

I've also forwarded some contacts for license coordinators.

Thanks guys!  Luckily 900mhz is less than 1% of our customer base.  But for
that 1% it's all they've got for getting Internet.

-Sean

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Travis Allen 
wrote:

> Sean,
>
> One of our local utilities uses licensed 220mhz for bh, but still uses
> 900mhz for meter to meter and meter to Collection point communication.  It
> does cut down on some of the noise though this way.  Most of the utilities
> around us monitor through their own wires, no noise that way.  I understand
> that the data rate is really slow, just a few hundred bits per second, but
> they don't need a ton of speed.
>
> We have two utilities using 900mhz in our service area, one monitors their
> meters every hour!  And one monitors at 9am 12pm and 5pm.  The second one
> is much better for us, much less noise.  They can make that choice so if
> they have to use 900mhz, try to get them to not monitor during your busy
> time for residential(after 5pm).
>
>
> Travis Allen
> Total Highspeed Internet Solutions
> totalhighspeed.com
> 417-851-1107
>
> --
> *From: *"Sean Heskett"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com ,
> memb...@wispa.org 
> *Sent: *Monday, April 25, 2016 3:05:56 PM
> *Subject: *[WISPA Members] Licensed spectrum for utility companies
>
> can anyone point me in the direction of what licensed spectrum is
> available and how to obtain the spectrum for electrical and water utility
> companies that want to do advanced metering.
>
> our local co-op is about to deploy a 900Mhz system and they stated that
> they couldn't get any licensed spectrum.
>
> Any and all advice is greatly appreciate!
>
> Thanks,
> Sean
>
>
> ___
> Members mailing list
> memb...@wispa.org 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/members
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[Chuck McCown]

So I guess the forecast last week was accurate?

From: CBB - Jay Fuller 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:25 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.


This is what was happening in my home town..

http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman

What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.

Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late last 
night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were starting 
to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks

Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q

I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from that 
day.

Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week

Re: [AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

this was the morning link, i posted the afternoon link below...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftz5UL8S2Ms


  - Original Message - 
  From: CBB - Jay Fuller 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 10:24 AM
  Subject: 5 years ago today.



  This is what was happening in my home town..

  http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman

  What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.

  Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late 
last night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were 
starting to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks

  Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q

  I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
  drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
  our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from that 
day.

  Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week

[AFMUG] 5 years ago today.....

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

This is what was happening in my home town..

http://abc3340.com/news/videos/april-27-2011-tornado-touches-down-in-cullman

What many people do not know is we had massive straight line winds early that 
morning (in addition to other tornadoes) and many parts of our state were 
without power during that huge outbreak.  After the outbreak, we didn't have 
power for nearly a week.

Watched some of the early morning coverage recently posted on youtube late last 
night - the last hour or so (really two hours) as the on-air guys were starting 
to get some damage reports in - - their tone really changed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZZNvNdhks

Here is the infamous coverage of the event as it happened...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmI9__WLR7Q

I was actually out checking on a tower that had been without power since that 
morning as this thing spun up - i almost
drove right into it.   There is a picture of the sky from about 30 minutes 
before (while i was at that tower) hanging in
our conference room.   My dad's office shows several damage photos from that 
day.

Lots of coverage on youtube - - our state is buzzing about this todayand 
really this week

Re: [AFMUG] How would you address this?

[D. Ryan Spott]

Years ago my mom had internet service from her cableco. She told me the deal 
was a phone (VoIP) and Internet. 

I was trying to support her remotely and it was terrible. I called the cableco 
and she was getting the basic triple play: 
Basic Cable
Phone
Internet... 80kbps!

I wanted mom to upgrade so I could help her when needed. She said no; Facebook 
and email worked just fine. 

This deal offered by the cableco damn near killed the local telco. 

ryan

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

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 12:22, That One Guy /sarcasm  
> wrote:
> 
> dsl to our customer base is never reliable over about 300k. Id say ten bucks 
> a month for 300k is fair.
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Josh Luthman  
>> wrote:
>> Hope he's doing OK.  Reminds me of Monty Python - perhaps he died while 
>> writing it!
>> 
>> Personally I'd have a hard time justifying $9.95 for any kind of unlimited 
>> service.  If he can get DSL at that price, have at it.  If it's not 
>> available, maybe we can help.
>> 
>> 
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Rory Conaway  
>>> wrote:
>>> We got hit with this a few weeks ago.  They get internet for $9.95 per 
>>> month for 1.5Mbps with DSL.  We match this.
>>> 
>>> Rory
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Head
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:03 PM
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Subject: [AFMUG] How would you address this?
>>> 
>>> This is a copy/paste of an inquiry submission we received on our website. 
>>> What is this guy asking for? Discounted service possibly? As a WISP we 
>>> certainly don't feed from the public trough, are we "required"
>>> to do some kind of discounted service here? Having said all that I would 
>>> mention that as a practice we do discount/waive the installation fee for 
>>> veterans as taken on a case-by-case basis. Yes it is incomplete and we are 
>>> not sure why he did not finish it
>>> 
>>> 
>>> "I am wondering if your company participates in the Rural Broadband 
>>> Initiative? I live on a fixed income and it was suggested by a friend I 
>>> research the program.
>>> 
>>> My retirement is more than adequate under normal circumstances but my 
>>> medical cost not covered by the VA eats up much of my income. This makes it 
>>> necessary to budget my expenses.
>>> 
>>> I need internet service right away and I am"
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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] How would you address this?

[Chuck McCown]

Any local telco that does not provide FTTH has one foot in the grave.  

From: D. Ryan Spott 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:53 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] How would you address this?

Years ago my mom had internet service from her cableco. She told me the deal 
was a phone (VoIP) and Internet. 

I was trying to support her remotely and it was terrible. I called the cableco 
and she was getting the basic triple play: 
Basic Cable
Phone
Internet... 80kbps!

I wanted mom to upgrade so I could help her when needed. She said no; Facebook 
and email worked just fine. 

This deal offered by the cableco damn near killed the local telco. 

ryan


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

On Apr 26, 2016, at 12:22, That One Guy /sarcasm  
wrote:


  dsl to our customer base is never reliable over about 300k. Id say ten bucks 
a month for 300k is fair.

  On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:

Hope he's doing OK.  Reminds me of Monty Python - perhaps he died while 
writing it! 

Personally I'd have a hard time justifying $9.95 for any kind of unlimited 
service.  If he can get DSL at that price, have at it.  If it's not available, 
maybe we can help.



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

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Rory Conaway  
wrote:

  We got hit with this a few weeks ago.  They get internet for $9.95 per 
month for 1.5Mbps with DSL.  We match this.

  Rory


  -Original Message-
  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Head
  Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:03 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: [AFMUG] How would you address this?

  This is a copy/paste of an inquiry submission we received on our website. 
What is this guy asking for? Discounted service possibly? As a WISP we 
certainly don't feed from the public trough, are we "required"
  to do some kind of discounted service here? Having said all that I would 
mention that as a practice we do discount/waive the installation fee for 
veterans as taken on a case-by-case basis. Yes it is incomplete and we are not 
sure why he did not finish it


  "I am wondering if your company participates in the Rural Broadband 
Initiative? I live on a fixed income and it was suggested by a friend I 
research the program.

  My retirement is more than adequate under normal circumstances but my 
medical cost not covered by the VA eats up much of my income. This makes it 
necessary to budget my expenses.

  I need internet service right away and I am"







  -- 

  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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Ken Hohhof]

More info please.  Is this a business or residential customer?  Do they run 
their own mailserver?  And is the static IP at their request or your 
convenience?  (I’m assuming they are not using your mailserver to send their 
spam.)

If it’s a business with their own mailserver, they may unknowingly have an open 
mail relay or something.  Or sending bulk mail may be central to their 
business.  Or they may be sending legit or borderline legit mail that others 
flag as spam (back when I did more hosting, I found it odd that most of my spam 
problems were from churches or companies marketing to churches).

On the one hand, many spam blacklists will automatically remove the IP address 
after a month or so if nefarious activity ceases.  Some you will have to 
request removal.

On the other hand, there is some risk of having your entire IP block 
blacklisted if they decide you are a spam-friendly ISP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_contract

If it’s a business, I would work with them to see if they maybe just need to 
close off an open relay or something.  Or if they send bulk mail, inform them 
of the CAN SPAM Act.  I usually push those customers toward a bulk mail 
service, which can do a much better job of handing bounces and removal 
requests.  Some people don’t realize that a high percentage of bounces will get 
you blacklisted by large domains like yahoo, gmail, aol, etc., on the 
assumption if you have that many bad addresses on your list, you must be a 
spammer.  And of course honoring removal requests is a requirement of the CAN 
SPAM Act.

If it’s a residence, or a business not operating their own mailserver, block 
traffic from their IP address to destination port 25.  The only reason they 
would need that is (1) they are operating a mailserver, or (2) they are hosting 
a spambot.

If they are violating your TOS, and especially if they are doing things even 
worse then sending spam, and they refuse to work with you and make a good faith 
effort to solve the problems, then you should dump them as a customer.  Yes, 
the next step might be a warrant, but the LEA serving the warrant might bust 
down the door of your NOC and seize all your equipment, depending on what this 
customer is doing or suspected of doing.  That would be a very bad day.



From: mailto:p...@believewireless.net 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:16 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

Reach out and let them know. Tell them you have been informed that someone is 
trying to steal their 
identity, looking to use their debit cards, rapists are viewing pics of the 
lady of the house online and
pedophiles have been interested in molesting their kids. But, hey, you are just 
letting them know
and not tell them how to protect their kids or family.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

  We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports on 
their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP clean. 
Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others on the 
network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure. suprisingly, its 
primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA. 

  Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively with 
the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate UTM 
option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP residing on 
every blacklist can we get nailed?

  Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a 
service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going 
elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and 
theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues


  -- 

  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] Tales from the Towers - Chapter 59 Posted

[Rory Conaway]

I just write what the voices in my head say….

Seriously, most of the political ranting is about stuff that affects us and if 
I didn’t let it out, I’d probably go WISPal.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 9:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tales from the Towers - Chapter 59 Posted


I've got to be honest... It's been awhile since you weren't going on a rant 
about the FCC or did something that was IMO really objective and at least 
somewhat technical...

... But this one is really well done Rory. Informative and entertaining with 
little to no spin.

Very well done.
On Apr 26, 2016 10:45 PM, "Rory Conaway" 
> wrote:
http://muniwireless.com/2016/04/26/migration-isnt-just-for-birds/

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

“I wish I could play little league now.  I’d be way better than before.”

Re: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Rory Conaway]

We have them run Malwarebytes and get Symantec Internet Security.  If they do 
that, the problem goes away.  If not, we disconnect them until they clean it up.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 7:10 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports on 
their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP clean. 
Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others on the 
network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure. suprisingly, its 
primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.

Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively with 
the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate UTM 
option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP residing on 
every blacklist can we get nailed?

Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a service 
issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going elsewhere" I 
dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and theyre not 
impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues

--
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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[can...@believewireless.net]

Reach out and let them know. Tell them you have been informed that someone
is trying to steal their
identity, looking to use their debit cards, rapists are viewing pics of the
lady of the house online and
pedophiles have been interested in molesting their kids. But, hey, you are
just letting them know
and not tell them how to protect their kids or family.


On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
> on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
> clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
> on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
> suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>
> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>
> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>
> --
> 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] abuse reports on customer IPs

[Jason Wilson]

My opinion on it, I am not a lawyer and I have not played one on TV, I am
not the internet police. Once the warrant is served then I will worry about
it. At which point I will turn over anything addressed in the warrant.

Jason.
On Apr 27, 2016 7:09 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" 
wrote:

> We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
> on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
> clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
> on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
> suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.
>
> Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
> with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
> UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
> residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?
>
> Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
> service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
> elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
> theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues
>
> --
> 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.
>

[AFMUG] abuse reports on customer IPs

[That One Guy /sarcasm]

We have a particular customer, We have been getting tons of abuse reports
on their static IP, I assume we will never be able to wash this sullied IP
clean. Theyre not really doing any harm to our network, or impacting others
on the network, they are in full breach of our TOS, thats for sure.
suprisingly, its primarily spam and botnet activity, but no DMCA.

Is there any liability on us as an ISP to not address this affirmatively
with the customer. Im going to contact them, may offer a leased fortigate
UTM option. But if there isnt a resolution, other than their static IP
residing on every blacklist can we get nailed?

Its a good customer, pays their bill on time, worked with us through a
service issue without the usual "gimme discounts and free shit or im going
elsewhere" I dont want to HAVE to disconnect them if im not required to and
theyre not impacting others if they cant or wont resolve the issues

-- 
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] Tales from the Towers - Chapter 59 Posted

[Ken Hohhof]

“Grab a Diet Coke and a HoHo”.

From: Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:52 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tales from the Towers - Chapter 59 Posted

I've got to be honest... It's been awhile since you weren't going on a rant 
about the FCC or did something that was IMO really objective and at least 
somewhat technical...

... But this one is really well done Rory. Informative and entertaining with 
little to no spin.

Very well done.

On Apr 26, 2016 10:45 PM, "Rory Conaway"  wrote:

  http://muniwireless.com/2016/04/26/migration-isnt-just-for-birds/



  Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO

  4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040

  602-426-0542

  r...@triadwireless.net

  www.triadwireless.net



  “I wish I could play little league now.  I’d be way better than before.”