Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

I wish you could teach me how to use FB for marketing.  I finally stopped 
paying google and bing and my sales have gone way up.  Go figure.


-Original Message- 
From: Travis Johnson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:50 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years
(before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious.

"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model...
let's look at wireless."

I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and yet
they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I doubt
Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several e-commerce
companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend a dime with
Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it generates
$400k in sales, per month.

Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to
texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat.
These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that means
someone else can do the same thing.

Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote:
Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company.. 
They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  & yes they will 
eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell 
you there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the 
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners 
(read competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more 
of the project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose 
and San Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money 
than Google budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea 
that cities would remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. 
With so much existing broadband already in place, this is certainly not 
the case. I think Google thought all cities were going to have the 
attitude like they had with the first cities who applied for Google to 
come to their cities (Like Kansas City did).


Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their 
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign 
ups (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem 
in planning construction especially with underground deployment. This 
also drove up costs.


Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see 
from them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber, 
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they 
can. They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high 
construction cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at 
wireless to basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially 
in MDU cases. Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an 
MDU makes it risky to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of 
a huge take rate within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a 
high capacity short hop last mile, but even then they will have 
challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.


While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do 
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the 
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD 
and too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks 
are too far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking 
about. Google is certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack 
the people, tools and skill sets to be one. They are their own best 
cheerleaders and they have a dangerous habit of believing their own hype 
internally and are not real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and 
outside input.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through the eye of a needle.


-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the 
world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF 
engineering talent in the world on their payroll?


They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Travis Johnson]

You will have to change your email address before then... LOL

Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:27 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
I think that facebook won't be far behind. Let's have this 
conversation again in 2026.



bp


On 8/11/2016 8:50 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years 
(before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious.


"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing 
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model... 
let's look at wireless."


I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and 
yet they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I 
doubt Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several 
e-commerce companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend 
a dime with Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it 
generates $400k in sales, per month.


Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to 
texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat. 
These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that 
means someone else can do the same thing.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote:
Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd 
company..  They look at the paper pile before the experience 
pile...  & yes they will eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
tell you there are a number of factors that caused them to take 
pause on the deployments. One was the almost obstructionist 
attitude of pole owners (read competitors to their broadband 
deployment). This forced a lot more of the project deigns to 
underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San Francisco, 
there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google 
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that 
cities would remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. 
With so much existing broadband already in place, this is certainly 
not the case. I think Google thought all cities were going to have 
the attitude like they had with the first cities who applied for 
Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas City did).


Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit 
their networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based 
on pre-sign ups (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge 
logistic problem in planning construction especially with 
underground deployment. This also drove up costs.


Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will 
see from them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up 
dark fiber, capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber 
systems where they can. They may use microwave to cross connect 
systems or bridge high construction cost areas such as railroad 
crossings. They are looking at wireless to basically go more from 
the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing 
competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky 
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take 
rate within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high 
capacity short hop last mile, but even then they will have 
challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.


While we all would think Google is a great company with resources 
to do whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a 
lot from the inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty 
somethings with ADD and too much money. They also seem to have the 
attitude that older folks are too far behind the times to possibly 
know what they are talking about. Google is certainly not a utility 
infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and skill sets to 
be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not 
real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through the eye of a needle.


-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your 
WISP.


We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies 
in the world though. Do you really think they don't have some of 
the best RF engineering talent in the world on their payroll?


They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, 
which is 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Bill Prince]

I think that facebook won't be far behind. Let's have this conversation 
again in 2026.



bp


On 8/11/2016 8:50 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years 
(before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious.


"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing 
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model... 
let's look at wireless."


I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and 
yet they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I 
doubt Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several e-commerce 
companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend a dime with 
Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it generates 
$400k in sales, per month.


Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to 
texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat. 
These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that means 
someone else can do the same thing.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote:
Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd 
company..  They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  
& yes they will eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
tell you there are a number of factors that caused them to take 
pause on the deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude 
of pole owners (read competitors to their broadband deployment). 
This forced a lot more of the project deigns to underground 
deployment. In cities like San Jose and San Francisco, there were a 
lot of requirements that cost more money than Google budgeted for. 
In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would 
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much 
existing broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. 
I think Google thought all cities were going to have the attitude 
like they had with the first cities who applied for Google to come 
to their cities (Like Kansas City did).


Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit 
their networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on 
pre-sign ups (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge 
logistic problem in planning construction especially with 
underground deployment. This also drove up costs.


Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will 
see from them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up 
dark fiber, capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber 
systems where they can. They may use microwave to cross connect 
systems or bridge high construction cost areas such as railroad 
crossings. They are looking at wireless to basically go more from 
the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing 
competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky 
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take 
rate within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high 
capacity short hop last mile, but even then they will have 
challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.


While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to 
do whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot 
from the inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty 
somethings with ADD and too much money. They also seem to have the 
attitude that older folks are too far behind the times to possibly 
know what they are talking about. Google is certainly not a utility 
infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and skill sets to 
be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not 
real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through the eye of a needle.


-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your 
WISP.


We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies 
in the world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the 
best RF engineering talent in the world on their payroll?


They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, 
which is evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the 
most appropriate one for the application. If it was 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Bill Prince]

Remember MySpace?

Easy come.  Easy go.


bp


On 8/11/2016 9:27 PM, Bill Prince wrote:
I think that facebook won't be far behind. Let's have this 
conversation again in 2026.



bp


On 8/11/2016 8:50 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years 
(before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious.


"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing 
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model... 
let's look at wireless."


I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and 
yet they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I 
doubt Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several 
e-commerce companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend 
a dime with Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it 
generates $400k in sales, per month.


Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to 
texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat. 
These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that 
means someone else can do the same thing.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote:
Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd 
company..  They look at the paper pile before the experience 
pile...  & yes they will eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
tell you there are a number of factors that caused them to take 
pause on the deployments. One was the almost obstructionist 
attitude of pole owners (read competitors to their broadband 
deployment). This forced a lot more of the project deigns to 
underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San Francisco, 
there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google 
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that 
cities would remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. 
With so much existing broadband already in place, this is certainly 
not the case. I think Google thought all cities were going to have 
the attitude like they had with the first cities who applied for 
Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas City did).


Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit 
their networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based 
on pre-sign ups (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge 
logistic problem in planning construction especially with 
underground deployment. This also drove up costs.


Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will 
see from them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up 
dark fiber, capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber 
systems where they can. They may use microwave to cross connect 
systems or bridge high construction cost areas such as railroad 
crossings. They are looking at wireless to basically go more from 
the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing 
competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky 
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take 
rate within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high 
capacity short hop last mile, but even then they will have 
challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.


While we all would think Google is a great company with resources 
to do whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a 
lot from the inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty 
somethings with ADD and too much money. They also seem to have the 
attitude that older folks are too far behind the times to possibly 
know what they are talking about. Google is certainly not a utility 
infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and skill sets to 
be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not 
real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through the eye of a needle.


-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your 
WISP.


We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies 
in the world though. Do you really think they don't have some of 
the best RF engineering talent in the world on their payroll?


They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, 
which 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Seth Mattinen]

On 8/11/16 8:50 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:


"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model...
let's look at wireless."



The Google Fiber model seemed to rely on cities bending over backwards 
begging Google to pick them and because they were so desperate to be 
chosen they'd remove any obstacles leaving Google to just show up and do 
whatever.


And then they rolled up to a big city that already has a dozen other 
companies doing (or trying to do) the same thing and their model fell 
flat. So someone was all hey we've got money let's just buy some company 
that was successful in San Fransisco to solve the problem. Thus they 
bought Webpass and are attempting to pivot.


It's like nobody bothered to actually plan it, just full speed ahead 
with our checkbook and branding. At least that's my impression of Google 
Fiber.


~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Travis Johnson]

Walmart is doing over $450 Billion per year, and they actually have 
assets to back it up.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:30 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/10/investing/google-alphabet-all-time-high/

"Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
worth $555 billion."

"The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.

That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
billion in 2017."

So, that may take awhile there Robert.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Robert Andrews  wrote:

Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company..
They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  & yes they will
eventually go down because of it...

On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:

Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
(in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can.
They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction
cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short
hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too
far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have
a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
the eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
engineering talent in the world on their payroll?

They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is
evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate
one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred
thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too.
It's the smart play.

At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying
they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies".

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller
 wrote:


Wait until they experience 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Travis Johnson]

So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years 
(before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious.


"Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing 
fiber everywhere!"
"Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model... 
let's look at wireless."


I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and yet 
they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I doubt 
Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several e-commerce 
companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend a dime with 
Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it generates 
$400k in sales, per month.


Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to 
texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat. 
These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that means 
someone else can do the same thing.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote:
Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd 
company..  They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  
& yes they will eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
tell you there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause 
on the deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of 
pole owners (read competitors to their broadband deployment). This 
forced a lot more of the project deigns to underground deployment. In 
cities like San Jose and San Francisco, there were a lot of 
requirements that cost more money than Google budgeted for. In some 
respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would remove 
obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing 
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think 
Google thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they 
had with the first cities who applied for Google to come to their 
cities (Like Kansas City did).


Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit 
their networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on 
pre-sign ups (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge 
logistic problem in planning construction especially with underground 
deployment. This also drove up costs.


Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see 
from them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark 
fiber, capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems 
where they can. They may use microwave to cross connect systems or 
bridge high construction cost areas such as railroad crossings. They 
are looking at wireless to basically go more from the curb to the 
customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing competition and/or 
existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky to do a wired play if 
they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate within the MDU. I 
see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short hop last 
mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum, 
interference and capacity.


While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to 
do whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot 
from the inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty 
somethings with ADD and too much money. They also seem to have the 
attitude that older folks are too far behind the times to possibly 
know what they are talking about. Google is certainly not a utility 
infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and skill sets to 
be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not 
real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through the eye of a needle.


-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your 
WISP.


We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in 
the world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the 
best RF engineering talent in the world on their payroll?


They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which 
is evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most 
appropriate one for the application. If it was going to cost you a 
couple hundred thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing 
the same thing too. It's the smart play.


At least they're not doing this in 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Eric Kuhnke]

Except for northwestel/bell and all the subsidies for telesat c-band based
internet and phone in the arctic...

Well actually all of Nunavut would collapse without several billion dollars
from Ottawa every year.

On Aug 11, 2016 6:05 PM, "Paul Stewart"  wrote:

> I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding
> the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over
> the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with
> taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they
> wouldn’t normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion ….
>
>
> > On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> >
> > Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only
> after low hanging fruit.
> > And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only
> applied to those using the PSTN.
> > And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from
> MaBell back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.
> >
> > Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation.
> Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a
> railroad, gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or
> telco, don't be a hater.
> >
> > -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> >
> > They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
> > primary focus going. :)
> >
> > Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
> > throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
> > billions upon billions of taxpayer money?
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
> >  wrote:
> >> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
> >> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
> >>
> >> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
> >> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
> intention
> >> of destroying other companies business.
> >>
> >> Josh Luthman
> >> Office: 937-552-2340
> >> Direct: 937-552-2343
> >> 1100 Wayne St
> >> Suite 1337
> >> Troy, OH 45373
> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
> >>> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
> >>> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
> >>>
> >>> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
> >>> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
> >>> projects / labs) will.
> >>>
> >>> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
> >>> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
> >>> strategy.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
> >>>  wrote:
> >>> > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> >>> > the
> >>> > cancelled projects.
> >>> >
> >>> > Josh Luthman
> >>> > Office: 937-552-2340
> >>> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> >>> > 1100 Wayne St
> >>> > Suite 1337
> >>> > Troy, OH 45373
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can
> tell
> >>> >> you
> >>> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
> >>> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole
> owners
> >>> >> (read
> >>> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more
> of
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose
> and
> >>> >> San
> >>> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money
> than
> >>> >> Google
> >>> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that
> cities
> >>> >> would
> >>> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
> >>> >> existing
> >>> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
> >>> >> Google
> >>> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had
> with
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
> >>> >> Kansas
> >>> >> City did).
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
> >>> >> their
> >>> >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on >>
> pre-sign
> >>> >> ups
> >>> >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic
> problem >> in
> >>> >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This
> >> also
> >>> >> drove up costs.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Google is still 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Eric Kuhnke]

That $107 was after several splits as well, right?

On Aug 11, 2016 6:02 PM, "Paul Stewart"  wrote:

> Yup .. and I sold out after much debate….$808 a share - originally bought
> at $293 so I’m happy… Also sold out of Apple shares this week - bought in
> at $1.03 (yup, back in 2002) and sold at $107 … really really happy about
> that return ….
>
> Not all my trades have this level of success but these definitely outweigh
> the losses many times over ;)
>
>
> >> On 8/11/16 17:30, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> >>>
> >>> "Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
> >>> all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
> >>> worth $555 billion."
> >>>
> >>> "The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
> >>> envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
> >>> 15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.
> >>>
> >>> That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
> >>> Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
> >>> billion in 2017."
> >>>
> >>> So, that may take awhile there Robert.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Or they'll become Weyland-Yutani or Umbrella.
> >>
> >> What do you think about pre-breakup AT? Was the Bell system
> divestiture
> >> wrong?
> >>
> >> ~Seth
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Mike Hammett]

Right, but it's just taking money away from other USDA telecom programs, which 
were LEC only. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:17:15 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 

CAF is a very new thing and USAC administers it. 

-Original Message- 
From: Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:48 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 

CAF? Until recently that was only opened to LECs, and the bar seemed 
very low for proving "service" in an area. 

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote: 
> LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans. And with ROR 
> regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs. If your 
> revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges 
> are split up according to need. But no taxes are touched. Without ROR 
> regulation there would only be good utilities in cities. 
> 
> -Original Message- From: Paul Stewart 
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM 
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 
> 
> I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding 
> the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over 
> the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with 
> taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they 
> wouldn’t normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion …. 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote: 
>> 
>> Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only 
>> after low hanging fruit. 
>> And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied 
>> to those using the PSTN. 
>> And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
>> back in the day. It was a replacement to make them whole. 
>> 
>> Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. 
>> Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a 
>> railroad, 
>> gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or telco, 
>> don't be a hater. 
>> 
>> -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds 
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM 
>> To: af@afmug.com 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 
>> 
>> They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their 
>> primary focus going. :) 
>> 
>> Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to 
>> throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received 
>> billions upon billions of taxpayer money? 
>> 
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman 
>> 
>>  wrote: 
>>> 
>>> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money. Now Gmail kind of 
>>> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product). 
>>> 
>>> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a 
>>> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the 
>>> intention 
>>> of destroying other companies business. 
>>> 
>>> Josh Luthman 
>>> Office: 937-552-2340 
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 
>>> 1100 Wayne St 
>>> Suite 1337 
>>> Troy, OH 45373 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote: 
 
 
 You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look 
 at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be 
 hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well. 
 
 They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards, 
 drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret 
 projects / labs) will. 
 
 Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects, 
 so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business 
 strategy. 
 
 On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman 
  wrote: 
 > Who is we? I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all 
 > the 
 > cancelled projects. 
 > 
 > Josh Luthman 
 > Office: 937-552-2340 
 > Direct: 937-552-2343 
 > 1100 Wayne St 
 > Suite 1337 
 > Troy, OH 45373 
 > 
 > 
 > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  
 > wrote: 
 >> 
 >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can >> 
 >> tell 
 >> you 
 >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the 
 >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole >> 
 >> owners 
 >> (read 
 >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more 
 >> of 
 >> the 
 >> project deigns 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier

Common carriage dates to the Roman Empire.  How things got done.

As a provider of last resort (POLR) LECS have a "duty to serve".
They must serve irrespective of the economics of the situation.  If it is 
tariffed, you gotta sell it, even at a loss.  That is the law.


Do you want a piece of that action???

This nation has a goal of "Universal Service".  That does not happen in 
areas that are uneconomic to serve without the pooling mechanisms.


Providing reliable 911 service to every jackrabbit and sagebrush that wants 
it costs a ton of money.

Hate it all you want but the system got the job done.

Millennials and younger believe that broadband should be ubiquitous, a 
birthright,  dial tone is worthless.   They have no problem stealing wifi 
wherever they can.


OK, fine, now every jackrabbit and gets broadband.  Free broadband for all, 
right Hillary...


Well how about central heating districts in the rural areas, and water and 
sewer.  How about mass transit to the farm.

Perhaps the grand canyon needs a subway system.

Where do you draw the line?
Who draws the line?



-Original Message- 
From: Chuck McCown

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:28 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans.  And with ROR
regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs.  If your
revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges
are split up according to need.  But no taxes are touched.  Without ROR
regulation there would only be good utilities in cities.

-Original Message- 
From: Paul Stewart

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding
the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over
the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with
taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they wouldn’t
normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion ….



On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only 
after low hanging fruit.
And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied 
to those using the PSTN.
And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.


Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. 
Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a 
railroad, gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or 
telco, don't be a hater.


-Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the 
intention

of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:


You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> the
> cancelled projects.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
>> tell

>> you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole 
>> owners

>> (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

CAF is a very new thing and USAC administers it.

-Original Message- 
From: Josh Reynolds

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

CAF? Until recently that was only opened to LECs, and the bar seemed
very low for proving "service" in an area.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans.  And with ROR
regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs.  If your
revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges
are split up according to need.  But no taxes are touched.  Without ROR
regulation there would only be good utilities in cities.

-Original Message- From: Paul Stewart
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding
the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over
the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with
taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they
wouldn’t normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion ….



On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only
after low hanging fruit.
And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied
to those using the PSTN.
And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell
back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.

Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation.
Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a 
railroad,

gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or telco,
don't be a hater.

-Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman

 wrote:


Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
intention
of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:



You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> the
> cancelled projects.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can >>
>> tell
>> you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole >>
>> owners
>> (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more 
>> of

>> the
>> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose 
>> and

>> San
>> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money 
>> than

>> Google
>> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that >>
>> cities
>> would
>> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
>> existing
>> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
>> Google
>> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had 
>> with

>> the
>> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
>> Kansas
>> City did).
>>
>> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
>> their
>> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on >> >>
>> pre-sign
>> ups
>> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem
>> >>  >> in
>> planning construction 

Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

[Brandon Yuchasz]

What degree antenna are you using at the site? What type of noise floor and SM 
signals? We are moving away from 900 on our network but I spent a lot of time 
managing our 900 connections in the past and got pretty creative in the ways we 
squeezed more out of it.

 

Best regards,

Brandon Yuchasz

GogebicRange.net

www.gogebicrange.net  

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Gray
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

 

I was really hoping to buy some time on these customers with high 
re-registrations. It looks like I just need to find a new band. I can't cut 
down my frequency list since it is a remote site and I sometimes need to swap 
channels just to get a radio to register at all.

 

Time try some 2.4 at this spot.




 

 

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

Like primary channel and backup channels?

Seems like they could store in RAM what the most recently connected channel 
was, and scan that channel a few times before going through the whole scan 
list.  Seems like it would reduce the service impact of a re-reg.  Just 
sayin
Is Aaron Schneider listening today?



-- Original Message --
From: "Matt" 
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Sent: 8/10/2016 6:06:34 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

 If you go into the affected SM and disable all channels except for the one
 the AP is on then it will register faster.  This doesn't stop the re-reging
 but makes it less noticeable.

 I'm generally against that because then you can't change channels, but
 sometimes you do what you have to do.


I really wish Canopy had a feature to only scan certain channels for X
minutes, if unable to register in that time frame switch to another
bigger channel group to scan.  That way if you are forced too switch
to a different channel and width due to interference etc. you can at
least get your SM's back on the AP.

 

 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Reynolds]

CAF? Until recently that was only opened to LECs, and the bar seemed
very low for proving "service" in an area.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans.  And with ROR
> regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs.  If your
> revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges
> are split up according to need.  But no taxes are touched.  Without ROR
> regulation there would only be good utilities in cities.
>
> -Original Message- From: Paul Stewart
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
> I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding
> the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over
> the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with
> taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they
> wouldn’t normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion ….
>
>
>> On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>>
>> Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only
>> after low hanging fruit.
>> And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied
>> to those using the PSTN.
>> And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell
>> back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.
>>
>> Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation.
>> Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a railroad,
>> gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or telco,
>> don't be a hater.
>>
>> -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>>
>> They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
>> primary focus going. :)
>>
>> Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
>> throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
>> billions upon billions of taxpayer money?
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
>>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
>>> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
>>>
>>> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
>>> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
>>> intention
>>> of destroying other companies business.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:


 You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
 at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
 hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

 They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
 drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
 projects / labs) will.

 Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
 so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
 strategy.

 On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
  wrote:
 > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
 > the
 > cancelled projects.
 >
 > Josh Luthman
 > Office: 937-552-2340
 > Direct: 937-552-2343
 > 1100 Wayne St
 > Suite 1337
 > Troy, OH 45373
 >
 >
 > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
 > wrote:
 >>
 >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can >>
 >> tell
 >> you
 >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
 >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole >>
 >> owners
 >> (read
 >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
 >> the
 >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
 >> San
 >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
 >> Google
 >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that >>
 >> cities
 >> would
 >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
 >> existing
 >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
 >> Google
 >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
 >> the
 >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
 >> Kansas
 >> City did).
 >>
 >> Google was also of the impression that they could design 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Mike Hammett]

and WISPs and third party fiber providers and cable companies. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:28:18 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 

LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans. And with ROR 
regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs. If your 
revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges 
are split up according to need. But no taxes are touched. Without ROR 
regulation there would only be good utilities in cities. 

-Original Message- 
From: Paul Stewart 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 

I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding 
the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over 
the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with 
taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they wouldn’t 
normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion …. 


> On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote: 
> 
> Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only 
> after low hanging fruit. 
> And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied 
> to those using the PSTN. 
> And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
> back in the day. It was a replacement to make them whole. 
> 
> Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. 
> Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a 
> railroad, gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or 
> telco, don't be a hater. 
> 
> -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds 
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM 
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? 
> 
> They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their 
> primary focus going. :) 
> 
> Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to 
> throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received 
> billions upon billions of taxpayer money? 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman 
>  wrote: 
>> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money. Now Gmail kind of 
>> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product). 
>> 
>> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a 
>> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the 
>> intention 
>> of destroying other companies business. 
>> 
>> Josh Luthman 
>> Office: 937-552-2340 
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 
>> 1100 Wayne St 
>> Suite 1337 
>> Troy, OH 45373 
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote: 
>>> 
>>> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look 
>>> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be 
>>> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well. 
>>> 
>>> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards, 
>>> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret 
>>> projects / labs) will. 
>>> 
>>> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects, 
>>> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business 
>>> strategy. 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman 
>>>  wrote: 
>>> > Who is we? I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all 
>>> > the 
>>> > cancelled projects. 
>>> > 
>>> > Josh Luthman 
>>> > Office: 937-552-2340 
>>> > Direct: 937-552-2343 
>>> > 1100 Wayne St 
>>> > Suite 1337 
>>> > Troy, OH 45373 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  
>>> > wrote: 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
>>> >> tell 
>>> >> you 
>>> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the 
>>> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole 
>>> >> owners 
>>> >> (read 
>>> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of 
>>> >> the 
>>> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and 
>>> >> San 
>>> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than 
>>> >> Google 
>>> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that 
>>> >> cities 
>>> >> would 
>>> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much 
>>> >> existing 
>>> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think 
>>> >> Google 
>>> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with 
>>> >> the 
>>> >> first cities who applied for Google to come 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

LECS in the US generally get pretty low interest loans.  And with ROR 
regulation you are guaranteed that you can cover your costs.  If your 
revenue is deficient then the pooled USF and long distance access charges 
are split up according to need.  But no taxes are touched.  Without ROR 
regulation there would only be good utilities in cities.


-Original Message- 
From: Paul Stewart

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding 
the ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over 
the years but those phone networks were never actually *built* with 
taxpayers dollars - some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they wouldn’t 
normally serve and stuff but that’s different in my opinion ….




On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only 
after low hanging fruit.
And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied 
to those using the PSTN.
And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.


Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. 
Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a 
railroad, gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or 
telco, don't be a hater.


-Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the 
intention

of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:


You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> the
> cancelled projects.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can 
>> tell

>> you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole 
>> owners

>> (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
>> the
>> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
>> San
>> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
>> Google
>> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that 
>> cities

>> would
>> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
>> existing
>> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
>> Google
>> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
>> the
>> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
>> Kansas
>> City did).
>>
>> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
>> their
>> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on >> 
>> pre-sign

>> ups
>> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem 
>>  >> in
>> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This >> 
>> also

>> drove up costs.
>>
>> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
>> from
>> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where >> 
>> they

>> can.
>> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
>> construction
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Paul Stewart]

I hear the same thing in Canada all the time about the “taxpayers” funding the 
ILEC’s …. yes, there has been subsidy and grants and other stuff over the years 
but those phone networks were never actually *built* with taxpayers dollars - 
some LEC’s got funding to expand into areas they wouldn’t normally serve and 
stuff but that’s different in my opinion …. 


> On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:58 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> 
> Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only after 
> low hanging fruit.
> And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied to 
> those using the PSTN.
> And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
> back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.
> 
> Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. Just 
> because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a railroad, gas 
> company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or telco, don't be 
> a hater.
> 
> -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> 
> They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
> primary focus going. :)
> 
> Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
> throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
> billions upon billions of taxpayer money?
> 
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
>  wrote:
>> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
>> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
>> 
>> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
>> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention
>> of destroying other companies business.
>> 
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>>> 
>>> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
>>> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
>>> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
>>> 
>>> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
>>> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
>>> projects / labs) will.
>>> 
>>> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
>>> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
>>> strategy.
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
>>>  wrote:
>>> > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
>>> > the
>>> > cancelled projects.
>>> >
>>> > Josh Luthman
>>> > Office: 937-552-2340
>>> > Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> > 1100 Wayne St
>>> > Suite 1337
>>> > Troy, OH 45373
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell
>>> >> you
>>> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>>> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
>>> >> (read
>>> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
>>> >> the
>>> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
>>> >> San
>>> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
>>> >> Google
>>> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities
>>> >> would
>>> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
>>> >> existing
>>> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
>>> >> Google
>>> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
>>> >> the
>>> >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
>>> >> Kansas
>>> >> City did).
>>> >>
>>> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
>>> >> their
>>> >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on >> 
>>> >> pre-sign
>>> >> ups
>>> >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem >> 
>>> >> in
>>> >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This >> 
>>> >> also
>>> >> drove up costs.
>>> >>
>>> >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
>>> >> from
>>> >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>>> >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where >> 
>>> >> they
>>> >> can.
>>> >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
>>> >> construction
>>> >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
>>> >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Paul Stewart]

Yup .. and I sold out after much debate….$808 a share - originally bought at 
$293 so I’m happy… Also sold out of Apple shares this week - bought in at $1.03 
(yup, back in 2002) and sold at $107 … really really happy about that return ….

Not all my trades have this level of success but these definitely outweigh the 
losses many times over ;)


>> On 8/11/16 17:30, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>>> 
>>> "Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
>>> all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
>>> worth $555 billion."
>>> 
>>> "The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
>>> envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
>>> 15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.
>>> 
>>> That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
>>> Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
>>> billion in 2017."
>>> 
>>> So, that may take awhile there Robert.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Or they'll become Weyland-Yutani or Umbrella.
>> 
>> What do you think about pre-breakup AT? Was the Bell system divestiture
>> wrong?
>> 
>> ~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

Thing is, they are not throwing a wrench into rural ILECs they go only after 
low hanging fruit.
And nobody has received ANY taxpayer money, the USF is a fee only applied to 
those using the PSTN.
And that fee replaces the old AT line haul payment they got from MaBell 
back in the day.  It was a replacement to make them whole.


Rate or return regulation is 100 years old and has built a great nation. 
Just because you did not achieve pioneers preference by starting a railroad, 
gas company, electric company, bus line, truck line, airline, or telco, 
don't be a hater.


-Original Message- 
From: Josh Reynolds

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 6:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention
of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:


You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> the
> cancelled projects.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell
>> you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
>> (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
>> the
>> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
>> San
>> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
>> Google
>> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities
>> would
>> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
>> existing
>> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
>> Google
>> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
>> the
>> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
>> Kansas
>> City did).
>>
>> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
>> their
>> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on 
>> pre-sign

>> ups
>> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem 
>> in
>> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This 
>> also

>> drove up costs.
>>
>> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
>> from
>> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where 
>> they

>> can.
>> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
>> construction
>> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
>> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU
>> cases.
>> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it
>> risky
>> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take 
>> rate

>> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity
>> short
>> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
>> interference and capacity.
>>
>> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to 
>> do

>> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from
>> the
>> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD
>> and
>> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks
>> are too
>> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about.
>> Google is
>> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

Bell breakup was one of the biggest stimulus of technology in modern 
times.  It was also the ruination of one of the most reliable pieces of 
technology of modern times.   On the scales of history it will be a huge 
success by itself.  Considering the re-creation of at*t into a nasty 
little company with big teeth, it's a horrible result...


On 08/11/2016 05:41 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:

On 8/11/16 17:30, Josh Reynolds wrote:

"Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
worth $555 billion."

"The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.

That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
billion in 2017."

So, that may take awhile there Robert.



Or they'll become Weyland-Yutani or Umbrella.

What do you think about pre-breakup AT? Was the Bell system
divestiture wrong?

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Reynolds]

They got bigger than ever after the breakup + reacquisition.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:41 PM, Seth Mattinen  wrote:
> On 8/11/16 17:30, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>>
>> "Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
>> all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
>> worth $555 billion."
>>
>> "The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
>> envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
>> 15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.
>>
>> That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
>> Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
>> billion in 2017."
>>
>> So, that may take awhile there Robert.
>
>
>
> Or they'll become Weyland-Yutani or Umbrella.
>
> What do you think about pre-breakup AT? Was the Bell system divestiture
> wrong?
>
> ~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

ads are the search engine...   Gmail making money would be part of the 
app sales...


On 08/11/2016 05:40 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Remember Gmail has ads

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


On Aug 11, 2016 8:31 PM, "Robert Andrews" > wrote:

Gmail just feeds the search engine..  Actual revenue from gmail...
not so much...

On 08/11/2016 03:47 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail
kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time
respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
intention of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds" 
>> wrote:

 You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have
accomplished. Look
 at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all
will be
 hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

 They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless
cards,
 drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X"
(secret
 projects / labs) will.

 Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet
projects,
 so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart
business
 strategy.

 On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 
>>
 wrote:
  > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage
generator, look at
 all the
  > cancelled projects.
  >
  > Josh Luthman
  > Office: 937-552-2340 
>
  > Direct: 937-552-2343 
>
  > 1100 Wayne St
  > Suite 1337
  > Troy, OH 45373
  >
  >
  > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"
 
>> wrote:
  >>
  >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber
projects, I
 can tell you
  >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take
pause on the
  >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude
of pole
 owners (read
  >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced
a lot
 more of the
  >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities
like San
 Jose and San
  >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost
more money
 than Google
  >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the
idea that
 cities would
  >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city.
With so
 much existing
  >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the
case. I
 think Google
  >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like
they had
 with the
  >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities
 (Like Kansas
  >> City did).
  >>
  >> Google was also of the impression that they could
design and
 permit their
  >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy
based on
 pre-sign ups
  >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge
logistic
 problem in
  >> planning construction especially with underground
deployment.
 This also
  >> drove up costs.
  >>
  >> Google is still investigating the wireless options.
What you
 will see from
  >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy
up dark fiber,
  >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber
systems
 where they can.
  >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or
bridge high
 construction
  >> cost 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Seth Mattinen]

On 8/11/16 17:30, Josh Reynolds wrote:

"Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
worth $555 billion."

"The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.

That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
billion in 2017."

So, that may take awhile there Robert.



Or they'll become Weyland-Yutani or Umbrella.

What do you think about pre-breakup AT? Was the Bell system 
divestiture wrong?


~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

It took a long while for MS to hit the slippery slope   And in worth 
at the time, MS was better off than google...   Yes search is growing 
like crazy still, but they see the scary part of the curve ahead..  It's 
a great company but is it IBM great?  is it PG great?  That is the proof 
of decades of success...   But that's because I'm old now and respect 
success/time a million times more than I did even when I was 40...   In 
10+ year of serious $$$ outlay they haven't gotten a success 1/10th of 
search... and their bigger successes at even that levels have been 
purchases...


On 08/11/2016 05:30 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/10/investing/google-alphabet-all-time-high/

"Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
worth $555 billion."

"The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.

That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
billion in 2017."

So, that may take awhile there Robert.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Robert Andrews  wrote:

Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company..
They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  & yes they will
eventually go down because of it...

On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:


Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
(in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can.
They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction
cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short
hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too
far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have
a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
the eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
engineering talent in the world on their payroll?

They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

Remember Gmail has ads

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

On Aug 11, 2016 8:31 PM, "Robert Andrews"  wrote:

> Gmail just feeds the search engine..  Actual revenue from gmail...  not so
> much...
>
> On 08/11/2016 03:47 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
>> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
>> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
>>
>> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
>> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
>> intention of destroying other companies business.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds" > > wrote:
>>
>> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
>> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
>> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
>>
>> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
>> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
>> projects / labs) will.
>>
>> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
>> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
>> strategy.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
>> >
>> wrote:
>>  > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at
>> all the
>>  > cancelled projects.
>>  >
>>  > Josh Luthman
>>  > Office: 937-552-2340 
>>  > Direct: 937-552-2343 
>>  > 1100 Wayne St
>>  > Suite 1337
>>  > Troy, OH 45373
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"
>> > wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I
>> can tell you
>>  >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on
>> the
>>  >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole
>> owners (read
>>  >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot
>> more of the
>>  >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San
>> Jose and San
>>  >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money
>> than Google
>>  >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that
>> cities would
>>  >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so
>> much existing
>>  >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I
>> think Google
>>  >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had
>> with the
>>  >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities
>> (Like Kansas
>>  >> City did).
>>  >>
>>  >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and
>> permit their
>>  >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on
>> pre-sign ups
>>  >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic
>> problem in
>>  >> planning construction especially with underground deployment.
>> This also
>>  >> drove up costs.
>>  >>
>>  >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you
>> will see from
>>  >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark
>> fiber,
>>  >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems
>> where they can.
>>  >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
>> construction
>>  >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at
>> wireless to
>>  >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in
>> MDU cases.
>>  >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU
>> makes it risky
>>  >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge
>> take rate
>>  >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high
>> capacity short
>>  >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with
>> spectrum,
>>  >> interference and capacity.
>>  >>
>>  >> While we all would think Google is a great company with
>> resources to do
>>  >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot
>> from the
>>  >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings
>> with ADD and
>>  >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older
>> folks are too
>>  >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking
>> about. Google is
>>  >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

DSL?  Look where they're deploying.  They're fighting cable companies with
15 meg as the smallest offered plan.

Now if they were doing rural stuff hooking up people that need something at
least 5 or 10 meg that's another story.

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

On Aug 11, 2016 8:16 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

> They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
> primary focus going. :)
>
> Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
> throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
> billions upon billions of taxpayer money?
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
>  wrote:
> > Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
> > does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
> >
> > They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
> > company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
> intention
> > of destroying other companies business.
> >
> > Josh Luthman
> > Office: 937-552-2340
> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> > 1100 Wayne St
> > Suite 1337
> > Troy, OH 45373
> >
> >
> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
> >>
> >> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
> >> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
> >> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
> >>
> >> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
> >> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
> >> projects / labs) will.
> >>
> >> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
> >> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
> >> strategy.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
> >> > the
> >> > cancelled projects.
> >> >
> >> > Josh Luthman
> >> > Office: 937-552-2340
> >> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> >> > 1100 Wayne St
> >> > Suite 1337
> >> > Troy, OH 45373
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can
> tell
> >> >> you
> >> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
> >> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole
> owners
> >> >> (read
> >> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
> >> >> the
> >> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
> >> >> San
> >> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
> >> >> Google
> >> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that
> cities
> >> >> would
> >> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
> >> >> existing
> >> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
> >> >> Google
> >> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
> >> >> the
> >> >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
> >> >> Kansas
> >> >> City did).
> >> >>
> >> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
> >> >> their
> >> >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on
> pre-sign
> >> >> ups
> >> >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem
> in
> >> >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This
> also
> >> >> drove up costs.
> >> >>
> >> >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
> >> >> from
> >> >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
> >> >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where
> they
> >> >> can.
> >> >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
> >> >> construction
> >> >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless
> to
> >> >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU
> >> >> cases.
> >> >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it
> >> >> risky
> >> >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take
> rate
> >> >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity
> >> >> short
> >> >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
> >> >> interference and capacity.
> >> >>
> >> >> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to
> do
> >> >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from
> >> >> the
> >> >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with
> ADD
> >> >> and
> >> >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

If the google fiber was a success it would be paying the way for the new 
deployments...   The halt is proof that it isn't.   The creation of the 
parent company was the proof that the blood letting was killing the 
golden calf...   Fat dumb and happy...   Just like smaller companies 
want them to be...


On 08/11/2016 05:16 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention
of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:


You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
the
cancelled projects.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
wrote:


Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell
you
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
(read
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
the
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
San
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
Google
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities
would
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
existing
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
Google
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
the
first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
Kansas
City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
their
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign
ups
(in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
from
them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they
can.
They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
construction
cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU
cases.
Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it
risky
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity
short
hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from
the
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD
and
too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks
are too
far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about.
Google is
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people,
tools
and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they
have
a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not
real
good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel
through
the eye of a needle.

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

Gmail just feeds the search engine..  Actual revenue from gmail...  not 
so much...


On 08/11/2016 03:47 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the
intention of destroying other companies business.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds" > wrote:

You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
>
wrote:
 > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at
all the
 > cancelled projects.
 >
 > Josh Luthman
 > Office: 937-552-2340 
 > Direct: 937-552-2343 
 > 1100 Wayne St
 > Suite 1337
 > Troy, OH 45373
 >
 >
 > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"
> wrote:
 >>
 >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I
can tell you
 >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
 >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole
owners (read
 >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot
more of the
 >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San
Jose and San
 >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money
than Google
 >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that
cities would
 >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so
much existing
 >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I
think Google
 >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had
with the
 >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities
(Like Kansas
 >> City did).
 >>
 >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and
permit their
 >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on
pre-sign ups
 >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic
problem in
 >> planning construction especially with underground deployment.
This also
 >> drove up costs.
 >>
 >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you
will see from
 >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
 >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems
where they can.
 >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
construction
 >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at
wireless to
 >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in
MDU cases.
 >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU
makes it risky
 >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge
take rate
 >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high
capacity short
 >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with
spectrum,
 >> interference and capacity.
 >>
 >> While we all would think Google is a great company with
resources to do
 >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot
from the
 >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings
with ADD and
 >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older
folks are too
 >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking
about. Google is
 >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the
people, tools
 >> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders
and they have
 >> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are
not real
 >> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.
 >>
 >> Thank You,
 >> Brian Webster
 >> www.wirelessmapping.com 
 >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com 
 >>
 >> -Original Message-
 >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Reynolds]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/10/investing/google-alphabet-all-time-high/

"Shares of Google parent company Alphabet (GOOGL, Tech30) hit an
all-time high Tuesday of more than $813 a share. The company is now
worth $555 billion."

"The company is still growing at a rate that would make most companies
envious. Analysts are forecasting that profits will increase more than
15% this year and that sales will be up 20%.

That's truly remarkable when you consider just how colossal Google is.
Sales are expected to top $88.5 billion this year and exceed $100
billion in 2017."

So, that may take awhile there Robert.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Robert Andrews  wrote:
> Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company..
> They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  & yes they will
> eventually go down because of it...
>
> On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
>> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
>> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google
>> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would
>> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing
>> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google
>> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
>> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
>> City did).
>>
>> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
>> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
>> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
>> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
>> drove up costs.
>>
>> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
>> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can.
>> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction
>> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
>> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
>> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky
>> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
>> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short
>> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
>> interference and capacity.
>>
>> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
>> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
>> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
>> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too
>> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is
>> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
>> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have
>> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
>> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.
>>
>> Thank You,
>> Brian Webster
>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>>
>> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
>> the eye of a needle.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Josh Reynolds
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>>
>> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.
>>
>> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
>> world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
>> engineering talent in the world on their payroll?
>>
>> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is
>> evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate
>> one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred
>> thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too.
>> It's the smart play.
>>
>> At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying
>> they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies".
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

And look how much of that huge outlay of cash has returned on the 
investment.   After the initial search engine success, android ($), and 
youtube ($$) are the only real moneymakers...  Sorry doing research 
isn't making money...   List their other big moneymakers that haven't 
been acquisitions and aren't based upon their search or hype...


On 08/11/2016 03:32 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the
cancelled projects.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  wrote:


Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
(in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can.
They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction
cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky
to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short
hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too
far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have
a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
the eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
engineering talent in the world on their payroll?

They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is
evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate
one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred
thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too.
It's the smart play.

At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Robert Andrews]

Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd company.. 
 They look at the paper pile before the experience pile...  & yes they 
will eventually go down because of it...


On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster wrote:

Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you 
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the 
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read 
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the 
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San 
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google 
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would 
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing 
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google 
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the first 
cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their 
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups (in 
Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in planning 
construction especially with underground deployment. This also drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from them 
should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber, capacity on lit 
fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can. They may use 
microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction cost areas such 
as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to basically go more from 
the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing competition and/or 
existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky to do a wired play if they 
cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate within the MDU. I see their 
wireless play as more of a high capacity short hop last mile, but even then 
they will have challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do 
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the 
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and too 
much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too far 
behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is 
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and 
skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real good at 
listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through the 
eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world 
though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF engineering 
talent in the world on their payroll?

They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is 
evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate 
one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred thousand 
just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too. It's the 
smart play.

At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying they can't do 
it unless they receive federal subsidies".

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller  
wrote:


Wait until they experience ducting ;)


- Original Message -
From: Bill Prince
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

It's apparently "too expensive" to do underground fiber. At least in
San Jose.

Anyone know anything about Webpass?


bp


On 8/10/2016 9:44 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

Google Fiber considering fixed microwave technology as alternative to
fiber.
Interesting times!

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/google-fiber-del
ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Reynolds]

They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their
primary focus going. :)

Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to
throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received
billions upon billions of taxpayer money?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
> does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
>
> They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
> company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention
> of destroying other companies business.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
>>
>> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
>> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
>> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
>>
>> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
>> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
>> projects / labs) will.
>>
>> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
>> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
>> strategy.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
>>  wrote:
>> > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all
>> > the
>> > cancelled projects.
>> >
>> > Josh Luthman
>> > Office: 937-552-2340
>> > Direct: 937-552-2343
>> > 1100 Wayne St
>> > Suite 1337
>> > Troy, OH 45373
>> >
>> >
>> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell
>> >> you
>> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
>> >> (read
>> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
>> >> the
>> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
>> >> San
>> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
>> >> Google
>> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities
>> >> would
>> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
>> >> existing
>> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
>> >> Google
>> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
>> >> the
>> >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like
>> >> Kansas
>> >> City did).
>> >>
>> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
>> >> their
>> >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign
>> >> ups
>> >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
>> >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
>> >> drove up costs.
>> >>
>> >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
>> >> from
>> >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>> >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they
>> >> can.
>> >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
>> >> construction
>> >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
>> >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU
>> >> cases.
>> >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it
>> >> risky
>> >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
>> >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity
>> >> short
>> >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
>> >> interference and capacity.
>> >>
>> >> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
>> >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from
>> >> the
>> >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD
>> >> and
>> >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks
>> >> are too
>> >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about.
>> >> Google is
>> >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people,
>> >> tools
>> >> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they
>> >> have
>> >> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not
>> >> real
>> >> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.
>> >>
>> >> Thank You,
>> >> Brian Webster
>> >> www.wirelessmapping.com
>> >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>> >>
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[George Skorup]

Exactly what I've been doing. Works great. Except I do the VLAN thing 
backwards. VLAN for the radio management. OSPF /30 go on the physical 
interface for radios that support 802.3 link drop upon RF link loss to 
quickly trigger OSPF topology change.


On 8/11/2016 4:10 PM, Cassidy B. Larson wrote:
A lot of times we want to login to side “B” when the link between A 
and B is down…but we can’t unless each side is advertised as a 
/30..but I want the two radio’s to see each other when they’re up.


So what I’ve done most recently is:
.1 = Router A (configured as /30)
.2 = Radio A (configured as /29, GW set to .1)
.5 = Radio B (configured as /29 GW set to .6)
.6 = Router B (configured as /30)

Then I just run OSPF on a separate /30 across that path on a separate 
VLAN.  The above is just for MGMT of the radios.




On Aug 11, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Gray 
> wrote:


How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be 
accessed (via loop) when the link is down?


*What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:*
I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.

Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B

Devices get addresses:

  * .1 - Router A
  * .2 - Router B
  * .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
  * .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
  * .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
  * .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)

This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when 
there is no network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am 
connected near Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through 
Router A, and I have no access to the B side. Then, I can only access 
the B side if I connect closer to Router B.


Suggestions?

Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money.  Now Gmail kind of
does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).

They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a
company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention
of destroying other companies business.

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

On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

> You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
> at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
> hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.
>
> They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
> drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
> projects / labs) will.
>
> Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
> so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
> strategy.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
>  wrote:
> > Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the
> > cancelled projects.
> >
> > Josh Luthman
> > Office: 937-552-2340
> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> > 1100 Wayne St
> > Suite 1337
> > Troy, OH 45373
> >
> >
> > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell
> you
> >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
> >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
> (read
> >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
> the
> >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
> San
> >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
> Google
> >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities
> would
> >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much
> existing
> >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think
> Google
> >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with
> the
> >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
> >> City did).
> >>
> >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit
> their
> >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign
> ups
> >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
> >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
> >> drove up costs.
> >>
> >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see
> from
> >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
> >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they
> can.
> >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
> construction
> >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
> >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU
> cases.
> >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it
> risky
> >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
> >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity
> short
> >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
> >> interference and capacity.
> >>
> >> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
> >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from
> the
> >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD
> and
> >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks
> are too
> >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about.
> Google is
> >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people,
> tools
> >> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they
> have
> >> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not
> real
> >> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.
> >>
> >> Thank You,
> >> Brian Webster
> >> www.wirelessmapping.com
> >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
> >> To: af@afmug.com
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> >>
> >> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel
> through
> >> the eye of a needle.
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Josh Reynolds
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
> >> To: af@afmug.com
> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> >>
> >> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your
> WISP.
> >>
> >> We're talking about one of the largest and 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

When you have an endless supply of money, no doubt they can generate many 
technical successes.
Creating financial success is a bit more difficult, but if you have free 
marketing and advertising, that really helps.


But they are far from their original motto of "don't be evil".

There is a job title there of "genius" and those with job titles sit in a 
room and throw out ideas.  The ideas are noted and submarine patents are 
filed.  Thousands and thousands of submarine patents.  I know one of the 
patent attorneys.


I think it is laughable that they thought they could just waltz by the hard 
won pole contact agreements that the CATV, Power and Telco have fought about 
for years.  Like Google was going to get some slack because they are Google? 
Yeah right.




-Original Message- 
From: Josh Reynolds

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 4:32 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:

Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the
cancelled projects.

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


On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  wrote:


Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell 
you

there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners 
(read

competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than 
Google
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities 
would
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much 
existing
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think 
Google

thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
City did).

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign 
ups

(in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see 
from

them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they 
can.
They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high 
construction

cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it 
risky

to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity 
short

hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD 
and
too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are 
too
far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google 
is

certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they 
have

a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel 
through

the eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking 

Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

[George Skorup]

Had another site today that popped up with -60 noise floor across the 
band with -45 peaks once in a while. Smart meters everywhere. And they 
haven't even started collecting data yet. And most of this is areas 
where, nope, sorry, you gotta cut down trees to get even satellite. I'm 
so f'n done with 900.


On 8/11/2016 3:38 PM, Christopher Gray wrote:
I was really hoping to buy some time on these customers with high 
re-registrations. It looks like I just need to find a new band. I 
can't cut down my frequency list since it is a remote site and I 
sometimes need to swap channels just to get a radio to register at all.


Time try some 2.4 at this spot.



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Adam Moffett > wrote:


Like primary channel and backup channels?

Seems like they could store in RAM what the most recently
connected channel was, and scan that channel a few times before
going through the whole scan list. Seems like it would reduce the
service impact of a re-reg.  Just sayin
Is Aaron Schneider listening today?



-- Original Message --
From: "Matt" >
To: "af@afmug.com " >
Sent: 8/10/2016 6:06:34 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

 If you go into the affected SM and disable all channels
except for the one
 the AP is on then it will register faster. This doesn't
stop the re-reging
 but makes it less noticeable.

 I'm generally against that because then you can't change
channels, but
 sometimes you do what you have to do.


I really wish Canopy had a feature to only scan certain
channels for X
minutes, if unable to register in that time frame switch to
another
bigger channel group to scan.  That way if you are forced too
switch
to a different channel and width due to interference etc. you
can at
least get your SM's back on the AP.

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Reynolds]

You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look
at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be
hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well.

They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards,
drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret
projects / labs) will.

Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects,
so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business
strategy.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the
> cancelled projects.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  wrote:
>>
>> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
>> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
>> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read
>> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the
>> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San
>> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google
>> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would
>> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing
>> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google
>> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the
>> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas
>> City did).
>>
>> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
>> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
>> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
>> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
>> drove up costs.
>>
>> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
>> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
>> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can.
>> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction
>> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to
>> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases.
>> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky
>> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate
>> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity short
>> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum,
>> interference and capacity.
>>
>> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
>> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
>> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
>> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too
>> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is
>> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools
>> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have
>> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real
>> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input.
>>
>> Thank You,
>> Brian Webster
>> www.wirelessmapping.com
>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>>
>> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
>> the eye of a needle.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Josh Reynolds
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>>
>> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.
>>
>> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
>> world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
>> engineering talent in the world on their payroll?
>>
>> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is
>> evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate
>> one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred
>> thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too.
>> It's the smart play.
>>
>> At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying
>> they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies".
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller
>>  wrote:
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

Who is we?  I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the
cancelled projects.

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

On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"  wrote:

> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you
> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the
> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners
> (read competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of
> the project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and
> San Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than
> Google budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that
> cities would remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so
> much existing broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I
> think Google thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they
> had with the first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities
> (Like Kansas City did).
>
> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their
> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups
> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in
> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also
> drove up costs.
>
> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from
> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber,
> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they
> can. They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high
> construction cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at
> wireless to basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in
> MDU cases. Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU
> makes it risky to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a
> huge take rate within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high
> capacity short hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with
> spectrum, interference and capacity.
>
> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do
> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the
> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and
> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are
> too far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about.
> Google is certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the
> people, tools and skill sets to be one. They are their own best
> cheerleaders and they have a dangerous habit of believing their own hype
> internally and are not real good at listening to fresh viewpoints and
> outside input.
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
> www.wirelessmapping.com
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
> the eye of a needle.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Josh Reynolds
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.
>
> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the
> world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF
> engineering talent in the world on their payroll?
>
> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is
> evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most
> appropriate one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple
> hundred thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same
> thing too. It's the smart play.
>
> At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying
> they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies".
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller <
> par...@cyberbroadband.net> wrote:
> >
> > Wait until they experience ducting ;)
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Bill Prince
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:48 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> >
> > It's apparently "too expensive" to do underground fiber. At least in
> > San Jose.
> >
> > Anyone know anything about Webpass?
> >
> >
> > bp
> > 
> >
> > On 8/10/2016 9:44 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
> >
> > Google Fiber considering fixed microwave technology as alternative to
> > fiber.
> > Interesting times!
> >
> > http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/google-fiber-del
> > 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Brian Webster]

Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell you 
there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the 
deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners (read 
competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of the 
project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and San 
Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than Google 
budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities would 
remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much existing 
broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think Google 
thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with the first 
cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas City did). 

Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit their 
networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign ups (in 
Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in planning 
construction especially with underground deployment. This also drove up costs.

Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see from them 
should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber, capacity on lit 
fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they can. They may use 
microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high construction cost areas such 
as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to basically go more from 
the curb to the customer, especially in MDU cases. Existing competition and/or 
existing contracts within an MDU makes it risky to do a wired play if they 
cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate within the MDU. I see their 
wireless play as more of a high capacity short hop last mile, but even then 
they will have challenges with spectrum, interference and capacity.

While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do 
whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from the 
inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD and too 
much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks are too far 
behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. Google is 
certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, tools and 
skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they have a 
dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not real good at 
listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input. 

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through the 
eye of a needle.

-Original Message-
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.

We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world 
though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF engineering 
talent in the world on their payroll?

They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is 
evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most appropriate 
one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred thousand 
just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing too. It's the 
smart play.

At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying they 
can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies".

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller  
wrote:
>
> Wait until they experience ducting ;)
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Bill Prince
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
> It's apparently "too expensive" to do underground fiber. At least in 
> San Jose.
>
> Anyone know anything about Webpass?
>
>
> bp
> 
>
> On 8/10/2016 9:44 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
>
> Google Fiber considering fixed microwave technology as alternative to 
> fiber.
> Interesting times!
>
> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/google-fiber-del
> ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1
>
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[jesse . dupont]

You can also leave it as you have it and setup a src-nat on router b (and a, 
for that matter) so that traffic to the radio ip is source natted to the 
router's iface /29. Then the gateways don't matter and whichever end is up will 
advertise the prefix and either radio is accessible.


Get Outlook for Android






On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 3:02 PM -0600, "Christopher Gray" 
 wrote:










How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed (via 
loop) when the link is down?
What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:I've been setting up OSPF links 
using a /29.

Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B
Devices get addresses:.1 - Router A.2 - Router B.3 - Radio A (Gateway set to 
.1).4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2).5 - Spare (used when swapping links).6 - 
Spare (used when swapping links)This feels very clean, and works nicely when 
the link is up or when there is no network loop. However, when the link goes 
down, if I am connected near Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed 
through Router A, and I have no access to the B side. Then, I can only access 
the B side if I connect closer to Router B.
Suggestions?
Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[Kurt Fankhauser]

Depending on how you monitor your network setting the radios up so that you
can access them both when the link is down may be a bad thing. I use the
dude to monitor and if the link goes down you wouldn't get notification if
the remote radio was still accessible. This is how I do it:

/24 subnet (private 10.0.0.0/24)

.2 Router A
.3 Radio A
.4 Radio B
.5 Router B

If i need to get to radio B while the link is down i can disable the
interface and OSPF network for that interface on Router A and then log into
Router B and change the interface IP to .2. Then i can get to the remote
radio.

It takes a little bit more work but in my view is a whole lot easier to
keep track of IPs.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Dennis Burgess 
wrote:

> /30s are the simplest, you can use /32 addressing on the link between the
> two MTs.Or get a radio that is smart enough to handle two gateways with
> checks J  Out of band management radios are better yet /J
>
>
>
> [image: DennisBurgessSignature]
>
> www.linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 x103 – dmburg...@linktechs.net
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Cassidy B. Larson
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 4:10 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?
>
>
>
> A lot of times we want to login to side “B” when the link between A and B
> is down…but we can’t unless each side is advertised as a /30..but I want
> the two radio’s to see each other when they’re up.
>
>
>
> So what I’ve done most recently is:
>
> .1 = Router A (configured as /30)
>
> .2 = Radio A (configured as /29, GW set to .1)
>
> .5 = Radio B (configured as /29 GW set to .6)
>
> .6 = Router B (configured as /30)
>
>
> Then I just run OSPF on a separate /30 across that path on a separate
> VLAN.  The above is just for MGMT of the radios.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Gray 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed
> (via loop) when the link is down?
>
>
>
> *What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:*
>
> I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.
>
>
>
> Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B
>
>
>
> Devices get addresses:
>
>- .1 - Router A
>- .2 - Router B
>- .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
>- .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
>- .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
>- .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)
>
> This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when there
> is no network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am connected
> near Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through Router A, and I
> have no access to the B side. Then, I can only access the B side if I
> connect closer to Router B.
>
>
>
> Suggestions?
>
>
>
> Thanks - Chris
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[Dennis Burgess]

/30s are the simplest, you can use /32 addressing on the link between the two 
MTs.Or get a radio that is smart enough to handle two gateways with checks 
☺  Out of band management radios are better yet /☺

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

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Cassidy B. Larson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 4:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

A lot of times we want to login to side “B” when the link between A and B is 
down…but we can’t unless each side is advertised as a /30..but I want the two 
radio’s to see each other when they’re up.

So what I’ve done most recently is:
.1 = Router A (configured as /30)
.2 = Radio A (configured as /29, GW set to .1)
.5 = Radio B (configured as /29 GW set to .6)
.6 = Router B (configured as /30)

Then I just run OSPF on a separate /30 across that path on a separate VLAN.  
The above is just for MGMT of the radios.





On Aug 11, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Gray 
> wrote:

How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed (via 
loop) when the link is down?

What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:
I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.

Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B

Devices get addresses:

  *   .1 - Router A
  *   .2 - Router B
  *   .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
  *   .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
  *   .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
  *   .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)
This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when there is no 
network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am connected near Router 
A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through Router A, and I have no access to 
the B side. Then, I can only access the B side if I connect closer to Router B.

Suggestions?

Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[Cassidy B. Larson]

A lot of times we want to login to side “B” when the link between A and B is 
down…but we can’t unless each side is advertised as a /30..but I want the two 
radio’s to see each other when they’re up. 

So what I’ve done most recently is:
.1 = Router A (configured as /30)
.2 = Radio A (configured as /29, GW set to .1)
.5 = Radio B (configured as /29 GW set to .6)
.6 = Router B (configured as /30)

Then I just run OSPF on a separate /30 across that path on a separate VLAN.  
The above is just for MGMT of the radios. 



> On Aug 11, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Gray  
> wrote:
> 
> How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed (via 
> loop) when the link is down?
> 
> What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:
> I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.
> 
> Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B
> 
> Devices get addresses:
> .1 - Router A
> .2 - Router B
> .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
> .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
> .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
> .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)
> This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when there is 
> no network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am connected near 
> Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through Router A, and I have no 
> access to the B side. Then, I can only access the B side if I connect closer 
> to Router B.
> 
> Suggestions?
> 
> Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[Josh Reynolds]

Connect using the loopback /32

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Christopher Gray
 wrote:
> How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed (via
> loop) when the link is down?
>
> What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:
> I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.
>
> Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B
>
> Devices get addresses:
>
> .1 - Router A
> .2 - Router B
> .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
> .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
> .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
> .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)
>
> This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when there is
> no network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am connected near
> Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through Router A, and I have no
> access to the B side. Then, I can only access the B side if I connect closer
> to Router B.
>
> Suggestions?
>
> Thanks - Chris

[AFMUG] Access Both Sides of Downed Link Using OSPF?

[Christopher Gray]

How do you setup radio addresses so both ends of a link can be accessed
(via loop) when the link is down?

*What I've been doing... and how it doesn't work:*
I've been setting up OSPF links using a /29.

Router A -- Radio A ~~ Radio B -- Router B

Devices get addresses:

   - .1 - Router A
   - .2 - Router B
   - .3 - Radio A (Gateway set to .1)
   - .4 - Radio B (Gateway set to .2)
   - .5 - Spare (used when swapping links)
   - .6 - Spare (used when swapping links)

This feels very clean, and works nicely when the link is up or when there
is no network loop. However, when the link goes down, if I am connected
near Router A, all traffic for that /29 is routed through Router A, and I
have no access to the B side. Then, I can only access the B side if I
connect closer to Router B.

Suggestions?

Thanks - Chris

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

That makes sense.

I think there might be ways to handle the lien so that it’s not a big stigma 
for the property owner.

I’m willing to try it and handle the aftermath.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Roger Timmerman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 2:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

I would recommend steering away from a Special Assessment Area as a mechanism 
for funding FTTx.  A bond with an SAA repayment still needs some form of 
backstop and in the case of Brigham City, the city placed liens on the 
properties as the backstop to the bonds.  It worked to get the bond and fund 
the build, but resulted in lots of not-so-happy people.  We don't plan on doing 
that ever again and connect customers now under our normal bond/debt structure 
with no liens.

As far as Perry City, UTOPIA collectively paid for the conduit, and we did 
finish that city so anyone in the city can get services there now.  Obviously, 
it wasn't in our best interests to let someone else come use that conduit.

Steer as far from RUS as possible.  The most devastating mishap in UTOPIA's 
history was using RUS loans to fund several builds and then have RUS mess it 
up.  After many years of legal fighting we finally settled with them last year. 
 Never again!  This was the cause for the Perry City completion delay where it 
may have appeared to be an abandoned project for a few years.

Roger



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
Tell them you are adjoining Eagle Mountain...

-Original Message- From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Thanks for that, I'll give it a try, though I doubt they will see it as rural.
We do have some large farms in the city still...

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:32 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Might be worth calling these guys:
http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Ah, ok.

Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires massive 
funding.

So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.

Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

That is why I am investigating special assessment.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and probably 
never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the extra work 
and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, just borrow the 
money and get it done.

There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.

Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special
Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even
the appearance of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and
financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking
every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
managing the paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called 

Re: [AFMUG] B11

[Chuck McCown]

My oldest son has a favorite t shirt with this:
http://mediacdn.snorgcontent.com/media/catalog/product/i/d/idrinknavy_fullpic_artwork.jpg

From: Ken Hohhof 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 2:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

“I drink your milkshake.”

>From the movie There Will Be Bandwidth.

From: John Blake 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

But that B in Shannon's Theorem keeps getting big.  That 10Gbps radio uses 2Ghz 
channels.  That results in a lot of C

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

  There are bumper stickers “Obey Gravity ... It’s the Law”.
  Maybe you need to sell Shannon’s Law bumper stickers.
  Ooops, it’s Shannon’s THEOREM.
  So you can be a Shannon denier.


  From: Chuck McCown 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:36 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

  When they figure a way around this let me know:

  C=B Log2 ((1+S/N)

  (Shannon/Hartley)

  From: Kurt Fankhauser 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:24 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

  wow 10Gbps over wireless? Give it a couple years and there will be an 80ghz 
Airfiber doing these speeds I can't wait.

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:10 PM, John Blake  wrote:

All in for a Huawei RTN-380 including brackets, antennas, software, 
licensing, cables, accessories, etc. comes out between about $22k-30k per link 
depending on which options you pick.   

Also, if 4Gbps isn't good enough, there is the RTN-380H that does 10G 
wireless.  The specs on this are insane.
  a.. 10Gbps throughput 
  b.. 2000 Mhz channel spacing, 128QAM modulation

  c.. SFP+ interfaces

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

  I'm talking 706 FT, give or take 6 inches 

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Eric Kuhnke  
wrote:

Depends on your distance, if you're going 1 km vs. 2.5 to 4 km 


It is definitely a VERY narrow beam width. Particularly with 60cm 
antennas. I wouldn't do it on anything that sways.




On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

  How stable of a structure do you need for 70/80Ghz? Self standing 
rohn 45 @ 55 ft too much? It's bracketed at 25ft. 

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
 wrote:

What price range is a Huawei link in?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:47 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
 wrote:

  You cannot directly compare 11 to 80 GHz. Totally different 
market. I can't do beyond 2.5 km at real five to six nines uptime with 80 GHz 
(even with +18 Tx power radios).

  I can do 60 km with 11 if the link will tolerate some ACM.


  On Aug 9, 2016 9:31 PM, "John Blake"  
wrote:

It's obviously pricier than the B11, but if you want true 
symmetrical and a ton of throughput, you could look at the Huawei RTN-380 
radios.  These will do 4Gbps (2Gbps symmetrical) at full licensing, or there 
are 1, 2, 3Gbps licensing options.  They use 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz and so are 
super easy and cheap to get (lightly) licensed. These are very popular with 
carriers outside the US, but not so much in the US because of all the 
Huawei/Ciscolobby disputes, but that has largely been resolved and they have 
been getting traction here.  Let me know if you want more info, we are Huawei 
VAR. 

John


On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:54 PM,  wrote:

  Gino,

  That seems to be the only configuration that meets the 
requirement.  The way I see it, in a traditional FDD system you would license 
an XPIC pair of frequencies, say 11075 H/V at point A and 11565 H/V at point B. 
 Assuming an 820 running 256QAM you might get 500mbps per polarity per 
direction, for a two-way aggregate of 2gpbs.  You would have licensed 160MHz at 
each end of the system, for a system efficiency of 2gbps/320MHz = 6 b/s/hz.

  If you operate a B11 on the same pair of frequencies, you 
have to use their FD mode which a typical PCN claims will deliver 736mbps.  It 
would seem that this can be viewed as a two-way aggregate rate, because the 
radios still take turns transmitting as in a true TDMA system.  So, the system 
efficiency here is 736mbps/320MHz = 2.3 b/s/hz -- below the requirement of 3 
b/s/hz.

  If you switch the B11 to the normal TDMA mode you will need 
to transmit on the same frequency from each end of the link.  So, in addition 
to licensing 11075 H and V transmitting from point A, you also need to license 
11075 H and V transmitting from point B, which adds another 160MHz at each end. 
The PCNs show this configuration giving 1.47gbps (again assumed to be an 
aggregate figure due to the TDMA mode).  This 

Re: [AFMUG] B11

[Eric Kuhnke]

The first generation 80 GHz, 1 Gbps FDD bridge products ten years ago used
OOK/BPSK and a high/low set of 5 GHz wide channels, like a Gigabeam or the
earliest Bridgewave radios.

Worked great and still didn't result in any colocation interference, with
60cm dishes, thanks to narrow dish beam width and the rarity of two
competing ISPs shooting from the same roof to the same roof. In which case
you could solve the problem by operating in the other polarity and
accomplishing 25-30' of horizontal separation between radios.



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:24 PM, John Blake  wrote:

> But that B in Shannon's Theorem keeps getting big.  That 10Gbps radio uses
> 2Ghz channels.  That results in a lot of C
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
>> There are bumper stickers “Obey Gravity ... It’s the Law”.
>> Maybe you need to sell Shannon’s Law bumper stickers.
>> Ooops, it’s Shannon’s THEOREM.
>> So you can be a Shannon denier.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Chuck McCown 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:36 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] B11
>>
>> When they figure a way around this let me know:
>>
>> C=B Log2 ((1+S/N)
>>
>> (Shannon/Hartley)
>>
>> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:24 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] B11
>>
>> wow 10Gbps over wireless? Give it a couple years and there will be an
>> 80ghz Airfiber doing these speeds I can't wait.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:10 PM, John Blake 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> All in for a Huawei RTN-380 including brackets, antennas, software,
>>> licensing, cables, accessories, etc. comes out between about $22k-30k per
>>> link depending on which options you pick.
>>>
>>> Also, if 4Gbps isn't good enough, there is the RTN-380H that does 10G
>>> wireless.  The specs on this are insane.
>>>
>>>- 10Gbps throughput
>>>- 2000 Mhz channel spacing, 128QAM modulation
>>>- SFP+ interfaces
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>>>
 I'm talking 706 FT, give or take 6 inches

 On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
 wrote:

> Depends on your distance, if you're going 1 km vs. 2.5 to 4 km
>
> It is definitely a VERY narrow beam width. Particularly with 60cm
> antennas. I wouldn't do it on anything that sways.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>
>> How stable of a structure do you need for 70/80Ghz? Self standing
>> rohn 45 @ 55 ft too much? It's bracketed at 25ft.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <
>> lists.wavel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What price range is a Huawei link in?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:47 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 You cannot directly compare 11 to 80 GHz. Totally different market.
 I can't do beyond 2.5 km at real five to six nines uptime with 80 GHz 
 (even
 with +18 Tx power radios).

 I can do 60 km with 11 if the link will tolerate some ACM.

 On Aug 9, 2016 9:31 PM, "John Blake"  wrote:

> It's obviously pricier than the B11, but if you want true
> symmetrical and a ton of throughput, you could look at the Huawei 
> RTN-380
> radios.  These will do 4Gbps (2Gbps symmetrical) at full licensing, or
> there are 1, 2, 3Gbps licensing options.  They use 71-76 GHz and 
> 81-86 GHz
> and so are super easy and cheap to get (lightly) licensed. These are 
> very
> popular with carriers outside the US, but not so much in the US 
> because of
> all the Huawei/Ciscolobby disputes, but that has largely been 
> resolved and
> they have been getting traction here.  Let me know if you want more 
> info,
> we are Huawei VAR.
>
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:54 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Gino,
>>
>> That seems to be the only configuration that meets the
>> requirement.  The way I see it, in a traditional FDD system you would
>> license an XPIC pair of frequencies, say 11075 H/V at point A and 
>> 11565 H/V
>> at point B.  Assuming an 820 running 256QAM you might get 500mbps per
>> polarity per direction, for a two-way aggregate of 2gpbs.  You would 
>> have
>> licensed 160MHz at each end of the system, for a system efficiency of
>> 2gbps/320MHz = 6 b/s/hz.
>> If you operate a B11 on the same pair of frequencies, you have to
>> use their FD mode which a typical PCN claims will deliver 736mbps.  
>> It
>> would seem that 

Re: [AFMUG] B11

[Ken Hohhof]

“I drink your milkshake.”

>From the movie There Will Be Bandwidth.

From: John Blake 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

But that B in Shannon's Theorem keeps getting big.  That 10Gbps radio uses 2Ghz 
channels.  That results in a lot of C

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

  There are bumper stickers “Obey Gravity ... It’s the Law”.
  Maybe you need to sell Shannon’s Law bumper stickers.
  Ooops, it’s Shannon’s THEOREM.
  So you can be a Shannon denier.


  From: Chuck McCown 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:36 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

  When they figure a way around this let me know:

  C=B Log2 ((1+S/N)

  (Shannon/Hartley)

  From: Kurt Fankhauser 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:24 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11

  wow 10Gbps over wireless? Give it a couple years and there will be an 80ghz 
Airfiber doing these speeds I can't wait.

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:10 PM, John Blake  wrote:

All in for a Huawei RTN-380 including brackets, antennas, software, 
licensing, cables, accessories, etc. comes out between about $22k-30k per link 
depending on which options you pick.   

Also, if 4Gbps isn't good enough, there is the RTN-380H that does 10G 
wireless.  The specs on this are insane.
  a.. 10Gbps throughput 
  b.. 2000 Mhz channel spacing, 128QAM modulation

  c.. SFP+ interfaces

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

  I'm talking 706 FT, give or take 6 inches 

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Eric Kuhnke  
wrote:

Depends on your distance, if you're going 1 km vs. 2.5 to 4 km 


It is definitely a VERY narrow beam width. Particularly with 60cm 
antennas. I wouldn't do it on anything that sways.




On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

  How stable of a structure do you need for 70/80Ghz? Self standing 
rohn 45 @ 55 ft too much? It's bracketed at 25ft. 

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
 wrote:

What price range is a Huawei link in?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:47 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
 wrote:

  You cannot directly compare 11 to 80 GHz. Totally different 
market. I can't do beyond 2.5 km at real five to six nines uptime with 80 GHz 
(even with +18 Tx power radios).

  I can do 60 km with 11 if the link will tolerate some ACM.


  On Aug 9, 2016 9:31 PM, "John Blake"  
wrote:

It's obviously pricier than the B11, but if you want true 
symmetrical and a ton of throughput, you could look at the Huawei RTN-380 
radios.  These will do 4Gbps (2Gbps symmetrical) at full licensing, or there 
are 1, 2, 3Gbps licensing options.  They use 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz and so are 
super easy and cheap to get (lightly) licensed. These are very popular with 
carriers outside the US, but not so much in the US because of all the 
Huawei/Ciscolobby disputes, but that has largely been resolved and they have 
been getting traction here.  Let me know if you want more info, we are Huawei 
VAR. 

John


On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:54 PM,  wrote:

  Gino,

  That seems to be the only configuration that meets the 
requirement.  The way I see it, in a traditional FDD system you would license 
an XPIC pair of frequencies, say 11075 H/V at point A and 11565 H/V at point B. 
 Assuming an 820 running 256QAM you might get 500mbps per polarity per 
direction, for a two-way aggregate of 2gpbs.  You would have licensed 160MHz at 
each end of the system, for a system efficiency of 2gbps/320MHz = 6 b/s/hz.

  If you operate a B11 on the same pair of frequencies, you 
have to use their FD mode which a typical PCN claims will deliver 736mbps.  It 
would seem that this can be viewed as a two-way aggregate rate, because the 
radios still take turns transmitting as in a true TDMA system.  So, the system 
efficiency here is 736mbps/320MHz = 2.3 b/s/hz -- below the requirement of 3 
b/s/hz.

  If you switch the B11 to the normal TDMA mode you will need 
to transmit on the same frequency from each end of the link.  So, in addition 
to licensing 11075 H and V transmitting from point A, you also need to license 
11075 H and V transmitting from point B, which adds another 160MHz at each end. 
The PCNs show this configuration giving 1.47gbps (again assumed to be an 
aggregate figure due to the TDMA mode).  This is an efficiency of 
1.47gbps/640MHz = 2.3 b/s/hz again.  However, because you have licensed two 
frequency pairs, each site can also transmit and receive on the unused 11565 H 
and V frequencies.  If you do this then you get 

Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?

[Christopher Gray]

I was really hoping to buy some time on these customers with high
re-registrations. It looks like I just need to find a new band. I can't cut
down my frequency list since it is a remote site and I sometimes need to
swap channels just to get a radio to register at all.

Time try some 2.4 at this spot.



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Like primary channel and backup channels?
>
> Seems like they could store in RAM what the most recently connected
> channel was, and scan that channel a few times before going through the
> whole scan list.  Seems like it would reduce the service impact of a
> re-reg.  Just sayin
> Is Aaron Schneider listening today?
>
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Matt" 
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Sent: 8/10/2016 6:06:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Increase PMP100 900 MHz Stability in High Noise?
>
>  If you go into the affected SM and disable all channels except for the one
>>>  the AP is on then it will register faster.  This doesn't stop the
>>> re-reging
>>>  but makes it less noticeable.
>>>
>>>  I'm generally against that because then you can't change channels, but
>>>  sometimes you do what you have to do.
>>>
>>
>> I really wish Canopy had a feature to only scan certain channels for X
>> minutes, if unable to register in that time frame switch to another
>> bigger channel group to scan.  That way if you are forced too switch
>> to a different channel and width due to interference etc. you can at
>> least get your SM's back on the AP.
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Ken Hohhof]

If you put a small PBX at the customer’s site rather than centralized, the 
Grandstream UCM series with Grandstream IP phones make it pretty easy.  You can 
create global and model templates, then to add a phone you basically tell the 
PBX the MAC address, extension number, and person’s name, then plug in the 
phone and the PBX pushes the config out to the phone.


From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

Really looking for a platform that has as close to zero phone config as 
possible. Easy management, hopefully someone to do all the 911 and so forth as 
that was a pain last time. The ability to copy phone configs would be nice.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:09 PM Josh Luthman  
wrote:

  I always felt Yealinks felt EXTREMELY cheap, but in terms of function I've 
heard nothing bad.


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

  On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

Before I ever saw a Yealink phone I thought they would be super terrible 
and cheesy, given how weird the name is.


Then I bought a SIP-T22P for $60 to test out and was pleasantly surprised. 
The http setup interface is quite full featured and the phones are very easy to 
use with Asterisk/FreePBX.  


If you don't care about color screens and fancy features like pairing with 
bluetooth headsets, Yealinks can be found for $55-65 each...  My main phone is 
now a SIP-T28P. 


My only complaint about them is that they are not as heavy as they should 
be, and change positions on a desk, which can be fixed by supergluing some 
steel or lead weights into the hollow parts of the snap-on 45 degree angle desk 
stand.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Andreas Wiatowski 
 wrote:

  We are using mostly grandstream ATA.  We are mainly using this platform 
for Business PBX…so Grandstream, Yeahlink and Polycom sip phones.



  Cheers,

  __

  Andreas Wiatowski | CEO

  Silo Wireless Inc.

  Email  andr...@silowireless.com

  19 Sage Court

  Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)

  Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free 
+1.866.727.4138



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM


  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted


  What are folks using for CPE?



On Aug 11, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski 
 wrote:



We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with 
channels and share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K 
investment and yearly maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….



Cheers,

__

Andreas Wiatowski | CEO

Silo Wireless Inc.

Email  andr...@silowireless.com

19 Sage Court

Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)

Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free 
+1.866.727.4138



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jim Bouse [Brazos 
WiFi]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted



I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is 
keeping up with the security updates.



I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage. 



Jim Bouse

Owner

Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi

979-985-5912

j...@brazoswifi.com



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted



I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and 
am wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think 
I need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few 
others. Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many use 
Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

Man, this list will let anyone lurk 



Hi Roger,
Yep, Perry told me they owned the conduit.  I was working for that “other” 
place then.
We would have blown in fiber in a heartbeat.  
This was probably 6-8 years ago.


From: Roger Timmerman 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 2:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

I would recommend steering away from a Special Assessment Area as a mechanism 
for funding FTTx.  A bond with an SAA repayment still needs some form of 
backstop and in the case of Brigham City, the city placed liens on the 
properties as the backstop to the bonds.  It worked to get the bond and fund 
the build, but resulted in lots of not-so-happy people.  We don't plan on doing 
that ever again and connect customers now under our normal bond/debt structure 
with no liens. 

As far as Perry City, UTOPIA collectively paid for the conduit, and we did 
finish that city so anyone in the city can get services there now.  Obviously, 
it wasn't in our best interests to let someone else come use that conduit.

Steer as far from RUS as possible.  The most devastating mishap in UTOPIA's 
history was using RUS loans to fund several builds and then have RUS mess it 
up.  After many years of legal fighting we finally settled with them last year. 
 Never again!  This was the cause for the Perry City completion delay where it 
may have appeared to be an abandoned project for a few years.

Roger



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  Tell them you are adjoining Eagle Mountain...

  -Original Message- From: Sterling Jacobson
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:36 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  Thanks for that, I'll give it a try, though I doubt they will see it as rural.
  We do have some large farms in the city still...

  -Original Message-
  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:32 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  Might be worth calling these guys:
  http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx

  -Original Message-
  From: Sterling Jacobson

  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  Ah, ok.

  Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires massive 
funding.

  So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.

  Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

  That is why I am investigating special assessment.

  -Original Message-
  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
  I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and 
probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the 
extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, just 
borrow the money and get it done.

  There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
  Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.

  Travis


  On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special
Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even
the appearance of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and
financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking
every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
managing the paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

  Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

  I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
  specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.

  I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this 

Re: [AFMUG] B11

[John Blake]

But that B in Shannon's Theorem keeps getting big.  That 10Gbps radio uses
2Ghz channels.  That results in a lot of C

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> There are bumper stickers “Obey Gravity ... It’s the Law”.
> Maybe you need to sell Shannon’s Law bumper stickers.
> Ooops, it’s Shannon’s THEOREM.
> So you can be a Shannon denier.
>
>
> *From:* Chuck McCown 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:36 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] B11
>
> When they figure a way around this let me know:
>
> C=B Log2 ((1+S/N)
>
> (Shannon/Hartley)
>
> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:24 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] B11
>
> wow 10Gbps over wireless? Give it a couple years and there will be an
> 80ghz Airfiber doing these speeds I can't wait.
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:10 PM, John Blake  wrote:
>
>> All in for a Huawei RTN-380 including brackets, antennas, software,
>> licensing, cables, accessories, etc. comes out between about $22k-30k per
>> link depending on which options you pick.
>>
>> Also, if 4Gbps isn't good enough, there is the RTN-380H that does 10G
>> wireless.  The specs on this are insane.
>>
>>- 10Gbps throughput
>>- 2000 Mhz channel spacing, 128QAM modulation
>>- SFP+ interfaces
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm talking 706 FT, give or take 6 inches
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Depends on your distance, if you're going 1 km vs. 2.5 to 4 km

 It is definitely a VERY narrow beam width. Particularly with 60cm
 antennas. I wouldn't do it on anything that sways.



 On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

> How stable of a structure do you need for 70/80Ghz? Self standing rohn
> 45 @ 55 ft too much? It's bracketed at 25ft.
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <
> lists.wavel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What price range is a Huawei link in?
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:47 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You cannot directly compare 11 to 80 GHz. Totally different market.
>>> I can't do beyond 2.5 km at real five to six nines uptime with 80 GHz 
>>> (even
>>> with +18 Tx power radios).
>>>
>>> I can do 60 km with 11 if the link will tolerate some ACM.
>>>
>>> On Aug 9, 2016 9:31 PM, "John Blake"  wrote:
>>>
 It's obviously pricier than the B11, but if you want true
 symmetrical and a ton of throughput, you could look at the Huawei 
 RTN-380
 radios.  These will do 4Gbps (2Gbps symmetrical) at full licensing, or
 there are 1, 2, 3Gbps licensing options.  They use 71-76 GHz and 81-86 
 GHz
 and so are super easy and cheap to get (lightly) licensed. These are 
 very
 popular with carriers outside the US, but not so much in the US 
 because of
 all the Huawei/Ciscolobby disputes, but that has largely been resolved 
 and
 they have been getting traction here.  Let me know if you want more 
 info,
 we are Huawei VAR.

 John


 On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:54 PM,  wrote:

> Gino,
>
> That seems to be the only configuration that meets the
> requirement.  The way I see it, in a traditional FDD system you would
> license an XPIC pair of frequencies, say 11075 H/V at point A and 
> 11565 H/V
> at point B.  Assuming an 820 running 256QAM you might get 500mbps per
> polarity per direction, for a two-way aggregate of 2gpbs.  You would 
> have
> licensed 160MHz at each end of the system, for a system efficiency of
> 2gbps/320MHz = 6 b/s/hz.
> If you operate a B11 on the same pair of frequencies, you have to
> use their FD mode which a typical PCN claims will deliver 736mbps.  It
> would seem that this can be viewed as a two-way aggregate rate, 
> because the
> radios still take turns transmitting as in a true TDMA system.  So, 
> the
> system efficiency here is 736mbps/320MHz = 2.3 b/s/hz -- below the
> requirement of 3 b/s/hz.
>
> If you switch the B11 to the normal TDMA mode you will need to
> transmit on the same frequency from each end of the link.  So, in 
> addition
> to licensing 11075 H and V transmitting from point A, you also need to
> license 11075 H and V transmitting from point B, which adds another 
> 160MHz
> at each end. The PCNs show this configuration giving 1.47gbps (again
> assumed to be 

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Roger Timmerman]

I would recommend steering away from a Special Assessment Area as a
mechanism for funding FTTx.  A bond with an SAA repayment still needs some
form of backstop and in the case of Brigham City, the city placed liens on
the properties as the backstop to the bonds.  It worked to get the bond and
fund the build, but resulted in lots of not-so-happy people.  We don't plan
on doing that ever again and connect customers now under our normal
bond/debt structure with no liens.

As far as Perry City, UTOPIA collectively paid for the conduit, and we did
finish that city so anyone in the city can get services there now.
Obviously, it wasn't in our best interests to let someone else come use
that conduit.

Steer as far from RUS as possible.  The most devastating mishap in UTOPIA's
history was using RUS loans to fund several builds and then have RUS mess
it up.  After many years of legal fighting we finally settled with them
last year.  Never again!  This was the cause for the Perry City completion
delay where it may have appeared to be an abandoned project for a few years.

Roger



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> Tell them you are adjoining Eagle Mountain...
>
> -Original Message- From: Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:36 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Thanks for that, I'll give it a try, though I doubt they will see it as
> rural.
> We do have some large farms in the city still...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:32 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Might be worth calling these guys:
> http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Ah, ok.
>
> Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires
> massive funding.
>
> So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close
> to matching up with the demand and cost of construction.
>
> Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.
>
> That is why I am investigating special assessment.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
> I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and
> probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the
> extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation,
> just borrow the money and get it done.
>
> There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
> Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with
> assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with
> interest only payments), etc.
>
> Travis
>
>
> On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>
>> Definitely.
>>
>> Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
>> attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special
>> Assessment in this manner?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>>
>> Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
>> getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even
>> the appearance of evil.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Travis Johnson
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>>
>> You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
>> imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and
>> financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking
>> every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.
>>
>> Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
>> managing the paperwork and government related money.
>>
>> Travis
>>
>> On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
>>>
>>> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
>>> specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
>>> what I have been told:
>>>
>>> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your
>>> company and the city.
>>> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
>>> lot/unit for around 20 years.
>>> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
>>> The city council agrees and creates a bond 

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Colin Stanners]

I imagine it takes a lot of processing power to do so and it could be they
used most of the spare AF5 FPGA gates for the 1024QAM functionality.

On Aug 11, 2016 12:47 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

> Yeah, it seems to work fine to use slant at one end, and h/v at the other
> with ePMP, ubnt M and Canopy 450... But airfibers don't seem to like it at
> all.
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 2:30 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:
>
>> It's built into the chipset of the ePMP 1000 (which is the same as UBNT
>> M).
>>
>> And think about high multipath indoor environments. You pretty much have
>> to rely on phase detection capabilities to get MIMO.
>>
>> On 8/11/2016 2:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>>
>> Yes they did say that, and I read the white paper, and I think I
>> understood it at the time.  I think they used some kind of special sauce to
>> make that true though.  I don’t think it would apply to any two radios.
>>
>> *From:* TJ Trout 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:09 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>>
>> Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe and
>> not loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>>
>>> You lose, but not quite that bad:
>>>
>>> 20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>>>
>>> BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
>>>
>>> One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>>>
 Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
 AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
 to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.



 We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X
 links, thus the thought.







 Paul McCall, President

 PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.

 658 Old Dixie Highway

 Vero Beach, FL 32962

 772-564-6800

 pa...@pdmnet.net

 www.pdmnet.com

 www.floridabroadband.com





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

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Mathew Howard]

Yeah, it seems to work fine to use slant at one end, and h/v at the other
with ePMP, ubnt M and Canopy 450... But airfibers don't seem to like it at
all.

On Aug 11, 2016 2:30 PM, "George Skorup"  wrote:

> It's built into the chipset of the ePMP 1000 (which is the same as UBNT M).
>
> And think about high multipath indoor environments. You pretty much have
> to rely on phase detection capabilities to get MIMO.
>
> On 8/11/2016 2:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>
> Yes they did say that, and I read the white paper, and I think I
> understood it at the time.  I think they used some kind of special sauce to
> make that true though.  I don’t think it would apply to any two radios.
>
> *From:* TJ Trout 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:09 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>
> Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe and
> not loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
>> You lose, but not quite that bad:
>>
>> 20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB
>>
>>
>> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>>
>> BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
>>
>> One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>>
>>> Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
>>> AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
>>> to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X
>>> links, thus the thought.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul McCall, President
>>>
>>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>>>
>>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>>
>>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>>
>>> 772-564-6800
>>>
>>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>>
>>> www.pdmnet.com
>>>
>>> www.floridabroadband.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[George Skorup]

It's built into the chipset of the ePMP 1000 (which is the same as UBNT M).

And think about high multipath indoor environments. You pretty much have 
to rely on phase detection capabilities to get MIMO.


On 8/11/2016 2:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Yes they did say that, and I read the white paper, and I think I 
understood it at the time.  I think they used some kind of special 
sauce to make that true though.  I don’t think it would apply to any 
two radios.

*From:* TJ Trout 
*Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:09 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe 
and not loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown > wrote:


You lose, but not quite that bad:
20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB
*From:* Josh Luthman 
*Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber
radios
BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall > wrote:

Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using
a AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios? I wouldn’t expect
the X polarity to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.

We have some links to put up that long term may become
AirFiber 5X links, thus the thought.

Paul McCall, President

PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.

658 Old Dixie Highway

Vero Beach, FL 32962

772-564-6800 

pa...@pdmnet.net 

www.pdmnet.com 

www.floridabroadband.com 

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Colin Stanners]

You lose ~3db from the cross to linear polarization difference.
But I assume you win ~3db from the incoming signal now being received and
summed by 2 antennas.

>From my understanding, say you have 30db signal. Instead of getting signal
A on port A at 30db and signal B on port B at 30db, you get:
-signal A on port X at 27db and port Y at 27db, the latter out of phase
90deg due to polarization
-signal B on port Y at 27db and port X at 27db, the latter out of phase
90deg due to polarization

The chipset used in ePMP sums up both (out-of-phase) signals for A and gets
a 30db signal, same for signal B.

Whether the chipset in other wifi products does the same is unsure, but I
assume most modern Atheros chips do it.



On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> Yes they did say that, and I read the white paper, and I think I
> understood it at the time.  I think they used some kind of special sauce to
> make that true though.  I don’t think it would apply to any two radios.
>
> *From:* TJ Trout 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:09 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>
> Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe and
> not loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
>> You lose, but not quite that bad:
>>
>> 20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB
>>
>>
>> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>>
>> BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
>>
>> One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>>
>>> Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
>>> AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
>>> to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X
>>> links, thus the thought.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul McCall, President
>>>
>>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>>>
>>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>>
>>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>>
>>> 772-564-6800
>>>
>>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>>
>>> www.pdmnet.com
>>>
>>> www.floridabroadband.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Chuck McCown]

Yes they did say that, and I read the white paper, and I think I understood it 
at the time.  I think they used some kind of special sauce to make that true 
though.  I don’t think it would apply to any two radios.  

From: TJ Trout 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 1:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe and not 
loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  You lose, but not quite that bad:

  20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB


  From: Josh Luthman 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

  BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it. 

  One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?



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

  On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:

Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a 
AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity to 
hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.



We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X links, 
thus the thought.







Paul McCall, President

PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.

658 Old Dixie Highway

Vero Beach, FL 32962

772-564-6800  

pa...@pdmnet.net

www.pdmnet.com

www.floridabroadband.com

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[TJ Trout]

Didn't cambium say that you can receive slant using a hpol/vpol cpe and not
loose any performance? Or is that with cambium CPE's only?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> You lose, but not quite that bad:
>
> 20*Log (Cos(angle)) = 3.01 dB
>
>
> *From:* Josh Luthman 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 12:59 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios
>
> BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
>
> One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>
>> Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
>> AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
>> to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.
>>
>>
>>
>> We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X links,
>> thus the thought.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul McCall, President
>>
>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>>
>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>
>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>
>> 772-564-6800
>>
>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>
>> www.pdmnet.com
>>
>> www.floridabroadband.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Colin Stanners]

You'll lose 1-3db (depends how the implementation sums signal strengths) if
one is side slant polarization and the other V/H, but the path may be only
MIMO-A, depends how good the wi-fi chipset is at distinguishing both
signals as being different by their phase irregardless of both coming in on
both RF ports at similar strengths (but out of phase).

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.
>
> One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>
>> Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
>> AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
>> to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.
>>
>>
>>
>> We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X links,
>> thus the thought.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul McCall, President
>>
>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>>
>> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>>
>> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>>
>> 772-564-6800
>>
>> pa...@pdmnet.net
>>
>> www.pdmnet.com
>>
>> www.floridabroadband.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Josh Luthman]

BOTH sides should be slant.  That's it.

One slant and one VH you'll lose I think 15db?


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

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:

> Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a
> AF‑5G30‑S45  to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity
> to hurt performance, but don’t want to assume.
>
>
>
> We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X links,
> thus the thought.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Paul McCall, President
>
> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
>
> 658 Old Dixie Highway
>
> Vero Beach, FL 32962
>
> 772-564-6800
>
> pa...@pdmnet.net
>
> www.pdmnet.com
>
> www.floridabroadband.com
>
>
>
>
>

[AFMUG] Using AirFiber 5x dishes with non-Airfiber radios

[Paul McCall]

Probably a dump question, but is there any downside with using a AF‑5G30‑S45  
to use with Mikrotik radios?  I wouldn’t expect the X polarity to hurt 
performance, but don’t want to assume.

We have some links to put up that long term may become AirFiber 5X links, thus 
the thought.



Paul McCall, President
PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc.
658 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Beach, FL 32962
772-564-6800
pa...@pdmnet.net
www.pdmnet.com
www.floridabroadband.com

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

Tell them you are adjoining Eagle Mountain...

-Original Message- 
From: Sterling Jacobson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Thanks for that, I'll give it a try, though I doubt they will see it as 
rural.

We do have some large farms in the city still...

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:32 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Might be worth calling these guys:
http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Ah, ok.

Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires 
massive funding.


So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.


Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

That is why I am investigating special assessment.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and 
probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the 
extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, 
just borrow the money and get it done.


There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special
Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even
the appearance of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and
financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking
every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
managing the paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
what I have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your
company and the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
lot/unit for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and
your company gets a check for the total amount times number of
properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary
stuff for internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get
go, maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the
service for
20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Josh Reynolds]

Look into USDA matching grants for broadband. Can't remember if it's 20 or
30% up front, but they provide the rest.

Avoid RUS, too many strings.

On Aug 11, 2016 12:28 PM, "Sterling Jacobson"  wrote:

> Ah, ok.
>
> Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires
> massive funding.
>
> So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close
> to matching up with the demand and cost of construction.
>
> Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.
>
> That is why I am investigating special assessment.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
> I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and
> probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the
> extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation,
> just borrow the money and get it done.
>
> There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
> Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with
> assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with
> interest only payments), etc.
>
> Travis
>
>
> On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> > Definitely.
> >
> > Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
> attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment
> in this manner?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
> >
> > Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
> getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the
> appearance of evil.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Travis Johnson
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
> >
> > You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
> imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials
> every year. You will also have to have someone tracking every single
> expense and what it is attached to, etc.
> >
> > Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
> managing the paperwork and government related money.
> >
> > Travis
> >
> > On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> >> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
> >>
> >> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
> >> specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
> >> what I have been told:
> >>
> >> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your
> >> company and the city.
> >> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
> >> lot/unit for around 20 years.
> >> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
> >> The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and
> >> your company gets a check for the total amount times number of
> properties.
> >> Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary
> >> stuff for internet, which is fiber in my case.
> >>
> >> And the new property owner has your service available from the get
> >> go, maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the
> >> service for
> >> 20 years.
> >>
> >> Anyone done anything like this?
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Lewis Bergman]

Really looking for a platform that has as close to zero phone config as
possible. Easy management, hopefully someone to do all the 911 and so forth
as that was a pain last time. The ability to copy phone configs would be
nice.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:09 PM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> I always felt Yealinks felt EXTREMELY cheap, but in terms of function I've
> heard nothing bad.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
> wrote:
>
>> Before I ever saw a Yealink phone I thought they would be super terrible
>> and cheesy, given how weird the name is.
>>
>> Then I bought a SIP-T22P for $60 to test out and was pleasantly
>> surprised. The http setup interface is quite full featured and the phones
>> are very easy to use with Asterisk/FreePBX.
>>
>> If you don't care about color screens and fancy features like pairing
>> with bluetooth headsets, Yealinks can be found for $55-65 each...  My main
>> phone is now a SIP-T28P.
>>
>> My only complaint about them is that they are not as heavy as they should
>> be, and change positions on a desk, which can be fixed by supergluing some
>> steel or lead weights into the hollow parts of the snap-on 45 degree angle
>> desk stand.
>>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <
>> andr...@silowireless.com> wrote:
>>
> We are using mostly grandstream ATA.  We are mainly using this platform
>>> for Business PBX…so Grandstream, Yeahlink and Polycom sip phones.
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>> __
>>>
>>> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>>>
>>> Silo Wireless Inc.
>>>
>>> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>>>
>>> 19 Sage Court
>>>
>>> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>>>
>>> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
>>> +1.866.727.4138
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul Stewart
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
>>>
>>
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What are folks using for CPE?
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 11, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <
>>> andr...@silowireless.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with channels
>>> and share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K investment
>>> and yearly maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> __
>>>
>>> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>>>
>>> Silo Wireless Inc.
>>>
>>> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>>>
>>> 19 Sage Court
>>>
>>> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>>>
>>> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
>>> +1.866.727.4138
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Jim Bouse [Brazos WiFi]
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is
>>> keeping up with the security updates.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim Bouse
>>>
>>> Owner
>>>
>>> Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi
>>>
>>> 979-985-5912
>>>
>>> j...@brazoswifi.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
>>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and am
>>> wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think
>>> I need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few
>>> others. Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many
>>> use Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Josh Luthman]

I always felt Yealinks felt EXTREMELY cheap, but in terms of function I've
heard nothing bad.


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

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> Before I ever saw a Yealink phone I thought they would be super terrible
> and cheesy, given how weird the name is.
>
> Then I bought a SIP-T22P for $60 to test out and was pleasantly surprised.
> The http setup interface is quite full featured and the phones are very
> easy to use with Asterisk/FreePBX.
>
> If you don't care about color screens and fancy features like pairing with
> bluetooth headsets, Yealinks can be found for $55-65 each...  My main phone
> is now a SIP-T28P.
>
> My only complaint about them is that they are not as heavy as they should
> be, and change positions on a desk, which can be fixed by supergluing some
> steel or lead weights into the hollow parts of the snap-on 45 degree angle
> desk stand.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <
> andr...@silowireless.com> wrote:
>
>> We are using mostly grandstream ATA.  We are mainly using this platform
>> for Business PBX…so Grandstream, Yeahlink and Polycom sip phones.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> __
>>
>> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>>
>> Silo Wireless Inc.
>>
>> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>>
>> 19 Sage Court
>>
>> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>>
>> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
>> +1.866.727.4138
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul Stewart
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
>>
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>
>>
>>
>> What are folks using for CPE?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with channels
>> and share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K investment
>> and yearly maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> __
>>
>> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>>
>> Silo Wireless Inc.
>>
>> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>>
>> 19 Sage Court
>>
>> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>>
>> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
>> +1.866.727.4138
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Jim Bouse [Brazos WiFi]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>
>>
>>
>> I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is
>> keeping up with the security updates.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim Bouse
>>
>> Owner
>>
>> Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi
>>
>> 979-985-5912
>>
>> j...@brazoswifi.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>>
>>
>>
>> I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and am
>> wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think
>> I need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few
>> others. Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many
>> use Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Gino Villarini]

Andreas, how is the management? can you provide your customer with user
access to their pbx instances? What HW are you running them on?

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <
andr...@silowireless.com> wrote:

> We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with channels
> and share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K investment
> and yearly maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> __
>
> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>
> Silo Wireless Inc.
>
> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>
> 19 Sage Court
>
> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>
> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
> +1.866.727.4138
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jim Bouse [Brazos
> WiFi]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>
>
>
> I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is
> keeping up with the security updates.
>
>
>
> I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage.
>
>
>
> Jim Bouse
>
> Owner
>
> Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi
>
> 979-985-5912
>
> j...@brazoswifi.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>
>
>
> I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and am
> wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think
> I need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few
> others. Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many
> use Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Ok, that’s helpful.

I haven’t talked to ALL banks of course, but any bank so far that I have talked 
to don’t fund anything unless its tied to real estate or equipment they can 
value at half market value and sell off immediately. That’s been my limited 
experience, so if you have a fiber friendly banking institute that breaks the 
mold, I am all ears.

I think this special assessment deal is going to be all about who I know.
I know a few key people in this already, so I do have a leg up.
Which probably means I have a ten percent chance of making it go forward 
instead of a zero percent chance.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

I'm more in Travis's camp, but maybe for different reasons.  The accounting and 
auditing stuff hasn't been difficult to deal withif you're keeping good 
records anyway, then it's not bad.  You may just have to be more anal than 
you're used to.  For everything we bought with the people's money we had to 
keep track of where it was installed and demonstrate that it actually was 
installed where we said (with photos, etc).  Then an auditor came by to double 
check that we weren't making it all up.

I agree the gov wants you to have a sound plan before they'll fund youand 
that if you really had a sound plan then a bank would fund it.

I think one difference is that if the bank doesn't understand what you're 
doing, they'll just say no because it's not safe for them to get involved in 
things they don't understand.  If the bureaucrat doesn't understand it they'll 
listen to you and pretend they're getting it.  The other funny thing is that I 
don't think the projects chosen for funding are always the best 
proposalssometimes it's the people who talk the best line of BS or who have 
support from the right people.

I'm a cynic, and my involvement in funding is peripheral, so take my 2c with a 
grain of salt.  Sterling's idea is interesting and I hope he's successful with 
it.  I'm not trying to be a killjoy.



-- Original Message --
From: "Jaime Solorza" 
>
To: "Animal Farm" >
Sent: 8/11/2016 1:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment


The folks from Alaska I work for seem to know how to work the system... They 
keep getting some choice government contracts.

On Aug 11, 2016 11:16 AM, "Travis Johnson" > 
wrote:
Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be. I've 
never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and probably 
never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the extra work 
and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, just borrow the 
money and get it done.

There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding. Leasing 
equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with assets of 
the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with interest only 
payments), etc.

Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings attached, or 
do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when getting 
involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the appearance 
of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would imagine 
you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials every year. 
You will also have to have someone tracking every single expense and what it is 
attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing the 
paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific
examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
what I have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company
and the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
lot/unit for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your
company gets a 

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Adam Moffett]

I'm more in Travis's camp, but maybe for different reasons.  The 
accounting and auditing stuff hasn't been difficult to deal withif 
you're keeping good records anyway, then it's not bad.  You may just 
have to be more anal than you're used to.  For everything we bought with 
the people's money we had to keep track of where it was installed and 
demonstrate that it actually was installed where we said (with photos, 
etc).  Then an auditor came by to double check that we weren't making it 
all up.


I agree the gov wants you to have a sound plan before they'll fund 
youand that if you really had a sound plan then a bank would fund 
it.


I think one difference is that if the bank doesn't understand what 
you're doing, they'll just say no because it's not safe for them to get 
involved in things they don't understand.  If the bureaucrat doesn't 
understand it they'll listen to you and pretend they're getting it.  The 
other funny thing is that I don't think the projects chosen for funding 
are always the best proposalssometimes it's the people who talk the 
best line of BS or who have support from the right people.


I'm a cynic, and my involvement in funding is peripheral, so take my 2c 
with a grain of salt.  Sterling's idea is interesting and I hope he's 
successful with it.  I'm not trying to be a killjoy.




-- Original Message --
From: "Jaime Solorza" 
To: "Animal Farm" 
Sent: 8/11/2016 1:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

The folks from Alaska I work for seem to know how to work the system... 
They keep getting some choice government contracts.



On Aug 11, 2016 11:16 AM, "Travis Johnson"  wrote:
Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be. 
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and 
probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all 
the extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and 
operation, just borrow the money and get it done.


There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding. 
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured 
with assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right 
now, with interest only payments), etc.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings 
attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special 
Assessment in this manner?


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when 
getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for 
even the appearance of evil.


-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would 
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and 
financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking 
every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.


Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for 
managing the paperwork and government related money.


Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for 
specific

examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this 
is

what I have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your 
company

and the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
lot/unit for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and 
your
company gets a check for the total amount times number of 
properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary 
stuff

for internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get 
go,
maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service 
for

20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux sync

[Mark - Myakka Technologies]

Forrest,

OK, think i need to order some updated equipment.

I have some B Sync Pipes, these didn't seem to work with the H sync
injectors.

Do the latest Sync Pipes work with the H injectors?

-- 
Best regards,
 Markmailto:m...@mailmt.com

Myakka Technologies, Inc.
www.MyakkaTech.com

Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life
http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL

Please Donate at Please Donate at http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html
--

Thursday, August 11, 2016, 11:49:41 AM, you wrote:

FCLA> Yep. It should.ￜￜ Might need a firmware update. 


FCLA> On Aug 11, 2016 8:38 AM, "Mark - Myakka Technologies"  
wrote:
FCLA> Forrest,

FCLA> will an old SiteMonitor Base A0 work?

FCLA> --
FCLA> Best regards,
FCLA> ￜMarkￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ 
mailto:m...@mailmt.com

FCLA> Myakka Technologies, Inc.
FCLA> www.MyakkaTech.com

FCLA> Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life
FCLA> http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL

FCLA> Please Donate at Please Donate at
FCLA> http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html
FCLA> --

FCLA> Thursday, August 11, 2016, 10:00:30 AM, you wrote:

FCLA>> No,ￜ you need a base unit to pull the data out of the newer injectors.

FCLA>> Or you can hook a deluxe syncpipe up to a radio directly.


FCLA>> On Aug 11, 2016 6:38 AM, "Mark - Myakka Technologies"  
wrote:
FCLA>> We had to replace one of our old sync injectors with one of the newer
FCLA>> ones (H1).ￜ One the old one I had a serial port I could plug into to
FCLA>> check the GPS status.ￜ Is there anything like that on the new one?



FCLA>> --
FCLA>> Thanks,
FCLA>> ￜMarkￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ 
mailto:m...@mailmt.com

FCLA>> Myakka Technologies, Inc.
FCLA>> www.MyakkaTech.com

FCLA>> Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life
FCLA>> http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL

FCLA>> Please Donate at http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html











  

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Thanks for that, I'll give it a try, though I doubt they will see it as rural.
We do have some large farms in the city still...

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:32 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Might be worth calling these guys:
http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Ah, ok.

Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires massive 
funding.

So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.

Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

That is why I am investigating special assessment.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and probably 
never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the extra work 
and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, just borrow the 
money and get it done.

There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.

Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> Definitely.
>
> Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings 
> attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special 
> Assessment in this manner?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when 
> getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even 
> the appearance of evil.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Travis Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would 
> imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and 
> financials every year. You will also have to have someone tracking 
> every single expense and what it is attached to, etc.
>
> Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for 
> managing the paperwork and government related money.
>
> Travis
>
> On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
>>
>> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for 
>> specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.
>>
>> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is 
>> what I have been told:
>>
>> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your 
>> company and the city.
>> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed 
>> lot/unit for around 20 years.
>> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
>> The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and 
>> your company gets a check for the total amount times number of 
>> properties.
>> Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary 
>> stuff for internet, which is fiber in my case.
>>
>> And the new property owner has your service available from the get 
>> go, maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the 
>> service for
>> 20 years.
>>
>> Anyone done anything like this?
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

Might be worth calling these guys:
http://www.cobank.com/About-CoBank.aspx

-Original Message- 
From: Sterling Jacobson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:28 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Ah, ok.

Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires 
massive funding.


So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.


Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

That is why I am investigating special assessment.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and 
probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the 
extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, 
just borrow the money and get it done.


There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings 
attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special 
Assessment in this manner?


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when 
getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the 
appearance of evil.


-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would 
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials 
every year. You will also have to have someone tracking every single 
expense and what it is attached to, etc.


Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing 
the paperwork and government related money.


Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for
specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
what I have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your
company and the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
lot/unit for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and
your company gets a check for the total amount times number of 
properties.

Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary
stuff for internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get
go, maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the
service for
20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Ah, ok.

Fiber is way more capital intensive than the WISP I had, and requires massive 
funding.

So my traditional sources and avenues for borrowing don't even come close to 
matching up with the demand and cost of construction.

Too bad banks don't see fiber/conduit build as collateral.

That is why I am investigating special assessment.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be. 
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and probably 
never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the extra work 
and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation, just borrow the 
money and get it done.

There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding. 
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with 
assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with 
interest only payments), etc.

Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> Definitely.
>
> Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings attached, 
> or do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment in this 
> manner?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when getting 
> involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the appearance 
> of evil.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Travis Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>
> You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would imagine 
> you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials every year. 
> You will also have to have someone tracking every single expense and what it 
> is attached to, etc.
>
> Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing the 
> paperwork and government related money.
>
> Travis
>
> On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
>>
>> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for 
>> specific examples and advice from my provider friends here.
>>
>> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is 
>> what I have been told:
>>
>> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your 
>> company and the city.
>> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed 
>> lot/unit for around 20 years.
>> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
>> The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and 
>> your company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
>> Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary 
>> stuff for internet, which is fiber in my case.
>>
>> And the new property owner has your service available from the get 
>> go, maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the 
>> service for
>> 20 years.
>>
>> Anyone done anything like this?
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Jaime Solorza]

The folks from Alaska I work for seem to know how to work the system...
They keep getting some choice government contracts.

On Aug 11, 2016 11:16 AM, "Travis Johnson"  wrote:

> Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be.
> I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and
> probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all the
> extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and operation,
> just borrow the money and get it done.
>
> There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding.
> Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured with
> assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right now, with
> interest only payments), etc.
>
> Travis
>
>
> On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>
>> Definitely.
>>
>> Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings
>> attached, or do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment
>> in this manner?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>>
>> Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when
>> getting involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the
>> appearance of evil.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Travis Johnson
>> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment
>>
>> You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
>> imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials
>> every year. You will also have to have someone tracking every single
>> expense and what it is attached to, etc.
>>
>> Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing
>> the paperwork and government related money.
>>
>> Travis
>>
>> On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
>>>
>>> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific
>>> examples and advice from my provider friends here.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
>>> what I have been told:
>>>
>>> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company
>>> and the city.
>>> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
>>> lot/unit for around 20 years.
>>> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
>>> The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your
>>> company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
>>> Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff
>>> for internet, which is fiber in my case.
>>>
>>> And the new property owner has your service available from the get go,
>>> maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for
>>> 20 years.
>>>
>>> Anyone done anything like this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Eric Kuhnke]

Before I ever saw a Yealink phone I thought they would be super terrible
and cheesy, given how weird the name is.

Then I bought a SIP-T22P for $60 to test out and was pleasantly surprised.
The http setup interface is quite full featured and the phones are very
easy to use with Asterisk/FreePBX.

If you don't care about color screens and fancy features like pairing with
bluetooth headsets, Yealinks can be found for $55-65 each...  My main phone
is now a SIP-T28P.

My only complaint about them is that they are not as heavy as they should
be, and change positions on a desk, which can be fixed by supergluing some
steel or lead weights into the hollow parts of the snap-on 45 degree angle
desk stand.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <
andr...@silowireless.com> wrote:

> We are using mostly grandstream ATA.  We are mainly using this platform
> for Business PBX…so Grandstream, Yeahlink and Polycom sip phones.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> __
>
> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>
> Silo Wireless Inc.
>
> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>
> 19 Sage Court
>
> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>
> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
> +1.866.727.4138
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul Stewart
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>
>
>
> What are folks using for CPE?
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with channels
> and share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K investment
> and yearly maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> __
>
> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
>
> Silo Wireless Inc.
>
> Email  andr...@silowireless.com
>
> 19 Sage Court
>
> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
>
> Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free
> +1.866.727.4138
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Jim Bouse [Brazos WiFi]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>
>
>
> I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is
> keeping up with the security updates.
>
>
>
> I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage.
>
>
>
> Jim Bouse
>
> Owner
>
> Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi
>
> 979-985-5912
>
> j...@brazoswifi.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted
>
>
>
> I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and am
> wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think
> I need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few
> others. Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many
> use Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Travis Johnson]

Just saying that government money is never what it's cracked up to be. 
I've never taken a single dime (loan, grant, tax, assessment, etc) and 
probably never will, with any of my companies. It's just not worth all 
the extra work and headaches. If you have a sound business plan and 
operation, just borrow the money and get it done.


There are all kinds of ways to be creative when it comes to funding. 
Leasing equipment, 60 day term credit cards, lines of credit (secured 
with assets of the business), or even home equity loans (4.25% right 
now, with interest only payments), etc.


Travis


On 8/11/2016 10:52 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings attached, or 
do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when getting 
involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the appearance 
of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would imagine 
you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials every year. 
You will also have to have someone tracking every single expense and what it is 
attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing the 
paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific
examples and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is
what I have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company
and the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed
lot/unit for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your
company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff
for internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get go,
maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for
20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

[Andreas Wiatowski]

We are using mostly grandstream ATA.  We are mainly using this platform for 
Business PBX…so Grandstream, Yeahlink and Polycom sip phones.

Cheers,
__
Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
Silo Wireless Inc.
Email  andr...@silowireless.com
19 Sage Court
Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free 
+1.866.727.4138

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

What are folks using for CPE?

On Aug 11, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Andreas Wiatowski 
> wrote:

We use Bicom Systems Muti Tenant PBX .  Buy a trunk or two with channels and 
share with all your instances…..works great…. About an 8K investment and yearly 
maintenance/licencing… Easy to manage….

Cheers,
__
Andreas Wiatowski | CEO
Silo Wireless Inc.
Email  andr...@silowireless.com
19 Sage Court
Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA)
Tel +1.519.449.5656  Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free 
+1.866.727.4138

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jim Bouse [Brazos WiFi]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

I’ve got 41 freepbx instances running on a VM host.  The challenge is keeping 
up with the security updates.

I’m moving to iPiFony right now so I have less to manage.

Jim Bouse
Owner
Mobile IT Pro - Brazos WiFi
979-985-5912
j...@brazoswifi.com

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 7:51 AM
To: Animal Farm >
Subject: [AFMUG] VOIP PBX - Hosted

I am considering getting back into this business in 6 more months and am 
wondering what all are using. I still really like IPiFony but I don't think I 
need that much hand holding now. Have been looking at FreePBX and a few others. 
Since this group is full of opinions, lets have some. I know many use 
Netsapiens and I even respect some of them ;)

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Definitely.

Travis, are you just generally saying the money comes with strings attached, or 
do you have actual specific experience with Special Assessment in this manner?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when getting 
involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the appearance 
of evil.

-Original Message-
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would imagine 
you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials every year. 
You will also have to have someone tracking every single expense and what it is 
attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for managing the 
paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
> Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?
>
> I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific 
> examples and advice from my provider friends here.
>
> I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is 
> what I have been told:
>
> You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company 
> and the city.
> They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed 
> lot/unit for around 20 years.
> Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
> The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your 
> company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
> Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff 
> for internet, which is fiber in my case.
>
> And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, 
> maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 
> 20 years.
>
> Anyone done anything like this?
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

Yeah, good people find themselves in legal trouble all the time when getting 
involved with guvmnt money.  Less than zero tolerance for even the 
appearance of evil.


-Original Message- 
From: Travis Johnson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials
every year. You will also have to have someone tracking every single
expense and what it is attached to, etc.

Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for
managing the paperwork and government related money.

Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific 
examples and advice from my provider friends here.


I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what 
I have been told:


You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and 
the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed 
lot/unit for around 20 years.

Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your 
company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.


And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, 
maybe with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 
years.


Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Travis Johnson]

You better build in an additional 100% for overhead costs... I would 
imagine you would have to start doing audited tax returns and financials 
every year. You will also have to have someone tracking every single 
expense and what it is attached to, etc.


Then you will have all the overhead and administrative costs for 
managing the paperwork and government related money.


Travis

On 8/11/2016 10:21 AM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific examples 
and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and the 
city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your company 
gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Sterling Jacobson]

So far I have used them mostly for large sweeping changes in my network 
topology.
They programmed my OSPF and MPLS/VPLS stuff en mass, remotely.
Which took a lot less time than I would have taken, and went a lot smoother.
Dennis did most, if not all, of the work himself.
He was awesome to work with and got the job done in a timely and relatively 
painless manner.
I intend to use them again for major changes and additions.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:34 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?


I agree on the support side.
How do you utilize linktechs to program your mikrotiks from remote?
do you power them up on a bench they have remote access to?

- Original Message -
From: Sterling Jacobson
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.

I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.

I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.

I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.

Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s only 
a call or two a day.

I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.

I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of different 
sources.
I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.

It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

what do you pay these contractors and for what work?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
Yes? (pops head out of hole)

I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Yep, ask Sterling.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Contractors?


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

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.

From: Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive and 
was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it looks 
like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new radios 
coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your fiber! I 
really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. Now i 
can keep on my plant on private property.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I 
didn't realize there were other variants :)

The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something nearly 
impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than 
for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I hope nobody 
here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).

I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application of it.  He 
may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the options. .



-- Original Message --
From: "Josh Luthman" 
>
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.

You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of 

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

I agree, Utopia had severe issues.

That is what I am trying to learn from and avoid.



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:30 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Brigham City was a disaster.  I went up at the request of the city council 
several times to see if we could fix the problem.  UTOPIA told BC that they 
owned all the OSP and it didn't matter that the city had paid off the debt they 
did not have control over the fiber.

It was worse in Perry.  There was duct everywhere but no fiber.  The city had 
paid for the duct.  UTOPIA still claimed total ownership and would not let me 
put fiber in that duct.

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:27 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Chuck, I know very little at the moment, but am investigating the possibility.

I do know Utoptia did something similar in Brigham City I think, and there 
might be a new example in Idaho, just waiting on particulars.

I also have another interesting funding example I am pursuing in one 
neighborhood, but can't talk about it until it succeeds or fails.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:24 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

No, but tell me more... please!

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific examples 
and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and the 
city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your company 
gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

I love watching you guys think :)

  - Original Message - 
  From: Sterling Jacobson 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment


  Chuck, I know very little at the moment, but am investigating the possibility.

  I do know Utoptia did something similar in Brigham City I think, and there 
might be a new example in Idaho, just waiting on particulars.

  I also have another interesting funding example I am pursuing in one 
neighborhood, but can't talk about it until it succeeds or fails.

  -Original Message-
  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:24 AM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  No, but tell me more... please!

  -Original Message-
  From: Sterling Jacobson
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
  To: 'af@afmug.com'
  Subject: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

  Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

  I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific 
examples and advice from my provider friends here.

  I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:

  You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and 
the city.
  They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.
  Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
  The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your 
company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
  Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.

  And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.

  Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

I agree on the support side.
How do you utilize linktechs to program your mikrotiks from remote?
do you power them up on a bench they have remote access to?

  - Original Message - 
  From: Sterling Jacobson 
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:50 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?


  Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.

   

  I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.

   

  I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.

   

  I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.

   

  Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s 
only a call or two a day.

   

  I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.

   

  I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of 
different sources.

  I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.

   

  It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.

   

   

  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
  Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

   

  what do you pay these contractors and for what work?

   

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson  
wrote:

Yes? (pops head out of hole)

 

I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

 

Yep, ask Sterling.  

 

From: Josh Luthman 

Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

 

Contractors?

 

 

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

 

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  
wrote:

  I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!

   

  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.  

Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.  

 

From: Kurt Fankhauser 

Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

 

I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost 
prohibitive and was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because 
now it looks like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the 
new radios coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your 
fiber! I really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. 
Now i can keep on my plant on private property.

 

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett  
wrote:

  My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb 
bag". I didn't realize there were other variants :)  

   

  The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something 
nearly impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a 
needle than for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I 
hope nobody here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).

   

  I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application 
of it.  He may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the 
options. .

   

   

   

  -- Original Message --

  From: "Josh Luthman" 

  To: "af@afmug.com" 

  Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

   

You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag. 

 

You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of spectrum.

 

 

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

 

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Josh Reynolds 
 wrote:

  I have looked this phrase up, but I still don't understand it.


  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Chuck McCown 

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

Brigham City was a disaster.  I went up at the request of the city council 
several times to see if we could fix the problem.  UTOPIA told BC that they 
owned all the OSP and it didn't matter that the city had paid off the debt 
they did not have control over the fiber.


It was worse in Perry.  There was duct everywhere but no fiber.  The city 
had paid for the duct.  UTOPIA still claimed total ownership and would not 
let me put fiber in that duct.


-Original Message- 
From: Sterling Jacobson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:27 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Chuck, I know very little at the moment, but am investigating the 
possibility.


I do know Utoptia did something similar in Brigham City I think, and there 
might be a new example in Idaho, just waiting on particulars.


I also have another interesting funding example I am pursuing in one 
neighborhood, but can't talk about it until it succeeds or fails.


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:24 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

No, but tell me more... please!

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific 
examples and advice from my provider friends here.


I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:


You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and 
the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.

Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your 
company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.


And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.


Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

That does yes :)

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

On Aug 11, 2016 12:23 PM, "Sterling Jacobson"  wrote:

> No, sorry, the customer asks for connection, THEN we construct the ‘drop’
> conduit and fiber/NID and schedule installation.
>
>
>
> So there is a different cost item for the drop construction to prepare it
> for inside installation.
>
>
>
> Does that make more sense?
>
>
>
> This would only be for areas/neighborhoods that are already mainline
> constructed which is yet ANOTHER cost item.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> You've already got the NIDs at all of the houses and then you charge $50
> for activation?  Why/how did you get every house wired and ready before
> they signed up for service?
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Ah, sorry, all of the outside box and splice are already done (NID).
>
>
>
> So this is very similar to a CPE install for wireless, only no roof work.
>
>
>
> The installer places the ONT device in the NID and connects up the house
> Ethernet to it.
>
> They usually cross-connect the Cat5e inside the house to a port in a
> central room, and connect the wireless router there.
>
>
>
> Average is about an hour an install I think.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:03 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson" 
> wrote:
>
> Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.
>
>
>
> I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.
>
>
>
> I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and
> configuration.
>
>
>
> I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with
> site maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site
> engineering.
>
>
>
> Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s
> only a call or two a day.
>
>
>
> I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.
>
>
>
> I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of
> different sources.
>
> I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.
>
>
>
> It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls
> and emails.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> what do you pay these contractors and for what work?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Yes? (pops head out of hole)
>
>
>
> I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Yep, ask Sterling.
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Contractors?
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
>
> I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber
> without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?
> $100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
> A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
>
> Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.
>
>
>
> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive
> and was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it
> looks like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new
> radios coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your
> fiber! I really did not want to own 

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Chuck, I know very little at the moment, but am investigating the possibility.

I do know Utoptia did something similar in Brigham City I think, and there 
might be a new example in Idaho, just waiting on particulars.

I also have another interesting funding example I am pursuing in one 
neighborhood, but can't talk about it until it succeeds or fails.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:24 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

No, but tell me more... please!

-Original Message-
From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific examples 
and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and the 
city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your company 
gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Heliax loss

[Jaime Solorza]

Yes... I figured with connectors and Polyphaser, they are pushing it.

On Aug 11, 2016 10:05 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

That was per 100 feet.  But yeah, 7 dB is worth trying to reclaim.

*From:* Jaime Solorza 
*Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:00 AM
*To:* Animal Farm 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Heliax loss


322 ft...!!!   That's what need... I am going suggest different size cable
or moving MDS radio closer to antenna.   Not sure why they want antenna so
high,  clean LOS at 60 ft level where antenna is now... Oh well it's work.

On Aug 11, 2016 9:30 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> 2.138 dB
> http://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:11 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Heliax loss
>
>
> What is loss of LDF4 @930mhz?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Chuck McCown]

No, but tell me more... please!

-Original Message- 
From: Sterling Jacobson

Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Special Assessment

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific 
examples and advice from my provider friends here.


I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:


You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and 
the city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.

Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your 
company gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.


And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.


Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Sterling Jacobson]

No, sorry, the customer asks for connection, THEN we construct the ‘drop’ 
conduit and fiber/NID and schedule installation.

So there is a different cost item for the drop construction to prepare it for 
inside installation.

Does that make more sense?

This would only be for areas/neighborhoods that are already mainline 
constructed which is yet ANOTHER cost item.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:21 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

You've already got the NIDs at all of the houses and then you charge $50 for 
activation?  Why/how did you get every house wired and ready before they signed 
up for service?


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

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
Ah, sorry, all of the outside box and splice are already done (NID).

So this is very similar to a CPE install for wireless, only no roof work.

The installer places the ONT device in the NID and connects up the house 
Ethernet to it.
They usually cross-connect the Cat5e inside the house to a port in a central 
room, and connect the wireless router there.

Average is about an hour an install I think.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:03 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?


An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?

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

On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson" 
> wrote:
Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.

I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.

I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.

I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.

Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s only 
a call or two a day.

I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.

I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of different 
sources.
I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.

It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

what do you pay these contractors and for what work?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
Yes? (pops head out of hole)

I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Yep, ask Sterling.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Contractors?


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

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.

From: Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive and 
was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it looks 
like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new radios 
coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your fiber! I 
really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. Now i 
can keep on my plant on private property.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I 

[AFMUG] Special Assessment

[Sterling Jacobson]

Has anyone here ever done a special assessment funded project?

I have a couple of examples in Utah/Idaho, but am looking for specific examples 
and advice from my provider friends here.

I'm not sure if it's called something else in other states so this is what I 
have been told:

You talk to a land developer, get them to partner up with your company and the 
city.
They allow a tax or assessment item to be attached to the developed lot/unit 
for around 20 years.
Sometime like $150 a year, so $3000 total over the period.
The city council agrees and creates a bond type item for that and your company 
gets a check for the total amount times number of properties.
Then you work with the developer to install all of the necessary stuff for 
internet, which is fiber in my case.

And the new property owner has your service available from the get go, maybe 
with free install, and a $150 a year discount on the service for 20 years.

Anyone done anything like this?

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

You've already got the NIDs at all of the houses and then you charge $50
for activation?  Why/how did you get every house wired and ready before
they signed up for service?


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

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
wrote:

> Ah, sorry, all of the outside box and splice are already done (NID).
>
>
>
> So this is very similar to a CPE install for wireless, only no roof work.
>
>
>
> The installer places the ONT device in the NID and connects up the house
> Ethernet to it.
>
> They usually cross-connect the Cat5e inside the house to a port in a
> central room, and connect the wireless router there.
>
>
>
> Average is about an hour an install I think.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:03 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson" 
> wrote:
>
> Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.
>
>
>
> I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.
>
>
>
> I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and
> configuration.
>
>
>
> I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with
> site maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site
> engineering.
>
>
>
> Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s
> only a call or two a day.
>
>
>
> I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.
>
>
>
> I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of
> different sources.
>
> I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.
>
>
>
> It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls
> and emails.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> what do you pay these contractors and for what work?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Yes? (pops head out of hole)
>
>
>
> I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Yep, ask Sterling.
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Contractors?
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
>
> I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber
> without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?
> $100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
> A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
>
> Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.
>
>
>
> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive
> and was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it
> looks like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new
> radios coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your
> fiber! I really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of
> ways. Now i can keep on my plant on private property.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>
> My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I
> didn't realize there were other variants :)
>
>
>
> The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something nearly
> impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
> than for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I
> hope nobody here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).
>
>
>
> I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application of
> it.  He may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the
> options. .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Original Message --
>
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Sterling Jacobson]

Ah, sorry, all of the outside box and splice are already done (NID).

So this is very similar to a CPE install for wireless, only no roof work.

The installer places the ONT device in the NID and connects up the house 
Ethernet to it.
They usually cross-connect the Cat5e inside the house to a port in a central 
room, and connect the wireless router there.

Average is about an hour an install I think.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:03 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?


An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?

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

On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson" 
> wrote:
Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.

I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.

I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.

I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.

Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s only 
a call or two a day.

I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.

I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of different 
sources.
I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.

It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

what do you pay these contractors and for what work?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
Yes? (pops head out of hole)

I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Yep, ask Sterling.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Contractors?


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

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.

From: Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive and 
was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it looks 
like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new radios 
coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your fiber! I 
really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. Now i 
can keep on my plant on private property.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I 
didn't realize there were other variants :)

The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something nearly 
impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than 
for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I hope nobody 
here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).

I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application of it.  He 
may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the options. .



-- Original Message --
From: "Josh Luthman" 
>
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.

You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of spectrum.


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

On Wed, 

Re: [AFMUG] Heliax loss

[Chuck McCown]

That was per 100 feet.  But yeah, 7 dB is worth trying to reclaim.  

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:00 AM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Heliax loss

322 ft...!!!   That's what need... I am going suggest different size cable or 
moving MDS radio closer to antenna.   Not sure why they want antenna so high,  
clean LOS at 60 ft level where antenna is now... Oh well it's work.  


On Aug 11, 2016 9:30 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

  2.138 dB
  http://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm

  From: Jaime Solorza 
  Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:11 AM
  To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: [AFMUG] Heliax loss

  What is loss of LDF4 @930mhz? 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Chuck McCown]

Bonobos

From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:02 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?

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


On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson"  wrote:

  Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.



  I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.



  I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.



  I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.



  Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s 
only a call or two a day.



  I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.



  I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of 
different sources.

  I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.



  It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.





  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
  Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
  To: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?



  what do you pay these contractors and for what work?



  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson  
wrote:

Yes? (pops head out of hole)



I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.





From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?



Yep, ask Sterling.  



From: Josh Luthman 

Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?



Contractors?





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



On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  
wrote:

  I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!



  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.  

Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.  



From: Kurt Fankhauser 

Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?



I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost 
prohibitive and was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because 
now it looks like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the 
new radios coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your 
fiber! I really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. 
Now i can keep on my plant on private property.



On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett  
wrote:

  My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb 
bag". I didn't realize there were other variants :)  



  The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something 
nearly impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a 
needle than for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I 
hope nobody here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).



  I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application 
of it.  He may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the 
options. .







  -- Original Message --

  From: "Josh Luthman" 

  To: "af@afmug.com" 

  Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?



You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag. 



You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of spectrum.





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



On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Josh Reynolds 
 wrote:

  I have looked this phrase up, but I still don't understand it.


  On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Chuck McCown  
wrote:
  > They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a 
camel through
  > the eye of a needle.
  >
  > -Original 

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Josh Luthman]

An ONT install is $50???  Are these tiny Chinese children?

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

On Aug 11, 2016 11:50 AM, "Sterling Jacobson"  wrote:

> Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.
>
>
>
> I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.
>
>
>
> I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and
> configuration.
>
>
>
> I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with
> site maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site
> engineering.
>
>
>
> Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s
> only a call or two a day.
>
>
>
> I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.
>
>
>
> I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of
> different sources.
>
> I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.
>
>
>
> It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls
> and emails.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> what do you pay these contractors and for what work?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Yes? (pops head out of hole)
>
>
>
> I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Yep, ask Sterling.
>
>
>
> *From:* Josh Luthman 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> Contractors?
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
>
> I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber
> without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?
> $100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
>
> A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
>
> Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.
>
>
>
> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser 
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive
> and was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it
> looks like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new
> radios coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your
> fiber! I really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of
> ways. Now i can keep on my plant on private property.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:
>
> My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I
> didn't realize there were other variants :)
>
>
>
> The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something nearly
> impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
> than for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I
> hope nobody here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).
>
>
>
> I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application of
> it.  He may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the
> options. .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Original Message --
>
> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
> Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
>
>
> You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.
>
>
>
> You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of spectrum.
>
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Josh Reynolds 
> wrote:
>
> I have looked this phrase up, but I still don't understand it.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> > They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel
> through
> > the eye of a needle.
> >
> > -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
> > To: af@afmug.com
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
> >
> > So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.
> >
> > 

Re: [AFMUG] Heliax loss

[Jaime Solorza]

322 ft...!!!   That's what need... I am going suggest different size cable
or moving MDS radio closer to antenna.   Not sure why they want antenna so
high,  clean LOS at 60 ft level where antenna is now... Oh well it's work.

On Aug 11, 2016 9:30 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> 2.138 dB
> http://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm
>
> *From:* Jaime Solorza 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 9:11 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Heliax loss
>
>
> What is loss of LDF4 @930mhz?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

[Sterling Jacobson]

Partner companies do the construction phase and drops/splicing.

I contract out the CPE/ONT and inside install for $50 an install.

I also contract LinkTechs for larger scale mikrotik programming and 
configuration.

I have a local company and other local people on contract for help with site 
maintenance and setup and other network monitoring and site engineering.

Most of my phone calls are sales so I do all of that personally since it’s only 
a call or two a day.

I handle front line support since again it’s very few calls or messages.

I do find now days that support and even sales come in from a lot of different 
sources.
I get phone calls, texts, emails and facebook messages that I respond to.

It’s a lot different from a few years ago where it was mostly phone calls and 
emails.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

what do you pay these contractors and for what work?

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
Yes? (pops head out of hole)

I am the only employee, everyone else is contracted.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Yep, ask Sterling.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

Contractors?


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

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
I can run a WISP by myself, (have been for 12 years), no way to do fiber 
without any employees. First two good employees is going to cost what?  
$100k/year? I'm gonna keep on doing it this way as long as i can!!!

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
A bunch of folks on this list doing fiber with very few employees.
Wireless is and always will be ersatz fiber at best.

From: Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 12:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

I looked into doing fiber a couple years back but was too cost prohibitive and 
was going to require too many employees. Glad I waited because now it looks 
like we can get fiber type speeds over wireless with some of the new radios 
coming out. Plus you wont have to worry about someone cutting your fiber! I 
really did not want to own plant that was in the public right of ways. Now i 
can keep on my plant on private property.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Adam Moffett 
> wrote:
My grampa used to say "you can't put 10 lbs of shit in a 2 lb bag". I 
didn't realize there were other variants :)

The camel thing is used in the bible as a metaphor for something nearly 
impossible.  "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than 
for a rich man to go to heaven"or something to that effect.  (I hope nobody 
here has gotten too rich, we want to see you on the other side).

I imagine Reynolds understands the metaphor, but not the application of it.  He 
may be right to question it.  Google has probably weighed the options. .



-- Original Message --
From: "Josh Luthman" 
>
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Sent: 8/10/2016 1:36:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?

You can't put 12 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.

You can't get 100 gbps in ~100 MHz of spectrum.


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

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Josh Reynolds 
> wrote:
I have looked this phrase up, but I still don't understand it.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Chuck McCown 
> wrote:
> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel through
> the eye of a needle.
>
> -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave?
>
> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your WISP.
>
> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in
> the world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best
> RF engineering talent in the world on their payroll?
>
> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, 

Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux sync

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Yep. It should.   Might need a firmware update.

On Aug 11, 2016 8:38 AM, "Mark - Myakka Technologies" 
wrote:

> Forrest,
>
> will an old SiteMonitor Base A0 work?
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Markmailto:m...@mailmt.com
>
> Myakka Technologies, Inc.
> www.MyakkaTech.com
>
> Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life
> http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL
>
> Please Donate at Please Donate at http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html
> --
>
> Thursday, August 11, 2016, 10:00:30 AM, you wrote:
>
> FCLA> No,ￜ you need a base unit to pull the data out of the newer
> injectors.
>
> FCLA> Or you can hook a deluxe syncpipe up to a radio directly.
>
>
> FCLA> On Aug 11, 2016 6:38 AM, "Mark - Myakka Technologies" <
> m...@mailmt.com> wrote:
> FCLA> We had to replace one of our old sync injectors with one of the newer
> FCLA> ones (H1).ￜ One the old one I had a serial port I could plug into
> to
> FCLA> check the GPS status.ￜ Is there anything like that on the new one?
>
>
>
> FCLA> --
> FCLA> Thanks,
> FCLA> ￜMarkￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ mailto:
> m...@mailmt.com
>
> FCLA> Myakka Technologies, Inc.
> FCLA> www.MyakkaTech.com
>
> FCLA> Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life
> FCLA> http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL
>
> FCLA> Please Donate at http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>