Re: [WISPA] A little help with Mikrotik

[Mark Koskenmaki]

Yo, Mac.  Read first.

I use them as clients, and am sorely disappointed with the performance of
Mikrotik in B mode.

I don't see what changing to a different SBC would do.   For that matter, I
put Ikarus on a board half the price of  the RB112 and got double the
throughput in the exact same spot.You don't "get what you pay for", you
simply have to find that which works best.

+++
neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East Washington
email me at mark at neofast dot net
541-969-8200
Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] A little help with Mikrotik


> Mark Koskenmaki:
>
> >>Am I missing something?
>
> YES!! No doubt!
>
> >>Is this just a setting problem or ???
>
>
> "Or" is a big word and I really think it is an "or" problem. I think you
> need your head examined first for saving the $60.00 on the difference
> between a RB532 & a RB112.
> Were these vital links?
> Were they mission critical links?
> Do you have residual money coming in off these links?
>
>  If you answered yes to any of the above questions and you put a
residential
> RB112 (16 megs memory) in place - - you got what you paid for - - quit
> bitching for your mistake and complaining about throughput, suck it up and
> get a real SBC that will give you what you are looking for!
>
>  Don't cut corners again and you won't get burned. You will not suffer
loss
> as you can reuse the RB112's as a "client" - - - that's what they were
built
> for although you can use them as a backhaul - just don't expect the world
to
> pass through them all at once.
>
> I apologize if this seemed rash, but it chaps me hind end to here some one
> complain about their Chevy half ton pick up truck not hauling 80,000lbs
and
> this complaint is along those lines.
>
> You get what you pay for!!
>
> Mac
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> +++
> neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East
Washington
> email me at mark at neofast dot net
> 541-969-8200
> Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[Dawn DiPietro]

Mark,

As quoted;

   "Income is, of course, a factor in broadband 
adoption. As the table on page three shows,
   15% of those who live in households with income 
under $30,000 annually have
   broadband compared with 57% of those in households 
whose incomes exceed $75,000
   annually. But the data do show that broadband is no 
longer just the province of upper-

   income Americans."

www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_trends2006.pdf

Those dreaded facts! ;-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Mark Koskenmaki wrote:


My experience has been that income has almost no relationship to whether or
not someone wants and gets high-speed internet.

I know people who drive new trucks and bmw's and won't spring for high speed
internet.   And others who have to scrape it together nickel by nickel who
do.

And, in my area, at least, there's well past 25% who simply don't have a
computer, much less want internet.


+++
neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East Washington
email me at mark at neofast dot net
541-969-8200
Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net


---
---

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Rural Broadband Remains Spotty

[Dawn DiPietro]

 Rural Broadband Remains Spotty
› › › Broadband

By Enid Burns | May 8, 2006

Several factors, including geography and population density, account for 
the 71 percent of American households that either dial-up or don't 
access the Web from home. A telecommunications report to congressional 
committees from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) details 
barriers to high-speed Internet adoption.


Twenty-eight percent of American households subscribed to broadband 
service in 2005, about 30 million homes. Of the remaining 71 percent of 
households, 30 percent subscribe to dial-up Internet service, and 41 
percent have no home access. Among broadband subscribers, distribution 
between cable modem and DSL was almost evenly split. DSL is less likely 
to serve rural residents; service is only available within a three-mile 
radius of a central office.


Certain household factors make residents more or less likely to 
subscribe to broadband services. Households with high incomes are 39 
percent more likely to subscribe to broadband than lower-income 
households. College-educated heads of households are 12 percent more 
likely to adopt broadband than households headed by someone without a 
college degree.


While price remains a barrier to adoption, the cost of broadband 
services has declined over time. Tax is a barrier to subscribing when it 
equals 10 percent, however when tax amounts to only 5 percent of the 
rate it doesn't affect subscription rates among rural residents and 
lower-income households.


Broadband providers are available for all but 1 percent of the country's 
population. Ninety-nine percent of Americans live in 95 percent of the 
Zip Codes that have at least one ISP offering broadband access. While it 
appears companies continue to build out infrastructure for broadband 
access, geography and population density deter providers from further 
deployment.


Federal programs like the Universal Service Fund (USF) and the 
Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service (RUS) have increased 
the uptake of broadband service in rural areas.


Due to rugged terrain, it's more expensive to deploy land-based 
broadband in rural areas. The same areas are less populated and return 
smaller revenues. Broadband providers are more likely to enter a 
particular market if there's no existing competition, though the land 
grab appears to be over. By contrast, incumbent telecom and cable 
providers are likely to roll out or enhance services in markets with new 
competition.


The GAO conducts data collection using Form 477, a government-mandated 
survey of telecommunications competition and deployment of broadband 
services. At a Zip Code level, the FCC collects data based on where 
subscribers are served, not where providers have deployed broadband 
infrastructure for the report.


http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3604581

---
---

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] A little help with Mikrotik

[Mac Dearman]

Mark,


  I apologize for that!!

 I miss-understood what you were doing with them and thought you were using
them as a backhaul solution - which they will do, but I didn't think a
person ought to complain for lousy throughput when he chose the solution.

Again - sorry!!

Mac 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:02 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] A little help with Mikrotik

Yo, Mac.  Read first.

I use them as clients, and am sorely disappointed with the performance of
Mikrotik in B mode.

I don't see what changing to a different SBC would do.   For that matter, I
put Ikarus on a board half the price of  the RB112 and got double the
throughput in the exact same spot.You don't "get what you pay for", you
simply have to find that which works best.

+++
neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East Washington
email me at mark at neofast dot net
541-969-8200
Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] A little help with Mikrotik


> Mark Koskenmaki:
>
> >>Am I missing something?
>
> YES!! No doubt!
>
> >>Is this just a setting problem or ???
>
>
> "Or" is a big word and I really think it is an "or" problem. I think you
> need your head examined first for saving the $60.00 on the difference
> between a RB532 & a RB112.
> Were these vital links?
> Were they mission critical links?
> Do you have residual money coming in off these links?
>
>  If you answered yes to any of the above questions and you put a
residential
> RB112 (16 megs memory) in place - - you got what you paid for - - quit
> bitching for your mistake and complaining about throughput, suck it up and
> get a real SBC that will give you what you are looking for!
>
>  Don't cut corners again and you won't get burned. You will not suffer
loss
> as you can reuse the RB112's as a "client" - - - that's what they were
built
> for although you can use them as a backhaul - just don't expect the world
to
> pass through them all at once.
>
> I apologize if this seemed rash, but it chaps me hind end to here some one
> complain about their Chevy half ton pick up truck not hauling 80,000lbs
and
> this complaint is along those lines.
>
> You get what you pay for!!
>
> Mac
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> +++
> neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East
Washington
> email me at mark at neofast dot net
> 541-969-8200
> Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Outsourced installations

[chris cooper]

Im sure this has been covered before…..

 

Have any of you outsourced installations?  If so, has it
been a positive experience, how much do you pay a contractor?

 

Thanks

Chris






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Mario Pommier]

John,
   Good to hear you got issues fixed, independent of the 
manufacturer/vendor you used.

   Regarding the radios you're using now.
   Some of us, like our company, started with Alvarion and never 
switched out.
   It's hard to try other technologies that appear less expensive, when 
the one you already have proves itself year after year after year.  And 
when you can talk to really good engineering support.
   OK, so we haven't found a way to use Alvarion equipment on 
residential markets except where we don't have to compete with $30/mo 
dsl.  But I know some folks, even on this list, who somehow have done that.
   But on the business side, our transition from Alvarion BAII or 900 
to VL has had the same response from our customers that you describe 
"wow, that is fast".  Mind you, these customers are still limited on our 
bandwidth manager to the same 1Mbps symmetrical speeds.  But the VL 
network just seems to fly compared to the previous, 4 or more year old 
technologies now.
   It's also hard to try out other technologies when someone like you 
give a report like this one: I was thinking about using Trango for a 
link, but I do not want headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.

   Thanks.

Mario

John Scrivner wrote:

As you guys know my company was having some serious speed and 
reliability issues with our existing Trango backhaul some time back. 
We have about 25 tower locations in Southern Illinois which until 
recently were all fed from these Trango radios. We had countless short 
outages, signal irregularities, bandwidth crunches, etc. The Trangos 
used to work just fine. In the last year or so the Trango links have 
become a big problem for us. We tried several things to fix these 
problems but the Trangos were simply being pushed to do more than they 
were designed to do. The amount of packet counts, speed, etc. we 
needed to reliably serve the towers simply was too much for these 
radios and they were buckling under the strain.


I have always thought highly of Alvarion and knew we could probably 
find a good place for their equipment in our network someday. 
Previously the trouble with choosing Alvarion had always been that we 
either needed something they did not offer at the time needed ( as was 
the case when we selected Trango for multi-point 5 GHz backhaul back 
in the day) or that they were too expensive. Alvarion finally has a 
place in our network.


In the case of our troubled backhaul links Alvarion's VL product 
seemed to fit the bill to help us now. We had seen reports of 50,000 
packet per second throughput and up to 35 megabit per second capacity 
with the new Version 4 of the VL firmware. When I asked about the 
product I was directed to a guy named Mike Cowan of Wireless 
Connections who is a RF engineer and sells Alvarion VL.


Mike spent an incredible amount of time with our staff to look over 
the issues we were having and help us find ways of correcting it. He 
never charged us a dime for what I consider to be thousands of dollars 
worth of support and training. Mike Cowan and Alvarion did more for us 
to help us build a better WISP network than any vendor ever has since 
the day I became a WISP.


We also had some serious peer to peer traffic issues on our network 
which were resolved with a Mikrotik box running to slow down that 
traffic. The combination of this box and the new more robust Alvarion 
VL backhaul has led customers to remark, "It's like the difference 
between night and day". We have zero downtime on our backhaul now. We 
were getting countless reports of downtime from our network monitoring 
system before. Now it just works.


I don't think I can overstate the impact Alvarion VL has had on my 
network. If you are having problems with your network then you need to 
at least call Alvarion and give them a shot. In the last three months 
or so we have migrated about 40% of our backhaul links over to 
Alvarion VL. Since that time outages on those most troubled links have 
vanished. Throughput has tripled. People have gone from screaming and 
yelling to sending their friends to us to hookup.


If you guys want to compare the numbers out there I am sure you will 
find a few  different systems that will give comparable umbers to what 
we are seeing with Alvarion VL. What you do not see in those numbers 
is the quality and the reliability of the system. I have always been a 
tinkerer and I will continue to tinker. What I believe though is that 
there is something to be said for buying a high-quality, engineered 
system and that is what you get with Alvarion VL. If you have tower 
locations and/or enterprise customers who cannot afford to be a test 
subject for your tinkering then consider calling Alvarion for those 
links. There is no shame in admitting you cannot possibly build a 
system as reliable as a company who has spent millions of dollars and 
hired countless designers to research and build a better data radio. I 
am certainly not ashamed to 

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[Tom DeReggi]

I don't disagree that many people choose Dial UP by Choice.
I'm just saying that 30% of America does not.
I don't have data on this, but neither does any one else, so of course it is 
speculation.
I also think its a sales problem. Better sales and marketing targeted to the 
Dial Up user would also contribute to changing this.
For example, how many parents knowthere are parental control home routers 
that can restrict usage by time of day?
For example, I revently converted some DialUP users to Wireless, and had 
been marketing DSL Wireless to them for years, unsuccessfully.
They replied, "I got the flyers regularly but never called, because I knew 
DSL didn't exist in my area, from past experience, and thought it was just 
unqualified marketing.
I didn't realize Wireless was a different technology to get signal to the 
home, and thought it was referring to Indoor wireless router".

My point is that statistical data is flawed for those type of reasons.

The big kicker is that many keep Dial Up for mobility. As WIFI and FREE 
broadband in Hotels and such, and broadband in every home gets closer to be 
met, and Email by Cell Phone,  the need for Mobile Dial Up starts to 
diminish.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition



Tom DeReggi wrote:


Peter,

" Other figures from research firms like Forrester
show that only about 40% of Americans have high-speed connections at
home, 30% rely on dial-up and 25% don’t have any Internet connections at
all!"

I do not disagree with those statistics. I disagree with your statement 
that most DialUp users are DialUp users by choice, and that most people 
that don't have Internet are doing so by choice.


I think you are inferring there, but I know several people who keep 
dial-up (mostly with AOL) because of the pain of change, including my 
sister, who could get SBC DSL by Yahoo for less than her AOL account.  So 
yeah many are on it on purpose.  A buddy keeps dial-up at home so his kids 
will not get addicted and be on MySpace all night. Again on purpose he has 
dial-up.


The facts are, 60% of America is under served, which is both embaressing 
for the US, and a call for opportunity.  In todays world, there is 
justification for every home in America to have broadband and to have a 
computer.  Not having a computer, is no longer a valid arguement. Even 
the most impoverished homes, can manage to budget to buy a $300 computer 
from BestBuy, that includes monitor and printer.


Yeah. People on welfare buy PC's. They buy Xbox. It's a status and social 
thing. But I won't write a thesis on it. Again this is from personal 
experience.


Or for that matter to get a FREE used donated computer.  A pentium pc, 
does Broadband fine (although slow and problematic).  The reason people 
do not buy broadband, is NOT price. It doesn't need to be cheaper. There 
is already cost justification, the end user just doesn't always realize 
it at first.  Understanding that the Average DialUp user is paying $35 a 
month already (line and service).  The problem is that broadband is to 
cheap.  So large players can't justify expansion into lower profit 
centers, by subsidees of higher paying subs.  The problem is that users 
DO NOT HAVE OPTIONS.  USERS HAVE NOT BEEN SOLICITED WITH PROPER SALES AND 
MARKETING TO CONVINCE THEM THEY NEED IT, BECAUE IT IS POINTLESS WHEN IT 
IS NOT AVAILABLE.


I think the duopoly is doing a great job of marketing and lowering the 
ARPU to get everyone on the internet.
But I am still amazed when I ask people for an email - and they don't have 
one!


- Peter
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.5/451 - Release Date: 9/19/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[Tom DeReggi]

The only thing that I forgot about is

Broadband may actually increase the sales of DialUP.  So a higher market 
share of BRoadband does not mean a lower market share of DialUP.
Everyone needs a Dial UP for redundancy, when their main broadband goes 
down, which it eventually will, since its a commodity low cost service now.
As people have Broadband, the more they train themselves to rely on it, and 
the bigger the need they have a backup.


So any statistic that does not ask,  "How Many broadband connection types do 
you have in your home", is flawed.
Just like people having more than one TV in the home, they have more than 
one communication device in their home.
We have 4 cell phones in our house, (Mine, Wifes, AuPairs, Spare).  Two 
phone services (Verizon Analog, and VOIP).
The same will likely happen with Broadband. More and More businesses will 
have more than one broadband connection.


The cheaper it gets the more likely two connections will be had. A reason 
that proves cost is not what is preventing broadband, they end up spending 
the same amount and getting two for the old price of one.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition



Tom DeReggi wrote:


Peter,

" Other figures from research firms like Forrester
show that only about 40% of Americans have high-speed connections at
home, 30% rely on dial-up and 25% don’t have any Internet connections at
all!"

I do not disagree with those statistics. I disagree with your statement 
that most DialUp users are DialUp users by choice, and that most people 
that don't have Internet are doing so by choice.


I think you are inferring there, but I know several people who keep 
dial-up (mostly with AOL) because of the pain of change, including my 
sister, who could get SBC DSL by Yahoo for less than her AOL account.  So 
yeah many are on it on purpose.  A buddy keeps dial-up at home so his kids 
will not get addicted and be on MySpace all night. Again on purpose he has 
dial-up.


The facts are, 60% of America is under served, which is both embaressing 
for the US, and a call for opportunity.  In todays world, there is 
justification for every home in America to have broadband and to have a 
computer.  Not having a computer, is no longer a valid arguement. Even 
the most impoverished homes, can manage to budget to buy a $300 computer 
from BestBuy, that includes monitor and printer.


Yeah. People on welfare buy PC's. They buy Xbox. It's a status and social 
thing. But I won't write a thesis on it. Again this is from personal 
experience.


Or for that matter to get a FREE used donated computer.  A pentium pc, 
does Broadband fine (although slow and problematic).  The reason people 
do not buy broadband, is NOT price. It doesn't need to be cheaper. There 
is already cost justification, the end user just doesn't always realize 
it at first.  Understanding that the Average DialUp user is paying $35 a 
month already (line and service).  The problem is that broadband is to 
cheap.  So large players can't justify expansion into lower profit 
centers, by subsidees of higher paying subs.  The problem is that users 
DO NOT HAVE OPTIONS.  USERS HAVE NOT BEEN SOLICITED WITH PROPER SALES AND 
MARKETING TO CONVINCE THEM THEY NEED IT, BECAUE IT IS POINTLESS WHEN IT 
IS NOT AVAILABLE.


I think the duopoly is doing a great job of marketing and lowering the 
ARPU to get everyone on the internet.
But I am still amazed when I ask people for an email - and they don't have 
one!


- Peter
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.5/451 - Release Date: 9/19/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[Tom DeReggi]

Scriv,Congrads on the spectrum win.

What are you doing about equipment to operate in that spectrum range?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Koskenmaki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:55 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition



I can only imagine.


+++
neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East 
Washington

email me at mark at neofast dot net
541-969-8200
Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net

- Original Message - 
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition



Here is an idea for a federal policy plan to end the broadband access
problems. How about Base Station Licenses instead of 10,000 square mile
licenses like we do now. Anyone could buy a Base Station License. Heaven
forbid a regular person should be allowed to compete with a Megasuck.net
RBOC! Someday I will share with all of you what it is like to be part of
the license auction system as I just went through in the AWS auction.
Root canals are more fun.
Scriv


Mark Koskenmaki wrote:

>- Original Message - 
>

>From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 11:19 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition
>
>
>
>
>>It is a lack of federal policy. Every nation that has a federal policy
>>on teelcom/BB/internet has strong penetration and competition - and
>>cheaper rates. Granted there are lots of debates about why some
>>countries are cheaper, and have more users, but the fact remains that
>>the FCC has failed - FAILED - in its charge of ensuring competition and
>>upholding the Telecom Act of 1996. Heck, they don't even enforce merger
>>requirements nor spectrum purchase requirements.
>>
>>Without a clear plan, laser focus, and habitual execution, you usually
>>have failure.
>>
>>
>
>The notion that the federal government can actually create a policy or
>program to provide something that is better than free enterprise is

absurd

>on it's face, and evidence suggests that is the worst possible means of
>attempting to do anything.
>
>I will agree that  there have been a lot of federal failures, but they
>relate to over-regulation, the creation of monopolies, and a failure at
>being good stewards of the public trust.   Add this all up, and you have

to

>wonder why on earth people think the federal government should EVER be
>considered as being responsible for much of anything in our daily lives.
>
>
>
>
>
>>- Peter
>>
>>
>>Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I can't believe that someone would be dumb enough to write this... 
>>>The

>>>biggest problem is a lack of FEDERAL POLICY
>>>
>>>Oh, please.   Spare us the insane idiocy...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>-- 
>>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

>>
>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.5/451 - Release Date: 9/19/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Tom DeReggi]

I'm glad to hear that John found success with Alvarion.
However, his post does leave out technical detail on why the equipment had 
helped, which may be misleading to a reader.
I have found great success with Trango for many reasons, and will continue 
to in comming years, and the fact that Alvarion shines in some areas now, 
does not conclude that Trango is not a good platform for WISPs, as Trango 
products still offers one of the best value propositions on the market 
today.  There are many factors to influence what choice is best for you and 
when.


As far as Alvarion, they are definately back in the game as a leader in 
reliabilty for WISPs.
We also have been very please with our live testing results of their 
product.


I'd like to point out that Alvarion not only provides top engineering behind 
their product (so you don;t have to be one your self), but also empowers the 
WISP to take advantage of their own engineering capabilties.  In other words 
they give the engineering control back to the WISP.  All Alvarion radio 
products are connectorized, allowing seperate antennas.  Every radio product 
shows Signal-to-Nosie ratios in real time while live.  What this allows is 
for a WISP operator to accurately predict in advance of a truck roll, what a 
problem is, and will be required to fix it. Although it takes a truck roll, 
the WISP is empowered to make what ever antenna changes are necessary to fix 
such link, in the shortest amount of time, because no Radio reconfigurations 
or internal documentations are needed, just the replacement of desired 
antenna. I'm an engineer and don;t want to be limited. And when their is 
engineering over my head, their is a solid engineering staff at Alvarion 
that is available.


What is a fact, is that I had three > $500 ARPU new subs, in the last two 
weeks, that were not successfully installed, because they were teatering 
right on the edge of the readios capabilty to get around environmental 
conditions that were causing minor packet loss. $500 ARPU subs don't keep 
service even with MINOR packet loss.  I attempted to get these with our 
Trango product line, because that is what is instaleld at the CellSite, 
taking the spectrum, with other live clients on the sectors.  As a result, I 
lost all three, The reason is that Wireless scares prospects, and every 
little bit of confidence that we could pull out of them was required to get 
the sale in the first place, and the first hint of difficulty, they get 
scared and pull the plug, before it starts.  They ask themselves, "What 
If?".   Had I had an external antenna option, and not been limited, I would 
be $1500 a month richer this week.


What I'm learning is that as my business grows, the abilty to change and 
move (channel options) is becoming less important that the abilty to 
effectively battle it out. The reason is that if every time I hiot noise, I 
move away from the channel, eventually others take those channels., until 
they are all gone, and their is no where else to move to. Sometimes its 
better to claim the space and say, "I'm here first", "go find another 
channel to play on".  And keep fighting back with better antennas. As the 
antenna grows, you over power the interference, but the important point is, 
you reduce the interference to you and them, by restricting the beamwidth. 
The high power via antenna you go, the more courtious it is to the other 
player to attempt avoidence of signals interfering.  Alvarion gives that 
advantage.


The point I'm making is that Alvarion "gets it", when providing ext antenna 
options, and why its necessary for.


Until Trango puts out an external connector SU, with strong reliable ARQ 
feature (required for TDD in noisy environments), they are at a severe 
disadvantage in PtMP to competitor vendors.  Because without it, we just 
loose to many High ARPU prospects.   The problem that we have with Trango 
right now, is they are making great accomplishments in their technology for 
low ARPU markets, but they have forgotten about taking care of the need of 
the High ARPU clients in PtMP in recent years.  We don't want minimum 
engineering for our high ARPU clients, they don't want the risk, and neither 
do we. I am still a big supporter of Trango's value, I just have recognized 
that this hole MUST be filled by them soon, for their product to stay a 
viable option.


Alvarion on the other hand has managed to solve the current day problems. 
But this comes at a price, and the step left for the provider, is to run the 
numbers to see if it all works financially.  Alvarion's numbers don't work 
everywhere, but after the fact, we are finding that they actually would have 
worked in more places than we originally thought.


Now in fairness, I have made some cross comparison between PtMP and PTP 
products. The Trango Atlas has an external antenna option also if doing PTP.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc


- Original Message - 
From: "Mario Pommier" <[EMAIL P

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[John Scrivner]

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are 
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links 
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad option. 
I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good job. Trango 
has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years (including 
myself until recently). I have found though that for my applications in 
feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 100% better than 
Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have a need for a 
low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing that the Trango 
multipoint radios will still provide excellent service. Just because I 
have soured on them does not mean they are not a platform for WISPs to 
consider.

Scriv

I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.

   Thanks.

Mario


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S. 16thAmong IndustrializedNations

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

I think what we really need is more telecommuting.  That will help drop out 
dependence on petrol, reduce the loads on the roads, save hours per day for 
some folks, help moms stay home with the kids etc.  I think it would also 
help de-urbanize the country and make it much harder for terrorists to do 
such large damage.  It would also help people be safer (crime is usually 
lower in the country).


I think that telecommuting will be the next really big "ap" that hits.
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S. 16thAmong 
IndustrializedNations



We are actually at the point where about 68% of the US population has 
Internet.

The rest don't own a computer or do not want Internet.

Some of that 68% is still on dial-up. For some it is a price thing. For 
some it is not understanding technology. For some it is to make the 
experience painful to avoid wasting hours on the internet.


So dropping the price - as SBC and VZ have experienced - to sub-$15 gets 
you some dial-up conversions. But when the price returns to normal, some 
switch back to cheaper dial-up.


The dilemma becomes How do you get more internet appliance (PC's, laptops, 
PDAs, internet terminal) penetration?


The marketing question is: What Remarkable & Useful things can you do with 
broadband (other than entertainment)?


That's my 2 cents.

Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Travis Johnson]

Tom,

I hate to say this, but I think you missed the boat on your three 
$500/mo subs. Trango still offers a 5830-EXT unit for $729 (retail) that 
would have allowed you the external antenna that was so critical for 
these links. Why did you not spend the $700 and have them paid for in 
less than two months?


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


I'm glad to hear that John found success with Alvarion.
However, his post does leave out technical detail on why the equipment 
had helped, which may be misleading to a reader.
I have found great success with Trango for many reasons, and will 
continue to in comming years, and the fact that Alvarion shines in 
some areas now, does not conclude that Trango is not a good platform 
for WISPs, as Trango products still offers one of the best value 
propositions on the market today.  There are many factors to influence 
what choice is best for you and when.


As far as Alvarion, they are definately back in the game as a leader 
in reliabilty for WISPs.
We also have been very please with our live testing results of their 
product.


I'd like to point out that Alvarion not only provides top engineering 
behind their product (so you don;t have to be one your self), but also 
empowers the WISP to take advantage of their own engineering 
capabilties.  In other words they give the engineering control back to 
the WISP.  All Alvarion radio products are connectorized, allowing 
seperate antennas.  Every radio product shows Signal-to-Nosie ratios 
in real time while live.  What this allows is for a WISP operator to 
accurately predict in advance of a truck roll, what a problem is, and 
will be required to fix it. Although it takes a truck roll, the WISP 
is empowered to make what ever antenna changes are necessary to fix 
such link, in the shortest amount of time, because no Radio 
reconfigurations or internal documentations are needed, just the 
replacement of desired antenna. I'm an engineer and don;t want to be 
limited. And when their is engineering over my head, their is a solid 
engineering staff at Alvarion that is available.


What is a fact, is that I had three > $500 ARPU new subs, in the last 
two weeks, that were not successfully installed, because they were 
teatering right on the edge of the readios capabilty to get around 
environmental conditions that were causing minor packet loss. $500 
ARPU subs don't keep service even with MINOR packet loss.  I attempted 
to get these with our Trango product line, because that is what is 
instaleld at the CellSite, taking the spectrum, with other live 
clients on the sectors.  As a result, I lost all three, The reason is 
that Wireless scares prospects, and every little bit of confidence 
that we could pull out of them was required to get the sale in the 
first place, and the first hint of difficulty, they get scared and 
pull the plug, before it starts.  They ask themselves, "What If?".   
Had I had an external antenna option, and not been limited, I would be 
$1500 a month richer this week.


What I'm learning is that as my business grows, the abilty to change 
and move (channel options) is becoming less important that the abilty 
to effectively battle it out. The reason is that if every time I hiot 
noise, I move away from the channel, eventually others take those 
channels., until they are all gone, and their is no where else to move 
to. Sometimes its better to claim the space and say, "I'm here first", 
"go find another channel to play on".  And keep fighting back with 
better antennas. As the antenna grows, you over power the 
interference, but the important point is, you reduce the interference 
to you and them, by restricting the beamwidth. The high power via 
antenna you go, the more courtious it is to the other player to 
attempt avoidence of signals interfering.  Alvarion gives that advantage.


The point I'm making is that Alvarion "gets it", when providing ext 
antenna options, and why its necessary for.


Until Trango puts out an external connector SU, with strong reliable 
ARQ feature (required for TDD in noisy environments), they are at a 
severe disadvantage in PtMP to competitor vendors.  Because without 
it, we just loose to many High ARPU prospects.   The problem that we 
have with Trango right now, is they are making great accomplishments 
in their technology for low ARPU markets, but they have forgotten 
about taking care of the need of the High ARPU clients in PtMP in 
recent years.  We don't want minimum engineering for our high ARPU 
clients, they don't want the risk, and neither do we. I am still a big 
supporter of Trango's value, I just have recognized that this hole 
MUST be filled by them soon, for their product to stay a viable option.


Alvarion on the other hand has managed to solve the current day 
problems. But this comes at a price, and the step left for the 
provider, is to run the numbers to see if it all works financially.  
Alvarion's numbers don't work everywhere, but after the fac

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition LeavesU.S.16th Among IndustrializedNations

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

Not at all true Tom.  We still have almost as many dialup users as we do 
broadband.  And many of those dialup users CAN get access to broadband. 
Often at a rate below what they are spending on dialup.


Don't ask me why the won't switch, I don't have an answer.  But it's 
still a fact of life out here in the real world.


People usually (I'd guess at least 50%) don't go broadband because they 
don't want/care about it.


Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition LeavesU.S.16th Among 
IndustrializedNations




Peter,

I do not agree with those statistics.
Why would anyone prefer DialUp for the same price? Don't think so.
A large part of that 68% are DialUp Users NOT by choice.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S.16th Among 
IndustrializedNations




Peter R. wrote:
We are actually at the point where about 68% of the US population has 
Internet.

The rest don't own a computer or do not want Internet.

Some of that 68% is still on dial-up. For some it is a price thing. For 
some it is not understanding technology. For some it is to make the 
experience painful to avoid wasting hours on the internet.


So dropping the price - as SBC and VZ have experienced - to sub-$15 gets 
you some dial-up conversions. But when the price returns to normal, some 
switch back to cheaper dial-up.


The dilemma becomes How do you get more internet appliance (PC's, 
laptops, PDAs, internet terminal) penetration?


The marketing question is: What Remarkable & Useful things can you do 
with broadband (other than entertainment)?


That's my 2 cents.

Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.



I agree with you, I still have a considerable amount of dial up 
subscribers.


There needs to be a motivator, other than price, that makes these types 
of users decide to trade up. They have to want to.


And I thought giant pictures killing  their email would have done the 
trick by now :(


George

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.4/449 - Release Date: 9/15/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] RE: ISPCON?

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

I'll be there.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:19 AM
Subject: [WISPA] RE: ISPCON?


Looks like I will attend, but have not planned to exhibit or speak this
go-round. How many of you are planning on going? Maybe I can arrange
something.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:08 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT FYI: New position

Does that mean you will be attending ISPCON?
Speaking??

Regards,

Peter
RAD-INFO, Inc.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(192).












This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[John Scrivner]

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Scriv,Congrads on the spectrum win.


Thank you.



What are you doing about equipment to operate in that spectrum range?


That is the $100,000 question right now. 802.16e for mobility and fixed 
wireless is designed strictly for TDD use. I have paired frequencies 
which are generally relegated to some type of FDD system like those used 
in the cellular industry. There are some next gen choices in that area 
that I am looking at. I personally believe someone will adapt 802.16e to 
work in FDD whether it is standards compliant or not. Then I will likely 
choose that. I could use 802.16d gear like BreezeMax but I really want 
to offer mobility as well as fixed which is not an option with 802.16d. 
Nortel is working on me pretty hard right now. We'll see where this 
goes. It is going to be a while before I can get the incumbent users of 
my bands relocated so I have some time to ponder.

Scriv



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

Agreed that Trango has clearly fallen behind...way behind.  However, the VL
is also far from being an "end all" solution.  The VL has no mechanism to
avoid interference (No RX threshold etc.) other than just to retransmit.

Also, the VL does not offer the flexibility to change polarities on the fly.
In fact Alvarion doesn't even offer an H Polarity SU INT and if you rotate
the V Polarity SU to H you'll likely have a water penetration problem.

The VL is only available in a 5.3GHz or 5.8GHz solution further limiting the
flexibility the product offers.  As our HUB sites increase in number and
decrease in required coverage area we have found the 5.3GHz band to be VERY
valuable.  You do not have that flexibility with VL.

When Alvarion is presented with the freq and polarity suggestions they
simply respond with "we're RF purists" talking points.  No indication that
maybe, just maybe those would be good features to add to the product.

We deployed a VL in an above average noisy environment with the latest v3.x
firmware and the results were dismal to say the least.  Fortunately
upgrading to v4.0 allowed us to salvage the deal, but we still can only pass
a few Mbps.  This is far less than what a Trango M5830AP can do in a noisy
environment.

As with most things YMMV.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are 
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links 
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad option. 
I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good job. Trango 
has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years (including 
myself until recently). I have found though that for my applications in 
feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 100% better than 
Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have a need for a 
low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing that the Trango 
multipoint radios will still provide excellent service. Just because I 
have soured on them does not mean they are not a platform for WISPs to 
consider.
Scriv

> I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
> headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
>Thanks.
>
> Mario
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S. 16thAmong IndustrializedNations

[Travis Johnson]

Marlon,

Shouldn't that actually be "wirelesscommuting" or "wificommuniting" or 
"wommuting"? :)


Travis
Microserv

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

I think what we really need is more telecommuting.  That will help 
drop out dependence on petrol, reduce the loads on the roads, save 
hours per day for some folks, help moms stay home with the kids etc.  
I think it would also help de-urbanize the country and make it much 
harder for terrorists to do such large damage.  It would also help 
people be safer (crime is usually lower in the country).


I think that telecommuting will be the next really big "ap" that hits.
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S. 16thAmong 
IndustrializedNations



We are actually at the point where about 68% of the US population has 
Internet.

The rest don't own a computer or do not want Internet.

Some of that 68% is still on dial-up. For some it is a price thing. 
For some it is not understanding technology. For some it is to make 
the experience painful to avoid wasting hours on the internet.


So dropping the price - as SBC and VZ have experienced - to sub-$15 
gets you some dial-up conversions. But when the price returns to 
normal, some switch back to cheaper dial-up.


The dilemma becomes How do you get more internet appliance (PC's, 
laptops, PDAs, internet terminal) penetration?


The marketing question is: What Remarkable & Useful things can you do 
with broadband (other than entertainment)?


That's my 2 cents.

Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Travis Johnson]

I think in all fairness, we need to put a major factor to radio 
selection out on the table too... price.


Trango retail pricing:
Trango Link10-EXT's are $1,500 for a complete link.
Trango 5830AP-EXTs are $1,095
Trango 5830SU-EXT's are $729
Trango FOX are $149

Alvarion pricing (not sure if this is retail or not):
VL 5.8ghz AP - $4,525
VL 6MBPS CPE - $1,045

It still stands true... you get what you pay for if you spend 4x the 
money on an AP, I would suspect it should work better. If you spend 4x 
the money on a car, boat, house, etc. it should work better. The 
question is, do you need to spend 4x the money to get what your 
customers need?


Travis
Microserv


John Scrivner wrote:

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are 
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used 
links feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad 
option. I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good 
job. Trango has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years 
(including myself until recently). I have found though that for my 
applications in feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 
100% better than Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have 
a need for a low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing 
that the Trango multipoint radios will still provide excellent 
service. Just because I have soured on them does not mean they are not 
a platform for WISPs to consider.

Scriv

I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.

   Thanks.

Mario


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Lack of CompetitionLeavesU.S.16th Among IndustrializedNations

[Patrick Leary]

Wow, seriously Marlon? You have as many dial-up guys? That is
interesting. Has your dial-up actually consistently grown these past few
years?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:24 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of CompetitionLeavesU.S.16th Among
IndustrializedNations

Not at all true Tom.  We still have almost as many dialup users as we do

broadband.  And many of those dialup users CAN get access to broadband. 
Often at a rate below what they are spending on dialup.

Don't ask me why the won't switch, I don't have an answer.  But it's

still a fact of life out here in the real world.

People usually (I'd guess at least 50%) don't go broadband because they 
don't want/care about it.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition LeavesU.S.16th Among 
IndustrializedNations


> Peter,
>
> I do not agree with those statistics.
> Why would anyone prefer DialUp for the same price? Don't think so.
> A large part of that 68% are DialUp Users NOT by choice.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 7:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition Leaves U.S.16th Among 
> IndustrializedNations
>
>
>> Peter R. wrote:
>>> We are actually at the point where about 68% of the US population
has 
>>> Internet.
>>> The rest don't own a computer or do not want Internet.
>>>
>>> Some of that 68% is still on dial-up. For some it is a price thing.
For 
>>> some it is not understanding technology. For some it is to make the 
>>> experience painful to avoid wasting hours on the internet.
>>>
>>> So dropping the price - as SBC and VZ have experienced - to sub-$15
gets 
>>> you some dial-up conversions. But when the price returns to normal,
some 
>>> switch back to cheaper dial-up.
>>>
>>> The dilemma becomes How do you get more internet appliance (PC's, 
>>> laptops, PDAs, internet terminal) penetration?
>>>
>>> The marketing question is: What Remarkable & Useful things can you
do 
>>> with broadband (other than entertainment)?
>>>
>>> That's my 2 cents.
>>>
>>> Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with you, I still have a considerable amount of dial up 
>> subscribers.
>>
>> There needs to be a motivator, other than price, that makes these
types 
>> of users decide to trade up. They have to want to.
>>
>> And I thought giant pictures killing  their email would have done the

>> trick by now :(
>>
>> George
>>
>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.4/449 - Release Date:
9/15/2006
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subsc

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[Matt Liotta]

I wouldn't think you would be required to use FDD. 802.16e supports 
varying channel widths, so you could for example deploy a multi-point 
system with two 10Mhz channels or six 3Mhz channels all TDD.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:


Tom DeReggi wrote:


Scriv,Congrads on the spectrum win.


Thank you.



What are you doing about equipment to operate in that spectrum range?


That is the $100,000 question right now. 802.16e for mobility and 
fixed wireless is designed strictly for TDD use. I have paired 
frequencies which are generally relegated to some type of FDD system 
like those used in the cellular industry. There are some next gen 
choices in that area that I am looking at. I personally believe 
someone will adapt 802.16e to work in FDD whether it is standards 
compliant or not. Then I will likely choose that. I could use 802.16d 
gear like BreezeMax but I really want to offer mobility as well as 
fixed which is not an option with 802.16d. Nortel is working on me 
pretty hard right now. We'll see where this goes. It is going to be a 
while before I can get the incumbent users of my bands relocated so I 
have some time to ponder.

Scriv



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Patrick Leary]

That's retail Travis. Actual pricing WISPs pay is far less. By the way,
that VL AU also delivers over 32Mbps net at the top mod and can scream
with VoIP.
Here are the net rates per mod for VL:

   Avg  Avg
 FTPLayer 2
Modulation 1   4.96 5.56
Modulation 2   7.28 8.16
Modulation 3   9.9  11.10
Modulation 4   14.3516.09
Modulation 5   19.3821.73
Modulation 6   26.7730.01
Modulation 7   33.4137.46
Modulation 8   36.2440.63
 
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

I think in all fairness, we need to put a major factor to radio 
selection out on the table too... price.

Trango retail pricing:
Trango Link10-EXT's are $1,500 for a complete link.
Trango 5830AP-EXTs are $1,095
Trango 5830SU-EXT's are $729
Trango FOX are $149

Alvarion pricing (not sure if this is retail or not):
VL 5.8ghz AP - $4,525
VL 6MBPS CPE - $1,045

It still stands true... you get what you pay for if you spend 4x the

money on an AP, I would suspect it should work better. If you spend 4x 
the money on a car, boat, house, etc. it should work better. The 
question is, do you need to spend 4x the money to get what your 
customers need?

Travis
Microserv


John Scrivner wrote:

> Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are

> still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
> better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used 
> links feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad

> option. I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good 
> job. Trango has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years 
> (including myself until recently). I have found though that for my 
> applications in feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 
> 100% better than Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have

> a need for a low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing 
> that the Trango multipoint radios will still provide excellent 
> service. Just because I have soured on them does not mean they are not

> a platform for WISPs to consider.
> Scriv
>
>> I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
>> headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
>>Thanks.
>>
>> Mario
>>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(43).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Scott Reed]

I have a potential customer that is looking to replace a fiber link with wireless.  Need best recommendation for a 1.5mile clear LOS shot.  Bridge as it is to replace a fiber link that goes switch to switch.  And probably 45Mbps would be good.

Scott Reed 


Owner 


NewWays 


Wireless Networking 


Network Design, Installation and Administration 


www.nwwnet.net 








-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

I fully believe these payload rates are achievable in little or no noise
environments.  I think it's important to add a disclaimer stating these
rates are theoretically obtainable under ideal conditions.  In comparison a
product that has mechanisms to avoid noise or block noise will perform
better.

Our VL setup running v4.0 is only able to achieve 2-3Mbps uploads TCP HDX
and 8-10Mbps downloads TCP HDX.  Running TCP FDX tests is pretty ugly, so I
won't even bother posting.

This is a real world deployment under real world noisy conditions not a
"glossy ad best case" claim by a manufacturer interested in pushing boxes
off the shelves.  

Patrick, any chance Alvarion will reconsider a software switchable Dual
Polarity AU and SU?  Any chance Alvarion will consider offering both 5.3GHz
and 5.8GHz bands in one product?  

I believe Alvarion is on to something with the VL v4.0 series product, but
they are lacking some very basic functionality as I have noted above.  If
Alvarion were to add the two above features to the VL line I believe the VL
product could be an industry leader in PtMP throughput and flexibility.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

That's retail Travis. Actual pricing WISPs pay is far less. By the way,
that VL AU also delivers over 32Mbps net at the top mod and can scream
with VoIP.
Here are the net rates per mod for VL:

   Avg  Avg
 FTPLayer 2
Modulation 1   4.96 5.56
Modulation 2   7.28 8.16
Modulation 3   9.9  11.10
Modulation 4   14.3516.09
Modulation 5   19.3821.73
Modulation 6   26.7730.01
Modulation 7   33.4137.46
Modulation 8   36.2440.63
 
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

I think in all fairness, we need to put a major factor to radio 
selection out on the table too... price.

Trango retail pricing:
Trango Link10-EXT's are $1,500 for a complete link.
Trango 5830AP-EXTs are $1,095
Trango 5830SU-EXT's are $729
Trango FOX are $149

Alvarion pricing (not sure if this is retail or not):
VL 5.8ghz AP - $4,525
VL 6MBPS CPE - $1,045

It still stands true... you get what you pay for if you spend 4x the

money on an AP, I would suspect it should work better. If you spend 4x 
the money on a car, boat, house, etc. it should work better. The 
question is, do you need to spend 4x the money to get what your 
customers need?

Travis
Microserv


John Scrivner wrote:

> Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are

> still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
> better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used 
> links feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad

> option. I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good 
> job. Trango has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years 
> (including myself until recently). I have found though that for my 
> applications in feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 
> 100% better than Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have

> a need for a low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing 
> that the Trango multipoint radios will still provide excellent 
> service. Just because I have soured on them does not mean they are not

> a platform for WISPs to consider.
> Scriv
>
>> I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
>> headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
>>Thanks.
>>
>> Mario
>>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(43).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure 

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Travis Johnson]

Scott,

P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps
full-duplex (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000.
Check on ebay.

Travis
Microserv

Scott Reed wrote:

  
  
  I have a potential customer that is looking to replace
a fiber link with wireless.  Need best recommendation for a 1.5mile
clear LOS shot.  Bridge as it is to replace a fiber link that goes
switch to switch.  And probably 45Mbps would be good.
  
  
Scott Reed 
Owner 
NewWays 
Wireless Networking 
Network Design, Installation and Administration 
  www.nwwnet.net 
  
  



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] CUWiN Releases CUWiNware 0.7.0

[Sascha Meinrath]

From Team CUWiN: (more info at www.cuwin.net)

CUWiN Releases CUWiNware 0.7.0 -- BETA.

September 19, 2006

CUWiN announces a new version of its flagship software, CUWiNware 0.7.0.
CUWiNware enables neighbors and communities to create a mesh wireless network
that can share Internet connections, establish local VoIP services, and utilize
peer-to-peer connections to improve their broadband experience. CUWiNware 0.7.0
makes community networking easier to use than ever before. CUWiNware is free
open source software, which makes network deployment as much as 75% cheaper than 
proprietary systems.


CUWiNware version 0.7.0 makes great strides forward in usability and
reliability. Dual radio support is the most visible addition to CUWiNware,
allowing a single node to provide a public access point in addition to providing
network infrastructure. Network traffic is handled more reliably. It also makes
gateway configuration more robust. Logging synchronization simplifies network
administration, in addition to a test version of a web-based configuration tool.
CUWiNware 0.7.0 also supports more diverse hardware.

“The effect of version 0.7.0 will soon be felt in the local Champaign-Urbana
community, as the City of Urbana converts their current nodes into dual-radio
nodes, providing free wireless Internet hotspots in places like Crane Alley, the
Market on the Square, and Lincoln Square Mall,” said CUWiN Outreach Coordinator
Ross Musselman. “This release brings us another step closer to the kind of
networks we envision: user owned and operated broadband networks.”

For the technical community, CUWiNware 0.7.0 marks a major step forward in
community wireless networking:

   * Dual radio allows a single node to act both as backhaul for the
 network and as an access point for public use.

   * Improved routing fidelity and routing daemon reliability,
 implements a more robust DHCPselect feature for gateway
 auto-configuration,

   * Syncing of HSLS daemon logs with Zebra logs for better debugging,

   * Non-i386 architectures support, including nascent support for the
 Atheros AR5312.

   * NodeConfig, a web-based graphical user interface that allows the
 user to change the node's settings through a web browser. Version
 0.7.0 contains a beta version of this feature, which can be
 accessed by typing the IP of the node into one's browser.

Release Notes:

CUWiNware Version 0.7.0 was released on September 19, 2006.

CUWiN’s three-part mission is to:
 - Connect more people to Internet and broadband services;
 - Develop open-source software for use by wireless projects world-wide;
 - Build & support community not-for-profit broadband networks worldwide.

For more information, contact:

Ross Musselman, CUWiN Outreach Coordinator
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 217 278-3933 x.30



--
Sascha Meinrath
Executive Director  *  Principal  *  President
CUWiN  *** The Ethos Group   *** Acorn Active Media
CUWireless.Net  *  EthosWireless.com  *  AcornActiveMedia.com

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[David E. Smith]

Travis Johnson wrote:

> P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps 
> full-duplex 
> (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay.

As long as it doesn't rain. :)

Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid most
of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and
light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrina
flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two links
I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit
more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the
maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I could
find for that gear.)

Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license
costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500
per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.)

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Lack of Competition

[John Scrivner]

The NTIA only allows the use of the 1710 to 1720 MHz band that I now 
have in CMA401 to be used with a max EIRP for the system (radio plus 
antenna) of 1 watt and a max height above average terrain of 30 feet. 
Their is NO practical use of 1710 to 1720 MHz as a tower base station 
frequency, period. It can ONLY be used at client ends. The base station 
end has to be in the 2110 to 2120 MHz band which can transmit at 
hundreds of watts EIRP. These unbalanced power levels may make this look 
like a dead deal for 1710 to 1720 for any use but remember that all PCS 
client radios (cell phones) operate at far below 1 watt EIRP. AWS can 
work as a broadband platform but only as a FDD based system. It also 
probably means that a different modulation scheme will be required for 
the client to base path because of the skewed power levels which 
probably means assymetrical bandwidth offerings.


I can live with that if it means I can serve everyone inside a given 
geography without running signal tests all the time. I want to sell 
customers a card or a phone or a PDA and be done with it. That is the 
whole reason to do this kind of a deal. Truck rolls are killing this 
industry from my perspective. We need to build networks that just work 
everyplace without having to do installations at every single customer 
location. That is the dream I am hoping to experience. I'll let you know 
how well that works out after a few million in Capex and a few years 
getting it all built. Wish me luck. I'll need it.   :-)

Scriv


Matt Liotta wrote:

I wouldn't think you would be required to use FDD. 802.16e supports 
varying channel widths, so you could for example deploy a multi-point 
system with two 10Mhz channels or six 3Mhz channels all TDD.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:



Tom DeReggi wrote:


Scriv,Congrads on the spectrum win.



Thank you.



What are you doing about equipment to operate in that spectrum range?



That is the $100,000 question right now. 802.16e for mobility and 
fixed wireless is designed strictly for TDD use. I have paired 
frequencies which are generally relegated to some type of FDD system 
like those used in the cellular industry. There are some next gen 
choices in that area that I am looking at. I personally believe 
someone will adapt 802.16e to work in FDD whether it is standards 
compliant or not. Then I will likely choose that. I could use 802.16d 
gear like BreezeMax but I really want to offer mobility as well as 
fixed which is not an option with 802.16d. Nortel is working on me 
pretty hard right now. We'll see where this goes. It is going to be a 
while before I can get the incumbent users of my bands relocated so I 
have some time to ponder.

Scriv



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[John Scrivner]

This is what I would buy to replace a fiber in this case:

http://www.alvarion.com/B100/?ref=wispabanner



Scott Reed wrote:

I have a potential customer that is looking to replace a fiber link 
with wireless.  Need best recommendation for a 1.5mile clear LOS 
shot.  Bridge as it is to replace a fiber link that goes switch to 
switch.  And probably 45Mbps would be good.


Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net 



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.6/453 - Release Date: 9/20/2006
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[David E. Smith]

Patrick Leary wrote:

> Here are the net rates per mod for VL:
> 
>  Avg  Avg
>FTPLayer 2
> Modulation 1   4.96   5.56
> Modulation 2   7.28   8.16
> Modulation 3   9.911.10
> Modulation 4   14.35  16.09
> Modulation 5   19.38  21.73
> Modulation 6   26.77  30.01
> Modulation 7   33.41  37.46
> Modulation 8   36.24  40.63

Just outta curiosity, what test methodology does Alvarion use to get
those numbers? Don't get me wrong, I'm fairly happy with our Alvarion
purchase (heck, you've all seen my boss' feedback that launched this
thread), but my real-world throughputs aren't quite that high.

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Travis Johnson]

David,

What are your signal levels on each side (the actual RSSI using the
management program)?

Even at 1.5 miles, with 2ft dishes I show you should have a -26db RSSI
and total downtime during a 1 year period of 7 minutes. (99.9%
uptime).

Travis
Microserv

David E. Smith wrote:

  Travis Johnson wrote:

  
  
P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps full-duplex 
(90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay.

  
  
As long as it doesn't rain. :)

Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid most
of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and
light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrina
flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two links
I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit
more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the
maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I could
find for that gear.)

Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license
costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500
per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.)

David Smith
MVN.net
  



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Patrick Leary]

I'll ask Ed. He posted all the details on Mike Cowan's Alvarion support
list. I cut and pasted the mod rates from his original post. Ed?

David, what speeds (Net) are you getting relative to the mod rate you
are running? 

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David E. Smith
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Patrick Leary wrote:

> Here are the net rates per mod for VL:
> 
>  Avg  Avg
>FTPLayer 2
> Modulation 1   4.96   5.56
> Modulation 2   7.28   8.16
> Modulation 3   9.911.10
> Modulation 4   14.35  16.09
> Modulation 5   19.38  21.73
> Modulation 6   26.77  30.01
> Modulation 7   33.41  37.46
> Modulation 8   36.24  40.63

Just outta curiosity, what test methodology does Alvarion use to get
those numbers? Don't get me wrong, I'm fairly happy with our Alvarion
purchase (heck, you've all seen my boss' feedback that launched this
thread), but my real-world throughputs aren't quite that high.

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Brad Belton]

Depends on what rain zone he’s in,
but I agree that a 1.5 mile and certainly a .5 mile 38GHz shot should be a walk
in the park.  I expect alignment is the issue and he’s probably
lined up on a side lobe.  

 

We spend an inordinate amount of time
aligning our 38GHz links.  We also use very heavy mounts sometimes as
large as 4” ID.  Can’t afford to have this stuff move. 


 

Best,

 

Brad

 

 

-Original
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006
3:09 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link
Recommendations

 

David,

What are your signal levels on each side (the actual RSSI using the management
program)?

Even at 1.5 miles, with 2ft dishes I show you should have a -26db RSSI and
total downtime during a 1 year period of 7 minutes. (99.9% uptime).

Travis
Microserv

David E. Smith wrote: 

Travis Johnson wrote:   

P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps full-duplex (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay.    

 As long as it doesn't rain. :) Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid mostof the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle andlight rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrinaflashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two linksI have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bitmore susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at themaximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I couldfind for that gear.) Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the licensecosts. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.) David SmithMVN.net  




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[David E. Smith]

On Thu, September 21, 2006 3:09 pm, Travis Johnson wrote:

> What are your signal levels on each side (the actual RSSI using the
> management program)?

I'd have to drive over to one end (or the other) to look, but IIRC, on
that longer link, it shows a signal of about -40 or so.

The link may actually be a bit longer than 1 1/2 miles; I don't have my
Big Spreadsheet Full O' GPS Coordinates handy. It won't be longer than
about 2 miles or so, though, because it's about a 2-mile drive, and I have
to use roads ;)

> Even at 1.5 miles, with 2ft dishes I show you should have a -26db RSSI
> and total downtime during a 1 year period of 7 minutes. (99.9%
> uptime).

Our total downtime on that link is probably about a half-hour so far this
year, and the link does give you a consistent 45Mbps all the time when it
works (which is most of the time, admittedly). Heck, most of the time, if
it's raining hard enough to make the link drop, folks on one end or the
other won't have power anyway because of the storm that brought said rain
:)

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Scott Reed]

What about unlicensed?  Anything that can do this link well?

Scott Reed 


Owner 


NewWays 


Wireless Networking 


Network Design, Installation and Administration 


www.nwwnet.net 




-- Original Message 
---

From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 


To: WISPA General List  


Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:21 -0500 


Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations 



> Travis Johnson wrote: 
> 
> 

> P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps 
full-duplex  
> 

> (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay. 

> 
> 

As long as it doesn't rain. :) 
> 
> 

Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid most 

> 

of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and 
> 

light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrina 

> 

flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two links 

> 

I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit 
> 

more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the 
> 

maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I could 

> 

find for that gear.) 
> 
> 

Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license 
> 

costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500 

> 

per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.) 
> 

> 

David Smith 
> 

MVN.net 
> 

--  
> 

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
> 
> 

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
> 

http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> 

> 

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
--- 
End of Original Message 
---






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

I fully believe these payload rates are achievable in little or no noise
environments.  I think it's important to add a disclaimer stating these
rates are theoretically obtainable under ideal conditions.  In comparison a
product that has mechanisms to avoid noise or block noise will perform
better.

Our VL setup running v4.0 is only able to achieve 2-3Mbps uploads TCP HDX
and 8-10Mbps downloads TCP HDX.  Running TCP FDX tests is pretty ugly, so I
won't even bother posting.

This is a real world deployment under real world noisy conditions not a
"glossy ad best case" claim by a manufacturer interested in pushing boxes
off the shelves.  

Patrick, any chance Alvarion will reconsider a software switchable Dual
Polarity AU and SU?  Any chance Alvarion will consider offering both 5.3GHz
and 5.8GHz bands in one product?  

I believe Alvarion is on to something with the VL v4.0 series product, but
they are lacking some very basic functionality as I have noted above.  If
Alvarion were to add the two above features to the VL line I believe the VL
product could be an industry leader in PtMP throughput and flexibility.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

That's retail Travis. Actual pricing WISPs pay is far less. By the way,
that VL AU also delivers over 32Mbps net at the top mod and can scream
with VoIP.
Here are the net rates per mod for VL:

   Avg  Avg
 FTPLayer 2
Modulation 1   4.96 5.56
Modulation 2   7.28 8.16
Modulation 3   9.9  11.10
Modulation 4   14.3516.09
Modulation 5   19.3821.73
Modulation 6   26.7730.01
Modulation 7   33.4137.46
Modulation 8   36.2440.63
 
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

I think in all fairness, we need to put a major factor to radio 
selection out on the table too... price.

Trango retail pricing:
Trango Link10-EXT's are $1,500 for a complete link.
Trango 5830AP-EXTs are $1,095
Trango 5830SU-EXT's are $729
Trango FOX are $149

Alvarion pricing (not sure if this is retail or not):
VL 5.8ghz AP - $4,525
VL 6MBPS CPE - $1,045

It still stands true... you get what you pay for if you spend 4x the

money on an AP, I would suspect it should work better. If you spend 4x 
the money on a car, boat, house, etc. it should work better. The 
question is, do you need to spend 4x the money to get what your 
customers need?

Travis
Microserv


John Scrivner wrote:

> Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are

> still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much 
> better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used 
> links feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad

> option. I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good 
> job. Trango has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years 
> (including myself until recently). I have found though that for my 
> applications in feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 
> 100% better than Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have

> a need for a low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing 
> that the Trango multipoint radios will still provide excellent 
> service. Just because I have soured on them does not mean they are not

> a platform for WISPs to consider.
> Scriv
>
>> I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want 
>> headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
>>Thanks.
>>
>> Mario
>>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(43).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure 

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Patrick Leary]

Ah. So in that case I would really like to hear from those with 4.0 in
the field in terms of what net rates are being achieved at what mods.
Lab is one thing, real world is quite another. 

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: Ed Wyatt 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:29 PM
To: Patrick Leary; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

This was done in the lab with Rev C hardware running FTP traffic.  And
then the Layer 2 traffic was done with Smartbits hardware box also in
the lab.   



Ed Wyatt, Jr.
Sr. Applications Engineer
Alvarion, Inc.
4012 Mt. Olney Lane
Olney, MD 20832-1002
(301) 570-0300 (v)
(301) 570-7074 (f)

http://www.alvarion-usa.com
 
NOTICE: "This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain
confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the
named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission,
dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or
files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this
electronic mail."
 
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 4:13 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Cc: Ed Wyatt
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

I'll ask Ed. He posted all the details on Mike Cowan's Alvarion support
list. I cut and pasted the mod rates from his original post. Ed?

David, what speeds (Net) are you getting relative to the mod rate you
are running? 

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David E. Smith
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Patrick Leary wrote:

> Here are the net rates per mod for VL:
> 
>  Avg  Avg
>FTPLayer 2
> Modulation 1   4.96   5.56
> Modulation 2   7.28   8.16
> Modulation 3   9.911.10
> Modulation 4   14.35  16.09
> Modulation 5   19.38  21.73
> Modulation 6   26.77  30.01
> Modulation 7   33.41  37.46
> Modulation 8   36.24  40.63

Just outta curiosity, what test methodology does Alvarion use to get
those numbers? Don't get me wrong, I'm fairly happy with our Alvarion
purchase (heck, you've all seen my boss' feedback that launched this
thread), but my real-world throughputs aren't quite that high.

David Smith
MVN.net
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Patrick Leary]

Certainly the B100 can and will probably
get you about 70mbps at that range (City of New Orleans gets 80mbps from a
short LOS link and AM gets over 60mbps sustained at 16 miles). It will also
trunk over 1,000 concurrent VoIP sessions. Not too much money, especially for
the value.

 



Patrick 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006
1:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link
Recommendations



 

What about unlicensed?  Anything that can do this link well? 

Scott Reed 
Owner 
NewWays 
Wireless Networking 
Network Design, Installation and Administration 
www.nwwnet.net 


-- Original Message ---

From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: WISPA General List  
Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:21 -0500 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations 

> Travis Johnson wrote: 
> 
> > P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps
full-duplex 
> > (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay.

> 
> As long as it doesn't rain. :) 
> 
> Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid most 
> of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and 
> light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrina 
> flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two links 
> I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit 
> more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the 
> maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I could 
> find for that gear.) 
> 
> Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license 
> costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500 
> per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.) 
> 
> David Smith 
> MVN.net 
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
--- End of Original Message ---









 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(192).







 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(43).






 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Travis Johnson]

Scott,

I think the biggest problem you will have when trying to replace a
fiber line will be half-duplex vs. full-duplex. They are "used" to
full-duplex... and 99% of the unlicensed equipment is only half-duplex.
If you move to Orthogon or something that will do 200Mbps half-duplex,
you should be fine... but you are talking a LOT more money than the
38ghz stuff. ;)

Travis
Microserv

Scott Reed wrote:

  
  
  What about unlicensed?  Anything that can do this link
well?
  
  
Scott Reed 
Owner 
NewWays 
Wireless Networking 
Network Design, Installation and Administration 
  www.nwwnet.net 
  
  
  -- Original Message ---
  
From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: WISPA General List  
Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:21 -0500 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations 
  
> Travis Johnson wrote: 
> 
> > P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times,
45Mbps full-duplex 
> > (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check
on ebay. 
> 
> As long as it doesn't rain. :) 
> 
> Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're
rock-solid most 
> of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle
and 
> light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets
Katrina 
> flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two
links 
> I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a
bit 
> more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the
  
> maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I
could 
> find for that gear.) 
> 
> Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the
license 
> costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license
for $500 
> per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.)
  
> 
> David Smith 
> MVN.net 
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  --- End of Original Message ---
  
  



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Brad Belton]

He could contact Stephen at www.CableFreeSolutions.com  and ask
about their FDX PtP products.  I believe they have (or will have) a 50-60Mbps TCP FDX product available based
in the 5GHz unlicensed band.

 

Best,

 

 

Brad

 

 

-Original
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006
4:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link
Recommendations

 

Scott,

I think the biggest problem you will have when trying to replace a fiber line
will be half-duplex vs. full-duplex. They are "used" to
full-duplex... and 99% of the unlicensed equipment is only half-duplex. If you
move to Orthogon or something that will do 200Mbps half-duplex, you should be
fine... but you are talking a LOT more money than the 38ghz stuff. ;)

Travis
Microserv

Scott Reed wrote: 

What about
unlicensed?  Anything that can do this link well? 

Scott Reed 
Owner 
NewWays 
Wireless Networking 
Network Design, Installation and Administration 
www.nwwnet.net 


-- Original Message ---

From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: WISPA General List 

Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:21 -0500 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations 

> Travis Johnson wrote: 
> 
> > P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 45Mbps
full-duplex 
> > (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on ebay.

> 
> As long as it doesn't rain. :) 
> 
> Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid most 
> of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and 
> light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets Katrina 
> flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two links 
> I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit 
> more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the 
> maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I could 
> find for that gear.) 
> 
> Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license 
> costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for $500 
> per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.) 
> 
> David Smith 
> MVN.net 
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
--- End of Original Message ---







-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Matt Larsen - Lists]

I've heard of some folks using an OSPF router on both ends and two hdx 
backhaul radios to simulate FDD, with excellent results.   Added benefit 
of having a backup link already in place if one radio fails.  I will be 
trying this on my next set of backhaul deployments.


Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Travis Johnson wrote:

Scott,

I think the biggest problem you will have when trying to replace a 
fiber line will be half-duplex vs. full-duplex. They are "used" to 
full-duplex... and 99% of the unlicensed equipment is only 
half-duplex. If you move to Orthogon or something that will do 200Mbps 
half-duplex, you should be fine... but you are talking a LOT more 
money than the 38ghz stuff. ;)


Travis
Microserv

Scott Reed wrote:

What about unlicensed?  Anything that can do this link well?

Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net 


*-- Original Message ---*
From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: WISPA General List 
Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:21 -0500
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

> Travis Johnson wrote:
>
> > P-com 38ghz with DS3 to ethernet converters. 1ms ping times, 
45Mbps full-duplex
> > (90Mbps total). Total equipment cost less than $3,000. Check on 
ebay.

>
> As long as it doesn't rain. :)
>
> Seriously, I've got two pair of these, and while they're rock-solid 
most

> of the time, I do have a few issues with rain fade. Normal drizzle and
> light rain aren't a problem, but torrential pouring-down-buckets 
Katrina
> flashback rain will make the link drop for a few minutes. (The two 
links

> I have are about 1/2 mile and 1 1/2 miles, and the longer one is a bit
> more susceptible to rain fade. They're both running near or at the
> maximum legal transmit power, and have the highest-gain antennas I 
could

> find for that gear.)
>
> Also, to stay nice and legal, don't forget to factor in the license
> costs. (38GHz is licensed spectrum, but you can lease a license for 
$500

> per link per year. Not a big cost, but something to keep in mind.)
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
> --
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
*--- End of Original Message ---*


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] FCC wireless auction raises almost $13.9 bln

[Ron Wallace]

Congratulations Scriv, I know you will show us the way.>-Original Message->From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:20 PM>To: 'WISPA General List'>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC wireless auction raises almost $13.9 bln>>The band is 2110 to 2120 MHz and 1710 to 1720 MHz. (20 MHz of spectrum) >There are some other hurdles yet to jump. You would think buying it >would be enough but it is far from usable yet. I'll let you know as we >get closer to the launch of licensed broadband services here.>Scriv>>>Mac Dearman wrote:>>>CONGRATS Scriv!>> >>I don't think that you will be guilty of just "squatting" >>on such lovely frequency eh?Did you get 700MHz in the AWS-1?I wish I had some too :-( Mac -Original Message->>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On>>Behalf Of John Scrivner>>Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:35 AM>>To: WISPA General List>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC wireless auction raises almost $13.9 blnWe won an AWS license in our area!>>:-)>>Scriv>>Dawn DiPietro wrote: >FCC wireless auction raises almost $13.9 bln>>Last Update: 5:13 PM ET Sep 18, 2006>>(Adds quote in third paragraph and details about Verizon in sixth and >>>seventh paragraphs.)>>>WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Federal Communications Commission on >>>Monday wrapped up an auction of licenses to provide new wireless >>>services, generating almost $13.9 billion in gross proceeds and >>>handing T-Mobile USA Inc. the capacity it needs to compete with larger >>>rivals.>>>T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG (DT), was the top bidder, >>>bidding almost $4.2 billion for 120 licenses. Verizon Wireless agreed >>>to pay $2.8 billion for 13 licenses. A consortium that includes cable >>>giants Comcast Corp. (CMCSA, CMCSK) and Time Warner Inc. (TWX), along >>>with Sprint Nextel Corp. (S), agreed to pay almost $2.4 billion for >>>137 licenses. As a result of their aggressive early moves, many >>>potential new players were squeezed out of the game before it got going.>>>"The dream of new entrants that would shake up the market died," said >>>Roger Entner, an analyst for technology research firm Ovum. "The usual >>>suspects have won.">>>The last time an FCC auction drew more bidding was in 2001, when >>>regulators reauctioned some licenses they had repossessed from >>>NextWave Telecom Inc. But in 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that the >>>FCC had improperly reclaimed the licenses, returning control to >>>NextWave and invalidating the auction.>>>This time, T-Mobile had the most at stake. Although it is the >>>fourth-largest U.S. wireless carrier, it has lacked the capacity to >>>upgrade its network to run third-generation, or 3-G services. The new >>>licenses will put T-Mobile in a more competitive position.>>>Verizon Wireless, meanwhile, will likely sit on its spectrum. The No. >>>2 wireless carrier, a joint venture between Verizon Communications >>>(VZ) and Vodafone Group Plc (VOD), has a next-generation network >>>called Evolution-Data Optimized, or EV-DO. It doesn't need to use the >>>new spectrum for that network. Verizon Wireless is seen using the >>>spectrum for wireless technology that is further down the line, >>>although it's unclear what that technology may be.>>>A spokesman for Verizon Wireless wasn't immediately available for >>>comment.>>>Smaller carriers were able to expand their coverage from select cities >>>to a much larger area. For example, Leap Wireless International Inc. >>>(LEAP), a smaller, regional company, won 99 licenses, bidding $710 >>>million for airwaves covering cities including Washington D.C., >>>Philadelphia, Baltimore, and St. Louis.>>>"Leap's push to acquire more spectrum in new high-growth market >>>clusters located in urban and suburban areas such as Baltimore, >>>Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia will help it withstand the >>>continuous competitive pressure from larger... competitors such as >>>Sprint-Nextel and Verizon," Jessica Zufolo, an analyst at research >>>firm Medley Advisors, wrote in a note to clients.>>>The U.S. Treasury will receive just $13.7 billion from its latest >>>auction because of rules that permit small companies to earn discounts >>>of as much as 25%.>>http://tinyurl.com/j77nv>>--->>>--->> -- >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Butch Evans]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:

I've heard of some folks using an OSPF router on both ends and two 
hdx backhaul radios to simulate FDD, with excellent results. 
Added benefit of having a backup link already in place if one radio 
fails.  I will be trying this on my next set of backhaul 
deployments.


I have done this.  All you need is 2 radio links with ethernet 
ports, a couple of Mikrotik (preferred) boxes and a few minutes 
beyond getting the links up and running.  A 100Mbps HDX link becomes 
a 100Mbps FDX link for just a little more than twice the price of 
the HDX link.  The nice thing is, you can add more links and you 
have the ability to add even more bandwidth.  Depending on whether 
you what you use for the radio links, you can do this very 
inexpensively.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT FYI: Change in position

[Ron Wallace]

Welcome back Patrick, we will all benefit from your increased participation in our industry.Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]>-Original Message->From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 06:17 PM>To: 'WISPA General List'>Subject: [WISPA] OT FYI: Change in position>>Having received John Scrivner's specific approval, I offer the following>note:>>Dear WISPA members,>>I wanted to drop you folks a note that Alvarion has challenged me to get>back to my roots, so to speak. I have asked to personally lead a renewed>focus on the WISP markets. Going forward, my energies will be full time>dedicated to this activity -- to you and your needs as operators and as>an industry. Over the past few years managing our North American>marketing team, I realized how much I missed daily interaction with>WISPs, especially meeting and getting to know you on your turf. The new>role has some wide accountability and will also allow me to again be an>active advocate for WISPs with the press, thought leaders and officials.>>As part of this, we will be enacting some innovative new ideas that>among other interesting and useful benefits to help your WISP>operations, should have direct business model benefits for small WISPs.>Details will come a bit later.>>I will put my 8 years worth of contacts to work and know that I look>forward to building on my existing relationships with many of you, as>well as making lots of new friends.>>Finally, please feel free to e-mail me directly with ideas about how I>can help, constructive criticism, etc. regardless of whether or not you>are an Alvarion-based operator. >>Sincerely,>>Patrick Leary>AVP WISP Markets>Alvarion, Inc.>o: 650.314.2628>c: 760.580.0080>Vonage: 650.641.1243 > >>This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by>PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.>-- >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Tom DeReggi]

Because, over the years I lost 100% of my high ARPU subs that used 5830-ext 
in these areas. Yes that REALLY hurt the financials of my business.  The 
reason, is that its a high noise environment where we're attempting to 
deploy, and its impossible to offer zero packet loss solutions with TDD 
unless ARQ is available, in these situations.  It makes it worse with all 
the WiFi gear going up, because you don;t know its there half the time, 
until its starts transmiting. (darn I hate contention based). Yes, of 
course, Beta ARQ firmware exists for the 5830-ext, but it can't be used 
reliably.  One of the big mistakes I made is I tried to use it, and learned 
that it locks up the SU radios every couple of days, when under heavy load. 
I did my testing of it on about 10 links. I started on 4 low use links, and 
it appeared to be stable, with only a random lockup every couple of weeks 
that I thought was something else. But after I installed it on the high 
volume links (other 6), they started locking up like crazy. (yes used most 
recent supposedly fixed firmware). Auto-Reboot devices causing two minutes 
of downtime for a reboot, is not adequate for High ARPU large office T1s and 
VOIP services. I'd rather not have the business, than to get my reputation 
tarnished by installing links the subscriber ends up cancelling and 
complaining about.  Evey T1 that gets cancelled means there is a MTU 
property owner involved that got the word (they make the referals) and a 
trusted advisor Computer guy (agents that give stamp of approval) that gets 
scared off, when they learn about the failure. Deals with partners that took 
months to build get thrown away over night, with a couple reboots from buggy 
ARQ firmware.


What you can't forget is that in PtMP, you can't encrease the antenna side 
of the AP. Not everything can be solved with the big antenna on SU side. 
Without ARQ one is toast.


Trango gave me so much hope when they developed ARQ for the 5800 Foxes, 
which works fantastically. I'd select the Fox over a 5830-ext any day 
because of ARQ. But thats not good enough, I need ARQ and EXT connectors. 
Last year,  I made Trango aware that we needed ARQ on 5830-EXT and Link-10s 
more than anything, and a year later, we still don't have it, and its not on 
their priority list.  That is frustrating for my business.  Customers don't 
wait in Urban Tier1 markets.  When the Link doesn't go up in a few days, or 
their were a couple of noise issues that scare them, they have already 
placed their order with someone else.


What it has forced me to do, is slowly start swapping out my Trango APs, to 
make room (spectrum and antenna lease fees) for radios that can deliver 
packetlossless links.  Even Wifi gear can offer packetlossless links.  And 
its forced me to go back and re-negotiate my contracts with property owners 
to try and not pay per antenna, so I can get more antennas of larger size 
(PtP) for less money on the roofs.  Its a BIG waste of time, that I wouldn't 
have to do, if Trango added ARQ reliable ARQ to 5830-ext.


I'm still a Big Trango fan, and still am basing my business around its 
product, because of its value proposition, but I am loosing sales and 
getting more black eyes than I have to, because Trango does not have a EXT 
antenna product line that delivers reliable ARQ.  I haven't bought a new 
Trango 5830 AP in ages, I have to many pulls on the shelf waiting, when I 
need one.  If Trango never released ARQ for the FOX, I would have never kown 
what I was missing. But now that I have experienced it, I can't live without 
it.


The two biggest reasons, for lack of progress in my company is, 1) Waiting 
for technology, and 2) Waiting for finance to come through.  I can't count 
how much money I burned just waiting.  I don't want to wait any more. I'm 
tired of waiting. I don't have the energy to keep waiting. I want it now.  I 
need it now.  This is a time to market business, where there is a domino 
effect of disaster tied to waiting.


So when a company like Alvarion or Valemont come out with a product that 
will do the job, and I no longer have to wait, I see no reason to wait.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links



Tom,

I hate to say this, but I think you missed the boat on your three $500/mo 
subs. Trango still offers a 5830-EXT unit for $729 (retail) that would 
have allowed you the external antenna that was so critical for these 
links. Why did you not spend the $700 and have them paid for in less than 
two months?


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


I'm glad to hear that John found success with Alvarion.
However, his post does leave out technical detail on why the equipment 
had helped, which may be misleading to a reader.
I have found great

Re: [WISPA] RE: ISPCON?

[Tom DeReggi]

Yeah, I'm definately going this year to.  I've learned that for me, ISPCON 
is the one event that I just can't afford to miss.
I'd justify the trip just for the CEO-Talk Session alone.  Session topics 
are relavent and right on current need like always.

Hope to see many of you there.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RE: ISPCON?



I'll be there.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:19 AM
Subject: [WISPA] RE: ISPCON?


Looks like I will attend, but have not planned to exhibit or speak this
go-round. How many of you are planning on going? Maybe I can arrange
something.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:08 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT FYI: New position

Does that mean you will be attending ISPCON?
Speaking??

Regards,

Peter
RAD-INFO, Inc.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(192).












This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.6/453 - Release Date: 9/20/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Tom DeReggi]

Brad,

I got an idea! How about Trango Fix ARQ for the 5830-EXT, so it can be like 
old times, and we can sit and brag on the list how great our networks are?


One of the reasons StarOS is becoming such an exciting platform. StarOS can 
be used as a multi-freq, Multi-polarity on the fly product.
I will say that Alvarions choice to not make Dual Freq radios, has allowed 
them to deliver the highest gain from a radio with good clean filtering of 
the spectrum range.
But nobody has a good excuse for not offering Dual Polarity, there just 
isn't a negative to it.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


Agreed that Trango has clearly fallen behind...way behind.  However, the VL
is also far from being an "end all" solution.  The VL has no mechanism to
avoid interference (No RX threshold etc.) other than just to retransmit.

Also, the VL does not offer the flexibility to change polarities on the fly.
In fact Alvarion doesn't even offer an H Polarity SU INT and if you rotate
the V Polarity SU to H you'll likely have a water penetration problem.

The VL is only available in a 5.3GHz or 5.8GHz solution further limiting the
flexibility the product offers.  As our HUB sites increase in number and
decrease in required coverage area we have found the 5.3GHz band to be VERY
valuable.  You do not have that flexibility with VL.

When Alvarion is presented with the freq and polarity suggestions they
simply respond with "we're RF purists" talking points.  No indication that
maybe, just maybe those would be good features to add to the product.

We deployed a VL in an above average noisy environment with the latest v3.x
firmware and the results were dismal to say the least.  Fortunately
upgrading to v4.0 allowed us to salvage the deal, but we still can only pass
a few Mbps.  This is far less than what a Trango M5830AP can do in a noisy
environment.

As with most things YMMV.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad option.
I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good job. Trango
has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years (including
myself until recently). I have found though that for my applications in
feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 100% better than
Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have a need for a
low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing that the Trango
multipoint radios will still provide excellent service. Just because I
have soured on them does not mean they are not a platform for WISPs to
consider.
Scriv


I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want
headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
   Thanks.

Mario


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.6/453 - Release Date: 9/20/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Tom DeReggi]

Just remember OSPF does not detect packet loss, and does not properly switch 
to backup channels or switches to frequently between channels on marginal 
links. So when you use two spectrum channels for 1 link, you double your 
chance that the link will get interference and degration.


Going two 10mhz channels, however, reduces the risk equivellent to one 20 
mhz channel.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations



On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:

I've heard of some folks using an OSPF router on both ends and two hdx 
backhaul radios to simulate FDD, with excellent results. Added benefit of 
having a backup link already in place if one radio fails.  I will be 
trying this on my next set of backhaul deployments.


I have done this.  All you need is 2 radio links with ethernet ports, a 
couple of Mikrotik (preferred) boxes and a few minutes beyond getting the 
links up and running.  A 100Mbps HDX link becomes a 100Mbps FDX link for 
just a little more than twice the price of the HDX link.  The nice thing 
is, you can add more links and you have the ability to add even more 
bandwidth.  Depending on whether you what you use for the radio links, you 
can do this very inexpensively.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.6/453 - Release Date: 9/20/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Gino A. Villarini]

Tom, so what you are changing the Trangos to ?

Also, you can hack yourself a EXT Fox ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 8:25 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Because, over the years I lost 100% of my high ARPU subs that used 5830-ext 
in these areas. Yes that REALLY hurt the financials of my business.  The 
reason, is that its a high noise environment where we're attempting to 
deploy, and its impossible to offer zero packet loss solutions with TDD 
unless ARQ is available, in these situations.  It makes it worse with all 
the WiFi gear going up, because you don;t know its there half the time, 
until its starts transmiting. (darn I hate contention based). Yes, of 
course, Beta ARQ firmware exists for the 5830-ext, but it can't be used 
reliably.  One of the big mistakes I made is I tried to use it, and learned 
that it locks up the SU radios every couple of days, when under heavy load. 
I did my testing of it on about 10 links. I started on 4 low use links, and 
it appeared to be stable, with only a random lockup every couple of weeks 
that I thought was something else. But after I installed it on the high 
volume links (other 6), they started locking up like crazy. (yes used most 
recent supposedly fixed firmware). Auto-Reboot devices causing two minutes 
of downtime for a reboot, is not adequate for High ARPU large office T1s and

VOIP services. I'd rather not have the business, than to get my reputation 
tarnished by installing links the subscriber ends up cancelling and 
complaining about.  Evey T1 that gets cancelled means there is a MTU 
property owner involved that got the word (they make the referals) and a 
trusted advisor Computer guy (agents that give stamp of approval) that gets 
scared off, when they learn about the failure. Deals with partners that took

months to build get thrown away over night, with a couple reboots from buggy

ARQ firmware.

What you can't forget is that in PtMP, you can't encrease the antenna side 
of the AP. Not everything can be solved with the big antenna on SU side. 
Without ARQ one is toast.

Trango gave me so much hope when they developed ARQ for the 5800 Foxes, 
which works fantastically. I'd select the Fox over a 5830-ext any day 
because of ARQ. But thats not good enough, I need ARQ and EXT connectors. 
Last year,  I made Trango aware that we needed ARQ on 5830-EXT and Link-10s 
more than anything, and a year later, we still don't have it, and its not on

their priority list.  That is frustrating for my business.  Customers don't 
wait in Urban Tier1 markets.  When the Link doesn't go up in a few days, or 
their were a couple of noise issues that scare them, they have already 
placed their order with someone else.

What it has forced me to do, is slowly start swapping out my Trango APs, to 
make room (spectrum and antenna lease fees) for radios that can deliver 
packetlossless links.  Even Wifi gear can offer packetlossless links.  And 
its forced me to go back and re-negotiate my contracts with property owners 
to try and not pay per antenna, so I can get more antennas of larger size 
(PtP) for less money on the roofs.  Its a BIG waste of time, that I wouldn't

have to do, if Trango added ARQ reliable ARQ to 5830-ext.

I'm still a Big Trango fan, and still am basing my business around its 
product, because of its value proposition, but I am loosing sales and 
getting more black eyes than I have to, because Trango does not have a EXT 
antenna product line that delivers reliable ARQ.  I haven't bought a new 
Trango 5830 AP in ages, I have to many pulls on the shelf waiting, when I 
need one.  If Trango never released ARQ for the FOX, I would have never kown

what I was missing. But now that I have experienced it, I can't live without

it.

The two biggest reasons, for lack of progress in my company is, 1) Waiting 
for technology, and 2) Waiting for finance to come through.  I can't count 
how much money I burned just waiting.  I don't want to wait any more. I'm 
tired of waiting. I don't have the energy to keep waiting. I want it now.  I

need it now.  This is a time to market business, where there is a domino 
effect of disaster tied to waiting.

So when a company like Alvarion or Valemont come out with a product that 
will do the job, and I no longer have to wait, I see no reason to wait.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


> Tom,
>
> I hate to say this, but I think you missed the boat on your three $500/mo 
> subs. Trango still offers a 58

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

Hello Tom,

Brag about networks?  Still do!  lol  

Believe me when I say you're preaching to the choir when it comes to Trango.
It has been a wild ride UP with the 5800/5830 product and certainly a
disappointing DOWNWARD slide with the introduction of yet one miserable
Trango product after another.  As we predicted Trango has lost its rudder
and drifting aimlessly without any apparent direction.  This has been very
disheartening to witness to say the least.  I'm still holding out hope, but
not holding my breath.

Once the M5830 is gone we'll have moved along to another product.  Hopefully
that product will be Alvarion VL, but not until the "RF purists" (as they
like to call themselves ) make a few fundamental
changes.  Dual polarity and dual band on the fly.  I've asked Patrick this
question, but it appears the cat's got his tongue!  

What's the big deal for Alvarion to add another Atheros radio to the product
that will give them dual polarity and dual band capability?  Alvarion would
rather you have to stock twice the SKUs (V & H SUs) for the ability to
change polarity?  Not to mention the truck rolls required...this is simply
out of the question.

Best,


Brad 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 7:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Brad,

I got an idea! How about Trango Fix ARQ for the 5830-EXT, so it can be like 
old times, and we can sit and brag on the list how great our networks are?

One of the reasons StarOS is becoming such an exciting platform. StarOS can 
be used as a multi-freq, Multi-polarity on the fly product.
I will say that Alvarions choice to not make Dual Freq radios, has allowed 
them to deliver the highest gain from a radio with good clean filtering of 
the spectrum range.
But nobody has a good excuse for not offering Dual Polarity, there just 
isn't a negative to it.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


Agreed that Trango has clearly fallen behind...way behind.  However, the VL
is also far from being an "end all" solution.  The VL has no mechanism to
avoid interference (No RX threshold etc.) other than just to retransmit.

Also, the VL does not offer the flexibility to change polarities on the fly.
In fact Alvarion doesn't even offer an H Polarity SU INT and if you rotate
the V Polarity SU to H you'll likely have a water penetration problem.

The VL is only available in a 5.3GHz or 5.8GHz solution further limiting the
flexibility the product offers.  As our HUB sites increase in number and
decrease in required coverage area we have found the 5.3GHz band to be VERY
valuable.  You do not have that flexibility with VL.

When Alvarion is presented with the freq and polarity suggestions they
simply respond with "we're RF purists" talking points.  No indication that
maybe, just maybe those would be good features to add to the product.

We deployed a VL in an above average noisy environment with the latest v3.x
firmware and the results were dismal to say the least.  Fortunately
upgrading to v4.0 allowed us to salvage the deal, but we still can only pass
a few Mbps.  This is far less than what a Trango M5830AP can do in a noisy
environment.

As with most things YMMV.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad option.
I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good job. Trango
has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years (including
myself until recently). I have found though that for my applications in
feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 100% better than
Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have a need for a
low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing that the Trango
multipoint radios will still provide excellent service. Just because I
have soured on them does not mean they are not a platform for WISPs to
consider.
Scriv

> I was thinking about using Trango for a link, but I do not want
> headaches, not today and not 5 years from today.
>Thanks.
>
> Mario
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Patrick Leary]

Cat doesn't have my tongue Brad. I'm just doing my best not to take the
bait.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 6:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Hello Tom,

Brag about networks?  Still do!  lol  

Believe me when I say you're preaching to the choir when it comes to
Trango.
It has been a wild ride UP with the 5800/5830 product and certainly a
disappointing DOWNWARD slide with the introduction of yet one miserable
Trango product after another.  As we predicted Trango has lost its
rudder
and drifting aimlessly without any apparent direction.  This has been
very
disheartening to witness to say the least.  I'm still holding out hope,
but
not holding my breath.

Once the M5830 is gone we'll have moved along to another product.
Hopefully
that product will be Alvarion VL, but not until the "RF purists" (as
they
like to call themselves ) make a few fundamental
changes.  Dual polarity and dual band on the fly.  I've asked Patrick
this
question, but it appears the cat's got his tongue!  

What's the big deal for Alvarion to add another Atheros radio to the
product
that will give them dual polarity and dual band capability?  Alvarion
would
rather you have to stock twice the SKUs (V & H SUs) for the ability to
change polarity?  Not to mention the truck rolls required...this is
simply
out of the question.

Best,


Brad 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 7:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Brad,

I got an idea! How about Trango Fix ARQ for the 5830-EXT, so it can be
like 
old times, and we can sit and brag on the list how great our networks
are?

One of the reasons StarOS is becoming such an exciting platform. StarOS
can 
be used as a multi-freq, Multi-polarity on the fly product.
I will say that Alvarions choice to not make Dual Freq radios, has
allowed 
them to deliver the highest gain from a radio with good clean filtering
of 
the spectrum range.
But nobody has a good excuse for not offering Dual Polarity, there just 
isn't a negative to it.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


Agreed that Trango has clearly fallen behind...way behind.  However, the
VL
is also far from being an "end all" solution.  The VL has no mechanism
to
avoid interference (No RX threshold etc.) other than just to retransmit.

Also, the VL does not offer the flexibility to change polarities on the
fly.
In fact Alvarion doesn't even offer an H Polarity SU INT and if you
rotate
the V Polarity SU to H you'll likely have a water penetration problem.

The VL is only available in a 5.3GHz or 5.8GHz solution further limiting
the
flexibility the product offers.  As our HUB sites increase in number and
decrease in required coverage area we have found the 5.3GHz band to be
VERY
valuable.  You do not have that flexibility with VL.

When Alvarion is presented with the freq and polarity suggestions they
simply respond with "we're RF purists" talking points.  No indication
that
maybe, just maybe those would be good features to add to the product.

We deployed a VL in an above average noisy environment with the latest
v3.x
firmware and the results were dismal to say the least.  Fortunately
upgrading to v4.0 allowed us to salvage the deal, but we still can only
pass
a few Mbps.  This is far less than what a Trango M5830AP can do in a
noisy
environment.

As with most things YMMV.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad option.
I have not used their Atlas radios which may well do a good job. Trango
has been a valuable product for many WISPs over the years (including
myself until recently). I have found though that for my applications in
feeding other towers to rural towns Alvarion VL works 100% better than
Trango or anything else I have ever used. If you have a need for a
low-cost short haul or CPE solution then I am guessing that the Trango
multipoint radios will still provide excellent service. Ju

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

???  Simple question...no bait intended!

What's the saying or how does it go?  Something about heat and the
kitchen...

Hey, don't be embarrassed about Coppell.  It's only a 2MB circuit and so far
the VL is keeping up...barely.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Cat doesn't have my tongue Brad. I'm just doing my best not to take the
bait.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 6:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Hello Tom,

Brag about networks?  Still do!  lol  

Believe me when I say you're preaching to the choir when it comes to
Trango.
It has been a wild ride UP with the 5800/5830 product and certainly a
disappointing DOWNWARD slide with the introduction of yet one miserable
Trango product after another.  As we predicted Trango has lost its
rudder
and drifting aimlessly without any apparent direction.  This has been
very
disheartening to witness to say the least.  I'm still holding out hope,
but
not holding my breath.

Once the M5830 is gone we'll have moved along to another product.
Hopefully
that product will be Alvarion VL, but not until the "RF purists" (as
they
like to call themselves ) make a few fundamental
changes.  Dual polarity and dual band on the fly.  I've asked Patrick
this
question, but it appears the cat's got his tongue!  

What's the big deal for Alvarion to add another Atheros radio to the
product
that will give them dual polarity and dual band capability?  Alvarion
would
rather you have to stock twice the SKUs (V & H SUs) for the ability to
change polarity?  Not to mention the truck rolls required...this is
simply
out of the question.

Best,


Brad 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 7:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Brad,

I got an idea! How about Trango Fix ARQ for the 5830-EXT, so it can be
like 
old times, and we can sit and brag on the list how great our networks
are?

One of the reasons StarOS is becoming such an exciting platform. StarOS
can 
be used as a multi-freq, Multi-polarity on the fly product.
I will say that Alvarions choice to not make Dual Freq radios, has
allowed 
them to deliver the highest gain from a radio with good clean filtering
of 
the spectrum range.
But nobody has a good excuse for not offering Dual Polarity, there just 
isn't a negative to it.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


Agreed that Trango has clearly fallen behind...way behind.  However, the
VL
is also far from being an "end all" solution.  The VL has no mechanism
to
avoid interference (No RX threshold etc.) other than just to retransmit.

Also, the VL does not offer the flexibility to change polarities on the
fly.
In fact Alvarion doesn't even offer an H Polarity SU INT and if you
rotate
the V Polarity SU to H you'll likely have a water penetration problem.

The VL is only available in a 5.3GHz or 5.8GHz solution further limiting
the
flexibility the product offers.  As our HUB sites increase in number and
decrease in required coverage area we have found the 5.3GHz band to be
VERY
valuable.  You do not have that flexibility with VL.

When Alvarion is presented with the freq and polarity suggestions they
simply respond with "we're RF purists" talking points.  No indication
that
maybe, just maybe those would be good features to add to the product.

We deployed a VL in an above average noisy environment with the latest
v3.x
firmware and the results were dismal to say the least.  Fortunately
upgrading to v4.0 allowed us to salvage the deal, but we still can only
pass
a few Mbps.  This is far less than what a Trango M5830AP can do in a
noisy
environment.

As with most things YMMV.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

Please know that I am not really trying to trash Trango here. They are
still a viable product in some situations. Alvarion is simply so much
better that it warranted this upgrade. Obviously for heavily used links
feeding towers to other towns I think Trango multipoint is a bad opti

Re: [WISPA] PTP Link Recommendations

[Butch Evans]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Tom DeReggi wrote:

Just remember OSPF does not detect packet loss, and does not 
properly switch to backup channels or switches to frequently 
between channels on marginal links. So when you use two spectrum 
channels for 1 link, you double your chance that the link will get 
interference and degration.


OSPF detecting packet loss?  Switching channels?  That's the job of 
the radios.  OSPF will simply use the links, regardless of the 
channel or even type of radio.  ANY FDX radio is going to be 2 
radios (and therefore 2 channels).


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] What could be improved with the Alvarion VL product?

[Brad Belton]

Now that Alvarion has dedicated a person to lend an ear to the wISP industry
and an Official Alvarion Representative is a member of the list I think this
is a good opportunity to field the pros and cons of the VL product.

What are the VL strong points vs. the shortcomings?  Here are a few off the
top of my head and I would encourage other VL users to post their findings.
The objective is to provide the feedback I'm sure Alvarion is looking for to
improve and help shape the evolution of current and future Alvarion
products.

Pros:

High quality construction
VLAN support
Alignment LEDS
Committed and enthusiastic personnel
Capable of 10MHz & 20MHz channels
High payload capacity under ideal conditions
ATPC (Auto Tx Power Control?)


Cons:

No dual band capability
No dual polarity capability
No Rx threshold
AU requires lengthy reboot network downtime for RF survey
AU requires lengthy reboot network downtime for many configuration changes
Non-standard CAT5 color code requires re-termination of included cable
Weather seal not large enough to pass RJ45 through




Best,


Brad


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Charles Wu]

What I'm learning is that as my business grows, the abilty to change and 
move (channel options) is becoming less important that the abilty to 
effectively battle it out. The reason is that if every time I hiot noise, I 
move away from the channel, eventually others take those channels., until 
they are all gone, and their is no where else to move to. Sometimes its 
better to claim the space and say, "I'm here first", "go find another 
channel to play on".  And keep fighting back with better antennas. As the 
antenna grows, you over power the interference, but the important point is, 
you reduce the interference to you and them, by restricting the beamwidth. 
The high power via antenna you go, the more courtious it is to the other 
player to attempt avoidence of signals interfering.  Alvarion gives that 
advantage.


Tom,

Based on that observation...shouldn't you be looking at Canopy 

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] What could be improved with the Alvarion VL product?

[Brad Belton]

Now that Alvarion has dedicated a person to lend an ear to the wISP industry
and an Official Alvarion Representative is a member of the list I think this
is a good opportunity to field the pros and cons of the VL product.

What are the VL strong points vs. the shortcomings?  Here are a few off the
top of my head and I would encourage other VL users to post their findings.
The objective is to provide the feedback I'm sure Alvarion is looking for to
improve and help shape the evolution of current and future Alvarion
products.

Pros:

High quality construction
VLAN support
Alignment LEDS
Committed and enthusiastic personnel
Capable of 10MHz & 20MHz channels
High payload capacity under ideal conditions
ATPC (Auto Tx Power Control?)


Cons:

No dual band capability
No dual polarity capability
No Rx threshold
AU requires lengthy reboot network downtime for RF survey
AU requires lengthy reboot network downtime for many configuration changes
Non-standard CAT5 color code requires re-termination of included cable
Weather seal not large enough to pass RJ45 through
No rssi reading




Best,


Brad


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Brad Belton]

lol...too funny Charles.

Tom has a good point and I largely agree, however there are times when push
comes to shove and you have no option but to make a change.  When that
happens running around rotating client antennas 90* all over town really
isn't an option.  With Trango it's a simple command to flip polarities and
even 5GHz bands if needed.  No reason why Alvarion VL can't do that to if
they wanted it.

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


What I'm learning is that as my business grows, the abilty to change and 
move (channel options) is becoming less important that the abilty to 
effectively battle it out. The reason is that if every time I hiot noise, I 
move away from the channel, eventually others take those channels., until 
they are all gone, and their is no where else to move to. Sometimes its 
better to claim the space and say, "I'm here first", "go find another 
channel to play on".  And keep fighting back with better antennas. As the 
antenna grows, you over power the interference, but the important point is, 
you reduce the interference to you and them, by restricting the beamwidth. 
The high power via antenna you go, the more courtious it is to the other 
player to attempt avoidence of signals interfering.  Alvarion gives that 
advantage.


Tom,

Based on that observation...shouldn't you be looking at Canopy 

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links

[Gino A. Villarini]

That's why I asked, to what gear he was switching to ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 11:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL Fixes Problems with Backhaul Links


What I'm learning is that as my business grows, the abilty to change and 
move (channel options) is becoming less important that the abilty to 
effectively battle it out. The reason is that if every time I hiot noise, I 
move away from the channel, eventually others take those channels., until 
they are all gone, and their is no where else to move to. Sometimes its 
better to claim the space and say, "I'm here first", "go find another 
channel to play on".  And keep fighting back with better antennas. As the 
antenna grows, you over power the interference, but the important point is, 
you reduce the interference to you and them, by restricting the beamwidth. 
The high power via antenna you go, the more courtious it is to the other 
player to attempt avoidence of signals interfering.  Alvarion gives that 
advantage.


Tom,

Based on that observation...shouldn't you be looking at Canopy 

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/