RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived
Oh Patrick, you couldn't resist Motorola is extremely conservative on the spec sheet. 4.21 Mbps Net typical where you get that? I got Advantage customers at 10 miles getting full 14 Mbps ...It may not be the most effective modulation, but is a very good compromise between performance and interference rejection. And don't negate the fact that GPS is a must have tool for Cell deployment, It saves you spectrum, tower space and I can play nice with other carriers using Canopy... Why you think all cell carriers rely on GPS ? Let me see a VL 6 60 deg Sector using only 60 Mhz of channels Let me see 3 VL Carriers sharing 1 tower 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 Patrick Leary Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 12:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived Jon, With a proper channel plan that is just not the case, not to mention things like ATPC. Things like WiMAX use it because there you are dealing with small frequency allocations where every last ounce of efficiency needs to be found. In UL that is not the case since there is so much more spectrum to work with. Please don't try to tell me Canopy's use of GPS is good example of UL efficiency. We both know Canopy's use of GPS is more the reality of the fact that Canopy is always talking and has no ATPC so the GPS is used to keep it from stepping on itself. And speaking about efficiency, even the Canopy Advantage is a very inefficient modulation relative to something like VL. Advantage, but Motorola's own spec sheet, delivers 4.25mbps net typical, 14mbps max (to 1 mile) in a 20MHz channel. VL does over 30mbps net max with typical over the air in an LOS environment being something like 80% of that well over 1 mile. In any event, there exist too many examples to count of scaled VL networks with co-located cells say you are incorrect in your assertion that VL can't be built in a cellular topology. It is a silly thing to assert in fact. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Langeler Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 9:23 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived With VL, you still run into the issue of self interference in a cellular deployment(many tower sites in a region). The only products I'm aware of that cooperate properly in a cellular deployment are minimally GPS capable, and the advanced products that support things like hand-off or N:1 deployment go beyond that with 2-way base station to base station communication. Technologies such as wimax, 3G, fiber networks, etc. all use GPS to to improve efficiency and operation. IMO VL may still be a good product to deploy, but just not in a cellular or colocated deployment. Jon Langeler Michwave Tech. Tom DeReggi wrote: Charles, Although your comment is true, and you left out on the fly flexibilty, what people want is not always the best value, at the end of the day with all things considered. The value of consistent availability and right out of the box deployment is PRICELIST! This doesn't only save cost of installer labor, but also management labor in purchasing and aquisition. I'll share something from my experience that I find is Ironic as heck. I always looked at Alvarion as the high end market gear, but its being a stronger residential play. I recently have done a lot with War/StarV3 for high end business, mostly Point to Point links, because I can get good speed, flexibilty to reach the neighboring building, and great testing tools with things like Iperf BUILT-IN able to test Ethernet connections as well as RF conclusively link by link, as hops increase as the backbone mesh grows. Alvarion is also a great product for high end business, which I'm also using in some cases, but I have a higher cost to accomplish that, since StarOS has dual radio slots. Where Alvarion has now shown undisputable advantage based on its new low price, is in its residential application. The difference between $185 and $285, is almost nothing compared to my time savings in operations. The ease of opening the box and installing a VL is unmatched. What VL does for me, is that it gives me confidence in using subcontractors to isntall. Because I know they'll take the time to make sure they get the best signal. With my other gear, its such a pain to get best signal, I was afraid to use contractors and only do installs with employees by the hour, so their income did not deter them from doing their best job. I gladly pay $100 more for a complete ready to go product. The only thing that keeps me from going 100% Alvarion for
[WISPA] FCC: Build wireless emergency broadband network
December 22, 2006 FCC: Build wireless emergency broadband network The Federal Communications Commission is proposing a national wireless, IP-based, broadband emergency network to be built by private companies, the BBC reports. Earlier this year, I had an opportunity to hear local public safety personnel recount their experiences on the ground during the tragic events of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, said Deborah Taylor Tate, commissioner at the FCC in a statement. Their eyewitness accounts underscore how important it is that our nation's first responders have access to reliable and redundant communications in the event of an emergency, and how much remains to be done before those tools are available. The proposed network would use the 700MHz band of the radio spectrum, which is already allocated to public safety. It can travel over long distances and penetrate walls. Our country is teeming with entrepreneurs, willing and able to invest and take the risks necessary to accelerate the development and roll-out of advanced services, said Commissioner Robert McDowell. The same market and technological forces that have made advanced wireless services an everyday part of living for the vast majority of Americans can and should be leveraged by the public safety community, he added. The network would deliver for the first time a fully unified emergency communications system for the entire country. Kevin Martin, chairman of the FCC in the US said any decision to implement a new network would fall to the federal government. If Congress determines that additional spectrum resources in the 700MHz band should be allocated to public safety, the commission would implement that determination. http://government.zdnet.com/?p=2791 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Terabeam Turbocell - Flash to 802.11b
Anyone know if there is a way to flash Terabeam/Proxim EtherAnt-Turbo wireless units with 802.11b firmware? I've got about 70 of these on 2 sites that I'm wanting to move away from Turbocell and I don't want to replace them all at once. Thanks... Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax -- 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 Comnet Radios have arrived
Hi Gino, Before I get to where Motorola says what I said, you said: Let me see a VL 6 60 deg Sector using only 60 Mhz of channels. That's no problem and would be done using 6 sixty degree AU's using 10MHz channels and the net capacity of that cell would be just about 100mbps net, which is about 15% more capacity than your Canopy Advantage cell's 84mbps net. Now on to your other parts where you fairly question where I got my Motorola numbers. I ain't making this stuff up: Here's the 14mbps to 1 mile part in the spec: http://motorola.canopywireless.com/products/specshome.php (Of course, you can buy range extenders to compensate for that poor out-of-the-box range. What's that, another $80 bucks or so?) And the part that says 4.25mbps (I did not say 4.21) is not, my mistake, reported on a spec sheet, but rather on Motorola's Motorola Canopy, Advantage Wireless Broadband Platform - Voice over IP (VoIP) over Canopy Advantage Platform whitepaper, dated February 7, 2006 from page 11, Table 1, under the Findings section. The study and data collected and reported was performed by independent third party consulting firm West Monroe Partners. Here is the relevant excerpt: ++ ...The results show that Canopy platform hardware, when updated to the software release 7.2.9 and being driven by a Canopy Advantage platform AP will provide nearly identical performance to the newer Canopy Advantage Subscriber Modules. The table below shows an average score over five separate tests for both throughput and response time. PlatformThroughput Avg. (Mbps) Response Time Avg.(s) Advantage 4.251 1.7526 Canopy 4.294 1.7568 Table 1: Hardware Differences ++ I see you are also beating the GPS is a must have for cellular deployment drum. Is that the latest Canopy mantra? And you are right, if a product: - uses licensed band frequencies where the operator only has access to a small channel range Or it is an unlicensed product that: - is always talking, - does not have ATPC, - uses 60 degree CPE and - has a low amount of capacity to begin with Then you must have GPS in a scaled network to keep from destroying yourself. We know all about GPS Gino, we've had it for the required products licensed and unlicensed long before there ever was a Canopy and it has been available for Alvarion's UL hoppers from day 1 (FCC just would not permit it in the US originally). BreezeACCESS VL does not require it to scale in the UL bands and BreezeACCESS VL does not need GPS to keep from stepping on itself. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 5:50 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived Oh Patrick, you couldn't resist Motorola is extremely conservative on the spec sheet. 4.21 Mbps Net typical where you get that? I got Advantage customers at 10 miles getting full 14 Mbps ...It may not be the most effective modulation, but is a very good compromise between performance and interference rejection. And don't negate the fact that GPS is a must have tool for Cell deployment, It saves you spectrum, tower space and I can play nice with other carriers using Canopy... Why you think all cell carriers rely on GPS ? Let me see a VL 6 60 deg Sector using only 60 Mhz of channels Let me see 3 VL Carriers sharing 1 tower 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 Patrick Leary Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 12:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived Jon, With a proper channel plan that is just not the case, not to mention things like ATPC. Things like WiMAX use it because there you are dealing with small frequency allocations where every last ounce of efficiency needs to be found. In UL that is not the case since there is so much more spectrum to work with. Please don't try to tell me Canopy's use of GPS is good example of UL efficiency. We both know Canopy's use of GPS is more the reality of the fact that Canopy is always talking and has no ATPC so the GPS is used to keep it from stepping on itself. And speaking about efficiency, even the Canopy Advantage is a very inefficient modulation relative to something like VL. Advantage, but Motorola's own spec sheet, delivers 4.25mbps net typical, 14mbps max (to 1 mile) in a 20MHz channel. VL does over 30mbps net max with typical over the air in an LOS environment being something like 80% of that well over 1 mile. In any event, there exist too many examples to count of scaled VL networks with co-located cells say you are incorrect in your assertion
