[WISPA] Venice Project would break many users' ISP conditions
Venice Project would break many users' ISP conditions OUT-LAW News, 03/01/2007 Internet television system The Venice Project could break users' monthly internet bandwith limits in hours, according to the team behind it. It downloads 320 megabytes (MB) per hour from users' computers, meaning that users could reach their monthly download limits in hours and that it could be unusable for bandwidth-capped users. The Venice Project is the new system being developed by Janus Friis and Niklas Zennström, the Scandinavian entrepreneurs behind the revolutionary services Kazaa and Skype. It is currently being used by 6,000 beta testers and is due to be launched next year. The data transfer rate is revealed in the documentation sent to beta testers and the instructions make it very clear what the bandwidth requirements are so that users are not caught out. Under a banner saying 'Important notice for users with limits on their internet usage', the document says: The Venice Project is a streaming video application, and so uses a relatively high amount of bandwidth per hour. One hour of viewing is 320MB downloaded and 105 Megabytes uploaded, which means that it will exhaust a 1 Gigabyte cap in 10 hours. Also, the application continues to run in the background after you close the main window. For this reason, if you pay for your bandwidth usage per megabyte or have your usage capped by your ISP, you should be careful to always exit the Venice Project client completely when you are finished watching it, says the document Many ISPs offer broadband connections which are unlimited to use by time, but have limits on the amount of data that can be transferred over the connection each month. Though limits are 'advisory' and not strict, users who regularly far exceed the limits break the terms of their deals. BT's most basic broadband package BT Total Broadband Package 1, for example, has a 2GB monthly 'usage guideline'. This would be reached after 20 hours of viewing. The software is also likely to transfer data even when not being used. The Venice system is going to run on a peer-to-peer (P2P) network, which means that users host and send the programmes to other users in an automated system. OUT-LAW has seen screenshots from the system and talked to one of the testers of it, who reports very favourably on its use. This is going to be the one. I've used some of the other software out there and it's fine, but my dad could use this, they've just got it right, he said. It looks great, you fire it up and in two minutes you're live, you're watching television. The source said that claims being made for the system being near high definition in terms of picture quality are wide of the mark. It's not high definition. It's the same as normal television, he said. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] more USWO
http://louisville.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2007/01/08/story6.html?t=printable -- Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.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] Optimally taking advantage of GB Ethernet
1GB Fiber is typically using Packet over SONET. I have typically seen over 500 mbps on these links, even from Telcove/L3. But the distance is usually a factor. Running from NoLa to ATL on a long-haul, single hop 1GB fiber run introduces lots of regen issues, so 500 mbps would be a blessing. Most people don't need as much pipe as they buy either. - Peter Tom DeReggi wrote: I do not believe that people like ATTT are passing over 200mbps on their GB Ethernet fiber links, when they are using them as backbones or extensions to existing customer's connection, for the reason I brought up. I just don't think that the end user custoemr base is smart enough to know the difference. 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] Dual-WAN routers
Great points Butch! There are products out there that claim load balancing and failover, but there is only one way to do both, and that is through bonding. Bonding requires that the circuits be terminated in one router on your end and one router on the provider end. The only true failover with multiple providers is BGP, although there are companies claiming otherwise on that also. BGP does nothing for load balancing. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 1:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dual-WAN routers On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, David E. Smith wrote: This is for the end user cpe side. I'd like to see both fail-over and load balancing but fail-over is priority. No need for wireless. I'll look into the microtik. Thanks! -RickG Rick, keeping in mind that load balancing where you don't control both ends of both links is not truly possible, there is a way to SORT OF get this effect. The problem is that some things have to be treated in a special way when you are using NAT (actually, masquerade, but we won't go there). VoIP, P2P, VPN and a few others come to mind. Either way, there are some things you can do to make this work with MT, and it's not that hard, but it IS a bit time consuming to get it right. As for failover, there are several ways to do this, and some of them are pretty simple. A bit of scripting knowledge is required, but other than that, it is not that bad to do. There are some examples in the manual (as David pointed out) Mikrotik RouterOS manual. In a pinch, I know we've got one or two Mikrotik trainers on the list; you could get them to show you how to do it. You only have to pay for it once, then you can just copy-and-paste the configuration from there on out. :D Well, copy/paste for policy routing is not really that cut and dried. It is best to understand what the policy states, then moving it to a new system is not that hard. As I said, it is somewhat time consuming to get it working, however. Fair warning, I haven't used the RouterBoard 150 hardware I mentioned, but most of their other hardware has treated me well, so I wouldn't expect that board to be any different. I like the 150...it is a very inexpensive solution for a low end router (just $70 plus a case and powersupply). The 153 is only $120 and you can add radio cards. -- Butch Evans Network Engineering and Security Consulting 573-276-2879 http://www.butchevans.com/ My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6 Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf 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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Optimally taking advantage of GB Ethernet
Jeff, The solution is simply a hardware upgrade for starters. A 32-bit/33 MHz bus will top out around 200 Mbps. If you look for a bus with higher speed slots, you can triple your throughput without adjusting ANYTHING in your Linux kernel. Well thats where I disagree. And where I am looking for clarification. We were NOT using systems with Buses limited to 32bit/33Mhz or Basic PCI. The routers that we used for testing were using the Intel 7501 chipset, spec'd at allowing 3GB of throughput, and PCI-X Bus. There are actually three potential limits... 1) Hardware 2) Software 3) Ethernet Protocol theoretical limit. My understanding, although not confirmed, was that there was an Ethernet (cdma) timing Limitation, that prevented the Full 1GB from being reached using a 1500MTU. Myhardware can handle it. I'm investigating whether the limit is related to my Linux Software config versus Ethernet theoretical limits. If you want wirespeed GigE performance with multiple packet streams at a more reasonable packet size (remember that 1500 byte packets aren't realistic), you'll need to make some adjustments to the kernel. Well, thats my point... 1500MTU is a requirement that is usually beyond the control of the ISP. The ISP may may control the GB connection for Higher MTU, but NOT necessarily backend Transit or Front End last mile connections. The Internet is full of less than 384K average size packets, and not much an ISP can do about that. Part of the question becomes, can near 1GB be acheived at 1500MTU? With the 1500MTU frame acheiving only 200kbps, our routers CPU utilization was less than 20%, so it was not a saturated router. Actually, it is. Utilities top and vmstat don't necessarily reflect all of the CPU utilization, and can't account for PCI bus contention/overhead. Excellent Point. Any way to tell that (FULL CPU utilization)? The second we changed MTU to 9600, we got over 800 mbps, and CPU utilization was still very low, forget exact number but under 40%. Well, sure...you've just taken your packet rate down significantly. The reason we thought this was an Ethernet limitation and not a CPU/hardware limitation is that, we were able to pass a larger speed by combining multiple 100 mbps connections. For example, we were able to get 400 mbps with 4- 100mbps connections simultaneously.(didn't have more machines to test.) You still have bus overhead and the limitations of a 32/33 bus (1 Gbps burst capacity). Again, we were using PCI-X not limited in that way, to my understanding. Does Image Stream have any data, from live tests, proving the speed they can get across their GB routers at 1500 MTU? Maybe thats a solution for us? Tom DeReggi Regards, Jeff 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/ -- 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] Venice Project would break many users' ISP conditions
I wonder if MT will be able to block it. Because right now I don't allow p2p or bit torrent on my network, and it is successfully blocked by MT. You have a good day now,en mag jou more's ook so wees. Carl A Jeptha http://www.jeptha.com 905-349-2027 skype cajeptha Dawn DiPietro wrote: Venice Project would break many users' ISP conditions OUT-LAW News, 03/01/2007 Internet television system The Venice Project could break users' monthly internet bandwith limits in hours, according to the team behind it. It downloads 320 megabytes (MB) per hour from users' computers, meaning that users could reach their monthly download limits in hours and that it could be unusable for bandwidth-capped users. The Venice Project is the new system being developed by Janus Friis and Niklas Zennström, the Scandinavian entrepreneurs behind the revolutionary services Kazaa and Skype. It is currently being used by 6,000 beta testers and is due to be launched next year. The data transfer rate is revealed in the documentation sent to beta testers and the instructions make it very clear what the bandwidth requirements are so that users are not caught out. Under a banner saying 'Important notice for users with limits on their internet usage', the document says: The Venice Project is a streaming video application, and so uses a relatively high amount of bandwidth per hour. One hour of viewing is 320MB downloaded and 105 Megabytes uploaded, which means that it will exhaust a 1 Gigabyte cap in 10 hours. Also, the application continues to run in the background after you close the main window. For this reason, if you pay for your bandwidth usage per megabyte or have your usage capped by your ISP, you should be careful to always exit the Venice Project client completely when you are finished watching it, says the document Many ISPs offer broadband connections which are unlimited to use by time, but have limits on the amount of data that can be transferred over the connection each month. Though limits are 'advisory' and not strict, users who regularly far exceed the limits break the terms of their deals. BT's most basic broadband package BT Total Broadband Package 1, for example, has a 2GB monthly 'usage guideline'. This would be reached after 20 hours of viewing. The software is also likely to transfer data even when not being used. The Venice system is going to run on a peer-to-peer (P2P) network, which means that users host and send the programmes to other users in an automated system. OUT-LAW has seen screenshots from the system and talked to one of the testers of it, who reports very favourably on its use. This is going to be the one. I've used some of the other software out there and it's fine, but my dad could use this, they've just got it right, he said. It looks great, you fire it up and in two minutes you're live, you're watching television. The source said that claims being made for the system being near high definition in terms of picture quality are wide of the mark. It's not high definition. It's the same as normal television, he said. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] churn, double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it
Back home...ahhh to bad when it ends... Frankly , I don't know ... maybe has to due with the TDD system, next firmware release should improve overall pps capacity 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: Sunday, January 07, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it It does sound like a similar smart mechanism Gino -- I stand corrected. If this is who I assume it is though, then why do they report such low VoIP performance per SM and per AP? ...but don't answer any of this until after you leave Vail. Better that you should just enjoy your vacation. Sounds great. Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:37 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Well, I haven't replied to this earlier cause Im on vacation (skiing @ Vail ) but now, let me add some info... I don't want to get involved in a gear fight, but a brand x gear has a Per Sector prioritization of traffic. It works like this: You set the cpe to identify the traffic to be prioritized using Diffserv, ( it can be any type of traffic not just voip) Then you activate on the cpe the high priority channel option Set how much bandwidth this high priority channel would use And you are done, The Sector AP identifies all the cpes on the sector using this feature and assings them a 2nd slot of time for this traffic for each cpe, so cpe's using this feature have 2 slots of time to talk to the ap, 1 for priority traffic, the other for regural traffic. Sector wide , all high priority channels of all cpes have priority over regular cpes... So Patrick, what do you think 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, January 06, 2007 12:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it I don't think so Gino, but I'm open to be proven wrong. Tell me who else can actually prioritize over the air sector wide. I'm talking about not just pushing out the voice first on any given CPE, I'm talking about ALL the CPE on a sector being able to send its que'd voice out before any CPE can release data into the sector? 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: Friday, January 05, 2007 2:19 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Patrick, not to rain on you parade but you guys area actually 2nd on this RF prioritization feature 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: Friday, January 05, 2007 4:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it ...So I'm here at our annual national meeting and our project manager is explaining the Wireless Link Prioritization feature available for BreezeACCESS VL. Frankly, it has always seemed esoteric to those of us non-technical types, but now I got and it is simple enough. First, I learned the statistical improvement in churn when a provider has double play VoIP + data customers. We have had a few CLECs report to us that with a single play model their churn is about 9%. Adding double play takes it down to close to 1%. This is critical to the business model because they said a 10% reduction in churn translates into about a 20% improvement in NPV per subscriber. That's obviously huge. So what's the WLP feature available in BreezeACCESS VL have to do with any of this? BreezeACCESS VL can already do QoS priority tagging of packets per CPE using layer 2 (802.11p), layer 3 (IP TOS, DSCP) or layer 4 (TCP/UDP port ranges common with Cisco, for example). That's good and already better than most brands of BWA gear. BUT, that's only PER CPE. In a typical situation, this does not help at all when multiple CPE are on a sector -- there is no prioritization at the RF level in unlicensed from any brand...until now. WLP (also called multimedia application prioritization) actually solves this and enables over-the-air prioritization for the first time in the industry. The translation for this is that BreezeACCESS VL can now deliver massive VoIP, up to 288 concurrent calls per
RE: [WISPA] churn, double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it
Gino, After you informed me of the way prioritization occurs in your solution, I asked one of our sharp engineers to articulate the differences to me. Here was his reply back and I'd be interested in your feedback: The [prioritization mechanism in the] __ system is different than VL in the way it is deployed and the way it will deploy a priority network. With VL the bandwidth for the sector is totally dynamic, any direction demand can utilize the entire capacity of the base station. __ pre-defines the amount up and down to the sector. Their implementation of the prioritization is stated for DSCP only where we can do it also for ToS. I am not sure if that is unique but keep it in the back of your head. Our WLP is also dynamic; where he stated that you specify the amount of bandwidth for the priority channel, our can/will fluctuate every microsecond during the communication. This will also happen independently in each direction. Because there is a potential for over subscription of prioritized traffic, VL also has an option to set aside some bandwidth for best effort traffic incase the provider creates too much prioritized traffic. This prevents the FTP from a customer from breaking during the high priority traffic times. Make sense? 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: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:24 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Back home...ahhh to bad when it ends... Frankly , I don't know ... maybe has to due with the TDD system, next firmware release should improve overall pps capacity 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: Sunday, January 07, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it It does sound like a similar smart mechanism Gino -- I stand corrected. If this is who I assume it is though, then why do they report such low VoIP performance per SM and per AP? ...but don't answer any of this until after you leave Vail. Better that you should just enjoy your vacation. Sounds great. Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:37 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Well, I haven't replied to this earlier cause Im on vacation (skiing @ Vail ) but now, let me add some info... I don't want to get involved in a gear fight, but a brand x gear has a Per Sector prioritization of traffic. It works like this: You set the cpe to identify the traffic to be prioritized using Diffserv, ( it can be any type of traffic not just voip) Then you activate on the cpe the high priority channel option Set how much bandwidth this high priority channel would use And you are done, The Sector AP identifies all the cpes on the sector using this feature and assings them a 2nd slot of time for this traffic for each cpe, so cpe's using this feature have 2 slots of time to talk to the ap, 1 for priority traffic, the other for regural traffic. Sector wide , all high priority channels of all cpes have priority over regular cpes... So Patrick, what do you think 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, January 06, 2007 12:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it I don't think so Gino, but I'm open to be proven wrong. Tell me who else can actually prioritize over the air sector wide. I'm talking about not just pushing out the voice first on any given CPE, I'm talking about ALL the CPE on a sector being able to send its que'd voice out before any CPE can release data into the sector? 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: Friday, January 05, 2007 2:19 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Patrick, not to rain on you parade but you guys area actually 2nd on this RF prioritization feature Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
[WISPA] Linksys 6 line voip phone
http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Promotion_C2childpagename=US%2FLayoutcid=1162878004771pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper SPA962 - 6-Line IP Phone with Color Display Looks interesting. -- George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] churn, double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it
Patrick, I agree with your engineer's description. But I'd argue the use of the word prioritization is incorrectly applied to Canopy. Canopy doesn't prioritize VoIP. Priority schemes infer media access preference. Canopy's separate pre-allocated partitions have nothing to do with prioritization as VoIP and general traffic do not compete for a common partition (they each have their own). VL uses prioritization (and uses the term correctly), as VoIP is given priority access (most likely by permitting access with a shorter time gap following other transmissions than general data ... thus VoIP grabs the media first). If VL claims to be the first to implement a VoIP priority it only depends whether anyone else has implemented a true priority scheme already. Canopy's is not a priority scheme in any sense of the term. Prioritization has the clear advantage (no pun intended). Canopy essentially divides the rf into subchannels which loses the ability to dynamically use the channel for in-vs-out, VoIP-vs-general, etc. As the 3rd party testing described, the VoIP call volume cited could only be achieved in a VoIP-only configuration. A true prioritization mechanism (such as embodied in VL) is far superior to pre-allocated partitions in so, so many ways. Rich - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: WISPA General List Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 6:57 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Gino, After you informed me of the way prioritization occurs in your solution, I asked one of our sharp engineers to articulate the differences to me. Here was his reply back and I'd be interested in your feedback: The [prioritization mechanism in the] __ system is different than VL in the way it is deployed and the way it will deploy a priority network. With VL the bandwidth for the sector is totally dynamic, any direction demand can utilize the entire capacity of the base station. __ pre-defines the amount up and down to the sector. Their implementation of the prioritization is stated for DSCP only where we can do it also for ToS. I am not sure if that is unique but keep it in the back of your head. Our WLP is also dynamic; where he stated that you specify the amount of bandwidth for the priority channel, our can/will fluctuate every microsecond during the communication. This will also happen independently in each direction. Because there is a potential for over subscription of prioritized traffic, VL also has an option to set aside some bandwidth for best effort traffic incase the provider creates too much prioritized traffic. This prevents the FTP from a customer from breaking during the high priority traffic times. Make sense? 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: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:24 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Back home...ahhh to bad when it ends... Frankly , I don't know ... maybe has to due with the TDD system, next firmware release should improve overall pps capacity 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: Sunday, January 07, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it It does sound like a similar smart mechanism Gino -- I stand corrected. If this is who I assume it is though, then why do they report such low VoIP performance per SM and per AP? ...but don't answer any of this until after you leave Vail. Better that you should just enjoy your vacation. Sounds great. Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:37 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally understand it Well, I haven't replied to this earlier cause Im on vacation (skiing @ Vail ) but now, let me add some info... I don't want to get involved in a gear fight, but a brand x gear has a Per Sector prioritization of traffic. It works like this: You set the cpe to identify the traffic to be prioritized using Diffserv, ( it can be any type of traffic not just voip) Then you activate on the cpe the high priority channel option Set how much bandwidth this high priority channel would use And you are done, The Sector AP identifies all the cpes on the sector using this feature and
RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL
I guess the rest haven't found their fish... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forbes Mercy Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:28 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL I am officially in Geek Heaven, I didn't even know I died but I haven't checked my pulse for 42 minutes. :) Forbes -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CHUCK PROFITO Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:10 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL # Star Trek Related Sightings # Episode of Star Trek, Clues, Whoopi Goldberg is supposed to meet Patrick Stewart on holo-deck 4 at 2 O'clock # There are 42 decks on the Enterprise NCC1701-D (the Next Generation ship) # In an episode of Star Trek Voyager, first aired on April 17, 1995, when the ship enters a nebulae / alien being, the density around the ship increases 42% # The Antimatter generator is on deck 42 --which, as any physicist will tell you, is an impossibility. Proof that Starfleet is really using an Infinite Improbability engine in their starships... # In a Star Trek DS9 episode (the one with the alien lass in the wheelchair due to gravitational differences), there's a conversation between Quark and some sort of alien trader bloke that runs something like... How many rings have you got to sell? Forty two. Forty two? # In the ST:TNG episode where Data is added to the trader's collection, the tricyanate concentration in the water is 42 parts per million # In the Star Trek episode 'The best of both worlds pt.2', the Enterprise is chasing the Borg. At a certain point, Acting Captain Riker asks how long it will take for the Borg to reach Earth. '27 minutes' is the reply. When he asks how long it will take for the Enterprise, the answer is '42 minutes' # In the movie Star Trek: Generations while Picard and Data are in stellar cartography Picard asks, How long until the energy ribbon enters this sector? The answer: Approximately 42 hours # Episode 42 of Star trek:tng introduses the Borg # Episode 42 of Deep Space 9 introduces the alternate universe. # There is a British series called 4.2 Children Disney Related Sightings # 42 is an address on a door in the queue line on Roger Rabbit ride in Disneyland # Disney is showing select audiences 42 minute clips of the new movie Crimson Tide which is schedule for release on May 12, 1995 # At Disneyland in the ride Alice in Wonderland, the little King says Remember Rule 42 ... right after seeing the Queen of Hearts when she asks you if you want to play croquet. This is also found in Lewis Carrol's Book Alice in Wonderland # Walt Disney's new waterpark, Blizzard Beach is built on 42 acres of land # In the movie Peter Pan, Copyright C 1955, When Captain Hook first sees Peter, Wendy, and the boys coming into Never, Never Land and they are standing on a cloud looking at the Island, Captain Hook relays the coordinates to his pirate gunner: ...range 42 # Disney is building a 300 million dollar hotel and amusement complex on 42nd street # A binder for Donald Duck magazines is priced at NOK 42 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Spott Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:38 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL Heh, Just use Google! http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=answer+to+life+the+universe+and+everyt hingbtnG=Google+Search Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote, On 1/8/2007 9:33 AM: LOL Too true. I've read the first 4 books. I re-read them the other day, sure was a lot funnier at 20 than at 40 though! That's been one case where I thought that the movie was much better than the book. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 3:14 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL That is the answer 42. Most people don't get it. (unless you have seen the movie or read the book. Sometimes on of the techs ask me a question, and I answer 42 they don't get it, and I just snicker to myself. Thanks Butch! Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 4:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESSVL On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Patrick Leary wrote:
[WISPA] vonage wireless
*Internet phone company Vonage said Monday that it plans to use EarthLink's citywide Wi-Fi infrastructure to provide wireless broadband service along with its voice over Internet Protocol service to customers.* http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-6148275.html -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
