Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp ) and review some of the posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take Your order please? and now today they are spouting out, I are a wi-fi consultant. I just find it odd that the alarm bells are not ringing in more heads than just a few of us?. Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote: Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it. What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless network covering downtown. H. My first thought on this was So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this? Does he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements. This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight. We need to make it public,
RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
Tim , Great post. I concur 100% with your statements, that's why I would prefer, instead of more unlicensed space, a Wisp Only band with coordination from a centralized organization and payable dues per pop/channel or something similaronly for bona-fide wireless operators 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 Tim Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp ) and review some of the posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take Your order please? and now today they are spouting out, I are a wi-fi consultant. I just find it odd that the alarm bells are not ringing in more heads than just a few of us?. Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote: Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis.
[WISPA] Consultants making too much?
Dennis, Is this this the study you are speaking of? Below are quotes from the article that address some of your issues. There are a few corrections I would like to point out. This is a County wide deployment not just downtown St. Louis also the consulting firm was paid $67,000 not $90,000 as you suggested. I have also provided a link to the consulting firm that was hired for this study. http://www.fusiva.com/aboutus.htm As quoted from the article; The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's economic development council, is working with a communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county. Also quoted from the same article; The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job. Also quoted from the same article; Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private partnership in which the vendor would incur most, if not all, costs. We are not looking at having taxpayers fund this, he said. Full article here; http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/AB4ECCB73F716FFD86257272000E7875?OpenDocument Regards, Dawn DiPietro Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote: Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it. What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless network covering downtown. H. My first thought on this was So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this? Does he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements. This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight. We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars. We need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor of large, non-local companies doing the work. A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready to listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then we will do something with it. Don't happen very often. If someone calls the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them? I have heard interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists). The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about. And also some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down enough to be solid in court or anywhere. Just a few thoughts. Dennis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:05 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces George, Thats a good point. WISPs are maturing and as they grow they start to demand name brand type gear that will let them scale, which inadvertently is usually certified. Thus larger providers using certified gear. With no disrespect meant, I could argue that some of WISP's straying to non-certified gear, could be more of a science project, or trials to test the viabilty of that type product line, and as those trials become successful, they likely will certify gear or buy versions that are certified. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Well this was an exiting day on the lists. I would find it hard to believe that the wisp industry is in worse shape now than before concerning abuse. 5 years ago when most were new and choices were far and few between, there was a lot of pringles type wisps. Hey, they were the inovators. But it's hard to believe that with the advent of cheap
[WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must say, it is getting stranger by the moment? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it. The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what impact it would have on existing providers. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it. What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless network covering downtown. H. My first thought on this was So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this? Does he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements. This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight. We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars. We need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor of large, non-local companies doing the work. A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready to listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then we will do something with it. Don't happen very often. If someone calls the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them? I have heard interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists). The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about. And also some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down enough to be solid in court or anywhere. Just a few thoughts. Dennis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:05 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces George, Thats a good point. WISPs are maturing and as they grow they start to demand name brand type gear that will let them scale, which inadvertently is usually certified. Thus larger providers using certified gear. With no disrespect meant, I could argue that some of WISP's straying to non-certified gear, could be more of a science project, or trials to test the viabilty of that type product line, and as those trials become successful, they likely will certify gear or buy versions that are certified. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Well this was an exiting day on the lists. I would find it hard to believe that the wisp industry is in worse shape now than before concerning abuse. 5 years ago when most were new and choices were far and few between, there was a lot of pringles type wisps. Hey, they were the inovators. But it's hard to believe that with the advent of cheap gear from many new players, I'd have ahard time believing that the vast majority of wisp gear is an fcc certified system or kit type product, such as a star or mt. I think we're building a mountain out of a mole hill in even suggesting that this an issue that has to be delt with. The industry has matured in a very positive way over the past few years. George This is NOT an official wispa stance or position, just my own. Patrick Leary wrote: Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves: 1. The FCC is not a baby sitter. 2. Mature operators (and industries as a whole) follow the rules as a matter of course and expected cost of business. 3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum. 4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc. As someone who has argued for WISP
RE: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
Jeje seems like the same fishy story from etherlinx ... 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 Tim Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:31 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be?? This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must say, it is getting stranger by the moment? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391 -- 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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
What bothers me the most is the perception of many residential consumers. I can;t count how many sales leads I'm getting now, where the prospect is calling asking to buy service that they can just connect to without an installtion. And when I say its over $19 and has an Install fee, they immediately say, Oh, I'll just go back to using one of the unsecured access points, or Harry Homeowner HotSpots in the community. And they actually can. Maybe a large nu,mber of these are their neighrbor with a 100ms Linksys, but I'm guessing more and more are installing that Omni with AMP, because as a novice, it sounds like what they are supposed to do, without understanding the impact. I think whats important to realize is that it does little good to complain about things we can;t control, but it does a lot of good to change the things that we can control. Live by example. (Thats sometimes hard to do, all things concidered). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Tim Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp ) and review some of the posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take Your order please?
Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
Thats what I thought?, but I wanted some more opinion as to what this person is up too? Gino Villarini wrote: Jeje seems like the same fishy story from etherlinx ... 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 Tim Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:31 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be?? This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must say, it is getting stranger by the moment? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to further muddy the waters in this river .. Best, -- 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/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
Hmmm..., I am sorry if I ruffled Your feathers Dylan?. I really didn't want to start a major debate, nor do You need to reply and defend Your position, as I understand it and respect it 100%. I was simply looking to see if anyone had seen this sales pitch before?. I am thinking maybe an old CO is trying to come back under a different name or there is some other BS that I need to be aware of?. Dylan Oliver wrote: Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to further muddy the waters in this river .. Best, -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access
Hi, Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built in??? Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is interference. Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show interference. -- You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca Office Phone: 905 349-2084 Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm skype cajeptha -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the power is turned down. Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.). I know there are two easy solutions... 1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem. 2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often) But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and HighPowered Cards. I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these levels and left up to the engineer. I'm going to Email Teletronics and Ubiquiti on the design specs of their cards, but I'm sure a lot of this depends on drivers as well. Also as a disclaimer, we wanted to rule our power supplies and Mainboard hardware as causes. At the CPE, we used both a WAR2 boards and a WRAP1E. With the WAR board we tried using a 18V 1amp Power Supply, a 24v unregulated power supply, and a regulated 24V 1amp power supply. With the WRAP we only tried using the 18V, so not to blow it up (21volt Max spec). The only thing left that we have to do, is ro replace the CPE SR2 with a different SR2 to make sure it is function properly, to confirm that it is the RF environment causing the 10 db drop in signal in one directions. However,
[WISPA] SF WiFi: Google Earthlink contract Municipal Broadband Hearing Today: Wed 1/7 3pm PST GMT-8
Live Webcast SFGTV http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463 ACLU is planning to present privacy concerns as well http://aclunc.org/issues/technology/bytes_and_pieces/asset_upload_file34_4522.pdf Or http://tinyurl.com/3de8hh -Original Message- From: Cassandra Costello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2007 February 02 10:04 To: Cassandra Costello Subject: Municipal Broadband Hearing NEXT WEDNESDAY! HEARINGS ON MUNICIPAL Wi-Fi Google/Earthlink Project . Do you have questions about the Google/Earthlink Wi-Fi plan? . Are you concerned about coverage in your neighborhood? Will I get reception? . What about the extra costs of hardware or faster service? . How fast is the free service? Will I have consistent service? . Who do I call if there is a problem? . Is Digital Inclusion being addressed fully? . Is the City giving away too much control like they did with cable TV and electricity/natural gas? . Who is the Budget Analyst anyway and what does he do? . What kind of privacy can I expect from Google/Earthlink? . What alternatives are there? If these and other questions about the Google/Earthlink Wi-Fi project concern you, find out more and speak your mind at the first of a series of public hearings at City Hall. WHEN: Wednesday, February 7th, 2007 TIME: 3:00pm (approximate start time) WHERE: City Hall, Board Chamber, room 250, Budget and Finance Committee Attached is a resolution that Supervisor McGoldrick has sponsored and a link to a report done by the San Francisco Budget Analyst tilted Fiscal Feasibility Analysis of a Municipally-Owned Citywide Wireless Broadband Network. (See attached file: WiFi Resolution.doc) To view a copy of the Budget Analyst report, please visit: http://www.sfgov.org/site/budanalyst_page.asp?id=53280 -- Cassandra Costello Legislative Assistant Supervisor Jake McGoldrick San Francisco District 1 415-554-7412 Fax 415-554-7415 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
Live by example, gee does that I mean I cannot have that beer now (it is still morning here) :-) Serious, I have no ant. pointing over the biggest town in our county, to much noise. Local grocery store chain in the summer time powers up their wireless cash register for the outside garden dept. Nothing wrong with using two omnis to make the connection is there You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca Office Phone: 905 349-2084 Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm skype cajeptha Tom DeReggi wrote: What bothers me the most is the perception of many residential consumers. I can;t count how many sales leads I'm getting now, where the prospect is calling asking to buy service that they can just connect to without an installtion. And when I say its over $19 and has an Install fee, they immediately say, Oh, I'll just go back to using one of the unsecured access points, or Harry Homeowner HotSpots in the community. And they actually can. Maybe a large nu,mber of these are their neighrbor with a 100ms Linksys, but I'm guessing more and more are installing that Omni with AMP, because as a novice, it sounds like what they are supposed to do, without understanding the impact. I think whats important to realize is that it does little good to complain about things we can;t control, but it does a lot of good to change the things that we can control. Live by example. (Thats sometimes hard to do, all things concidered). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Tim Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp ) and review some of the posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I
Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access
Yes, the VL has a very good one. Actually to be more specific, it isn't actually a Spectrum analyzer, but a site survey tool to detect noise on channels. It picks up most everything, (with the exception of some rare Telco type grear), not just other basic 802.11 gear, which is the flaw of most low end Wifi Site Survey features. This may or may not have always been the case, but I know its there in V3 and V4. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Carl A jeptha [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:25 AM Subject: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access Hi, Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built in??? Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is interference. Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show interference. -- You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca Office Phone: 905 349-2084 Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm skype cajeptha -- 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] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??
The wireless expertise that is claimed in the DSL Reports post certainly does NOT match the information shown on their website. At first glance, it looks pretty bogus. I agree with Dylan that there is no need to muddy these waters. Anyone who needs to thrash around on this is certainly free to thrash around over there. jack Tim Wolfe wrote: Hmmm..., I am sorry if I ruffled Your feathers Dylan?. I really didn't want to start a major debate, nor do You need to reply and defend Your position, as I understand it and respect it 100%. I was simply looking to see if anyone had seen this sales pitch before?. I am thinking maybe an old CO is trying to come back under a different name or there is some other BS that I need to be aware of?. Dylan Oliver wrote: Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to further muddy the waters in this river .. Best, -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.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] Funding fiber to the farm
I called the RUS guy for the Pac Northwest last fall inquiring about grant-loan funding for fiber. He said none except to telco's replacing copper to their pedestals. They did have money for wireless however. I would think the government would do us all a big favor and fund fiber and not wireless. Just open it up to more than the telco. I would like to see my town do fiber. George Peter R. wrote: Funding fiber to the farm By Joan Engebretson Feb 5, 2007 12:00 PM Like finding well-situated season tickets to your favorite sports team, it can be daunting to get a telecom grant or loan from the Rural Utilities Service. But once the task is accomplished, the payback can be enormous. Start-up communications service provider Air Advantage, for example, was able to use RUS grants and low-interest loans to expand its high-speed wireless network to serve a sparsely populated area of Michigan that had no high-speed connectivity. http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_funding_fiber_farm/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
Tom, I'm just wondering who should perform the necessary feasibility study for free? jack Tom DeReggi wrote: I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it. The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what impact it would have on existing providers. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it. What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless network covering downtown. H. My first thought on this was So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this? Does he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements. This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight. We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars. We need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor of large, non-local companies doing the work. A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready to listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then we will do something with it. Don't happen very often. If someone calls the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them? I have heard interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists). The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about. And also some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down enough to be solid in court or anywhere. Just a few thoughts. Dennis earlier discussions pruned -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
There is one thing that I failed to mention, and I thought it very important to point it out?. While I do see all of this happening at some locations, I must say that it has not hampered my ability to deploy or to operate my business?.. There is a HUGE difference between a hack and a professional. There are hacks in any business and these people are never around for long, as there are no shortcuts in this business no matter who tells You otherwise. The ability to engineer around these obstacles is a known thing, and all of us professionals know this fact. I personally consider someone running outside the regulations to be a hack. Just like a cloud of gnats that are in Your face when working on a tower or an install, these gnats eventually die or get blown away by the winds of change, and they really are only a temporary annoyance?. I made my original post to point out some of the shortcomings in the current system. While these shortcomings are there?, they are no different than any other business that You run?. Lets face it, if we could all run and cry about things we didn't like to the Govt. agency responsible for our line of work and get them to make changes that only benefited our line of work?, the stock and investment markets would be a perfect place?. The price of crude oil would be constant, all mutual funds would have a guaranteed rate of return and that entire business would be a utopia of sorts?. We all know that will never happen, and that industry itself has fallen once or twice (Think-Great Depression), but it is still here, as there are some really smart professionals out there that see all of the current setbacks and figure ways around them. Our business is no different. While it may seem as though I am trying to correct my first post?(I am man enough to pull my own foot out of my mouth), I am really not. I re-read what I sent out, and I just wanted to make sure that everyone who read it took it in the right context and did not interpret it as a doomsday message? (It really was not meant to be a Chicken Little The sky is falling type post but it sure did look like one?). I am just trying to point out some of the things that are happening in our business, and those road blocks are happening in EVERY business. If it were so horrible, most of us smart guys would have sold out a long time ago while the going was good. The WISP business is here to stay and the things that I mentioned in my first post are real, but they are not insurmountable. Tim Wolfe wrote: Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp ) and review some of the posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. Call me at 618-206-4190 Or skype mike.delp Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chadd Thompson Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:50 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces In our area So IL/metro St.Louis there are some large guys who are in no way shape or form legal, over power limits and the whole 9 yards. I can see other WISP Omni POP's with signal levels in the -70's from over 20 miles away using a 9dBi on my end, figure up what the EIRP on that is. The one in this case is a well know respected WISP that visits the popular lists, I always hope that he doesn't know that is going on and one of his guys is responsible but I have never taken the time to call them up and talk to them about it either. I don't know of any WISP's in this area about 10 that I know of including myself who are 100% legal when it comes to using only certified equipment. Most I think stay within power limits and equivalent antennas The other issue I see in our area is all the new start up WISP's who know nothing about the industry, the rules, networking, and don't know squat about RF. These guys are going to be our Achilles heal IMHO. There are too many vendors selling stuff and they are not concerned in the least bit whether the guys they are selling to know anything about Part15 rules. When I started four years ago it seemed like there were not near as many uncertified options as there are today so I came into the industry using certified equipment and knew what the rules were. It's too easy to buy 802.xx equipment throw it up on a pole and sell internet to a few users, more than likely they are not going to be successful but it still hurts everyone of us. I admit I am a glass half empty kind of guy, but I don't think there we are going to have any usable spectrum within the next one to two years because of stuff like this. Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I agree that MOST wisps are likely compliant. Unfortuneately, it won't stay that way, if we let the industry slowly deteriorate and slide. I think compliance is a message that continually needs to be revisited, sorta like speed bumps. Its easy to not realize you are speeding, yet we all know where the speedometer is located. 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/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 5:52 PM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the power is turned down. Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.). I know there are two easy solutions... 1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem. 2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often) But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and HighPowered Cards. I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these levels and left up to the engineer. I'm
RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
I'd be interested in the conclusive answer as well, I've heard several different theories. -Russ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:35 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the power is turned down. Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.). I know there are two easy solutions... 1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem. 2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often) But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and HighPowered Cards. I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these levels and left up to the engineer. I'm going to Email Teletronics and Ubiquiti on the design specs of their cards, but I'm sure a lot of this depends on drivers as well. Also as a disclaimer, we wanted to rule our power supplies and Mainboard hardware as causes. At the CPE, we used both a WAR2 boards and a WRAP1E. With the WAR board we tried using a 18V 1amp Power Supply, a 24v unregulated power supply, and a regulated 24V 1amp
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- 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/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
+ 36 dBm EIRP Dylan Oliver wrote: Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.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] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all yourself and stay legal... Marty __ Marty Dougherty CEO Roadstar Internet Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-623-4542 (Cell) 703-554-6620 (office) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the power is turned down. Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.). I know there are two easy solutions... 1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem. 2) Use a High quality OFDM
Re: [WISPA] Boeing Fails to Learn from WISPs
Marlon: I confess that my jaw dropped too, especially that the weight issue came out better for the wired system, but in fairness, read the story a bit more closely. It's not just Internet access that the wireless system was handling - it was also the seatback video, etc. Given that, it makes more sense to do wired, and if you're doing wired, just put in an Ethernet jack. Of course, some sharpie is going to use the wired connection to provide Wi-FI to the rest of the plane. It's two clicks on my Mac laptop. Thanks, Steve On Jan 27, 2007, at Jan 27 08:04 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: 200 lbs of aps and antennas How the hell is THAT possible? I'll bet all of my gear weighs in less than that and I've got 6000 square miles over coverage, not just one puny little airplane! Steve, do your old bosses need help over there or what? You need to go back to work for Boing! marlon --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
I didn't say free, I said Not $90,000. What should it cost to do a feasibilty study for a city? Why does every city need to start from Ground Zero? I'd rather $10,000-$20,000 go into a study with a competent engineer like you, and the other $$70-80,000 go into actually paying an integrator to build the network. Or better yet, keep the government out of it, and let the Local WISP that already knows the environment and how to do it, be on the top of the list to get the job. My understanding is that Downtown St Louis aint that big (But haven't been there), whats there to study? Here's a MESH budget for you $10,000 to get an OEM StarOS system FCC certified. $10,000 for a study (Maybe use OSLR for the MESH). $30,000 for 60 AP repeaters ($500 each w/ antennas, mounts, and CM9s). (Remember the CM9s support 2.4G-6G on the fly, so the integrator would have the flexibilty to adjust as they identified the obstacles that needed consideration) $40,000 to install and troubleshoot (5 hours per Access Point @ $100 per hour, plus an extra $10,000 for the final over view and documenting of what was found) If the network didn't work, you'd know exactly why, and you'd have only spent the $90,000 to get equivellent data as the Feasibilty study. If the network did work, you'd be done. If the network partially worked, you'd be half way there, and would have a clear picture on whta moneys was needed to finish the job. I could replicate this model using Alvarion, with their new low cost Comnet program, in a PtP platform. (Although would be less flexible on which spectrum appropriate, so maybe would need an exchange program from a distributor if channels needed varying). And maybe the end project would cost a tad bit more, if more super cells were needed than expected intially. The point is, to many people spend time trying to predict, rather than just going and finsing out what the situation really is. No better way to know for sure, than to put up gear and listen. Now what about support Local WISP, already has paid executives and local isntallers. Local WISP already has support department. Sure local WISP will want grant to help increase his staff size to handle demand, but thats an understandable cost, and a shared cost. The biggest costs are the learning curve and the management costs, but none of that would need to be paid, as the WISP already has that knowledge and experience, and peices in place, so the local governement would only be paying for just the new working staff (The hands on the end of the arms). Sure, I understand, my approach is not realistic based on the Politicaly correct proceedures a governement needs to follow in an award/bid situation using others(taxpayers) money. Sure you could argue that those that do not plan in advance pay for it later. But its likely a local WISP already did the bulk of the planning years ago. I'm just saying that its IRONIC that a network can be built for near the price of a feasibilty study, if the politics was not involved. The truth is, Muni Wireless is expensive to launch, because they generally duplicate the effort that is already available locally, select an out of state provider not familiar with the local land, and they have unknowlegeable people needing to make decission on how to use knowledgeable industry bidders. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Tom, I'm just wondering who should perform the necessary feasibility study for free? jack Tom DeReggi wrote: I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it. The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what impact it would have on existing providers. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts. I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking about consultants etc. You are correct in that many people who are consultants don't know the real world implications. Us WISPs have first hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc is capable of. A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it. What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless network covering downtown. H. My first thought on this was So the consultant
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Yes 36 dBm. Thanks, Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan Oliver Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- 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/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
Thanks Lonnie, that was helpful. Have you tested StarOS with the Teletronic's HighPower Card? Actually, I just looked at the Teletronic cards... They are Z-Com xg-622H (G-only) I was real surprise on the results that differed from SR2s. I'd love to use the Teletronics, just because they are cheaper (like $75), and Teletronics is located 5 miles from our office, with tons of inventory!! :-) I'm wondering if the SR2 is a bi-directional Amp, and the Z-Com one-way TX only? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the power is turned down. Or if the AMP in line causes significant
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Not sure what post referring to. Yes, 36 dbi is our limit for standard PtMP APs. But CPEs, and PTP links can go much higher in 2.4G and 5.8G. Mimo (smart antenna) Systems also now are allowed an additional 8db in AP TX power. Unfortuneately, the FCC defines PtP as a link that has 2 endpoints only, and not reference to a specifc antenna beamwidth. From what I understand, although not confirmed, and not likely advisable, a PTP link could result in a radio link with an OMNI on each end, if configured to only allow 1 association (the other radio). Doesn't mean FCC would Give an equipment certification for that. Could a single person, who wanted to install a personal private individual Mobile link/network for himself, run under PTP rules and an Omni, at the expense of the rest of the world? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- 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/ -- 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 Breeze Access
Carl, All BreezeACCESS products from the 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz versions (VL) all have built in analyzers that can look at and record over time the interference environment from both the CPE and AU sides. 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 Carl A jeptha Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:25 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access Hi, Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built in??? Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is interference. Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show interference. -- You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca Office Phone: 905 349-2084 Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm skype cajeptha -- 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(190). 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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
The guys in the St. Louis area can correct me if I'm wrong but if my memory is correct, St. Louis County does not include the City of St. Louis (yeah, I know it sounds funny). As I recall, the two governments are distinctly different. This proposal may apply only to the area in the County outside of the City boundaries and not the City itself. Can anyone local to the area clarify? Thanks, jack Dawn DiPietro wrote: St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet By Clay Barbour ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 01/29/2007 WiFi users CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region. The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's economic development council, is working with a communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county. Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service regionally. Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in downtown St. Louis. But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and New York are considering it. It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. It could really set this area apart. The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job. Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for the job. Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone stretches about 524 square miles. Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both like the idea of regional Wi-Fi. We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things. Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to Madison and St. Clair counties. I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, but we still need to explore it. Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet. We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed. The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a citywide network. Ahead of the curve The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing the proposal. If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve. The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the region's perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses. The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents and businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a higher price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the next three years. Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware costs about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a square mile for urban areas. Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private
Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet By Clay Barbour ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 01/29/2007 WiFi users CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region. The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's economic development council, is working with a communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county. Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service regionally. Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in downtown St. Louis. But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and New York are considering it. It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. It could really set this area apart. The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job. Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for the job. Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone stretches about 524 square miles. Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both like the idea of regional Wi-Fi. We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things. Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to Madison and St. Clair counties. I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, but we still need to explore it. Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet. We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed. The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a citywide network. Ahead of the curve The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing the proposal. If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve. The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the region's perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses. The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents and businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a higher price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the next three years. Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware costs about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a square mile for urban areas. Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private partnership in which the vendor would incur most, if not all, costs. We are not looking at having taxpayers fund this, he said. Philadelphia used a similar system for its Wi-Fi. EarthLink paid the city for the right to build and maintain a citywide system, which included installing transmittal devices on about 4,000 of the city's street lamp pole arms and providing residents and visitors with 22 area hot spots. EarthLink
[WISPA] FCC BB Numbers and the GAO
http://techdirt.com/articles/20070205/165735.shtml -- 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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
Whats the prupose of the feasibilty study? Sounds like grant money. Would the Earthlink, Google, or ATT use their own feasibilty study? Or is this a non-technical feasibity study? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet By Clay Barbour ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 01/29/2007 WiFi users CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region. The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's economic development council, is working with a communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county. Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service regionally. Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in downtown St. Louis. But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and New York are considering it. It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. It could really set this area apart. The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job. Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for the job. Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone stretches about 524 square miles. Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both like the idea of regional Wi-Fi. We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things. Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to Madison and St. Clair counties. I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, but we still need to explore it. Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet. We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed. The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a citywide network. Ahead of the curve The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing the proposal. If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve. The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the region's perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses. The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents and businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a higher price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the next three years. Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware costs about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a square mile for urban areas. Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the county.
RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
I don't seem much discussions about integrators or wisps going to the FCC to get these parts certified into a system. So, is it safe to safe that most microtik installs are NOT certified and are therefore not legal? Seems to me like this would be a big issue for us all to address?? Marty __ Marty Dougherty CEO Roadstar Internet Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-623-4542 (Cell) 703-554-6620 (office) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:21 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. do these all qualify as 'certified FCC systems? Parts dont get certified, systems do. They have the capabilty to be certified. Depends if the integrator took the time and money to get them certified. Depends if the WISP took the care to buy them from an integrator that certified them. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:14 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all yourself and stay legal... Marty __ Marty Dougherty CEO Roadstar Internet Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-623-4542 (Cell) 703-554-6620 (office) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test,
Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces
http://www.westendword.com/moxie/news/county-looks-at-implement.shtml http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2006/12/25/story13.html Elected officeholders,their staff, and local business leaders are not normally technology experts. They need help to understand how to proceed to build and manage a wireless network. There are big bucks and big reputations at stake and they want as much assurance as possible that the network will actually work. If Earthlink, Google, and ATT did their own studies then somebody who is technically knowledgable (a consultant?) would have to evaluate the results (often comparing apples to oranges) and provide an analysis for the political and business leaders. Better to do one study up front and then have the vendors reply with their ability to meet the needs and requirements specified in the upfront study. The vendors WILL have to do their own research to supplement the study - at least they should if they want to understand what they will actually have to do to deliver the results outlined in the study. jack Tom DeReggi wrote: Whats the prupose of the feasibilty study? Sounds like grant money. Would the Earthlink, Google, or ATT use their own feasibilty study? Or is this a non-technical feasibity study? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet By Clay Barbour ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 01/29/2007 WiFi users CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region. The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's economic development council, is working with a communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county. Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service regionally. Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in downtown St. Louis. But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and New York are considering it. It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. It could really set this area apart. The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job. Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for the job. Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone stretches about 524 square miles. Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both like the idea of regional Wi-Fi. We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things. Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to Madison and St. Clair counties. I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, but we still need to explore it. Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet. We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed. The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a citywide network. Ahead of the curve The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that appeals to St. Louis
Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
We have not tested with very many high power cards. Using the right antenna we can go 52 miles with a CM9, so high power is not a hot topic here. Our approach to NLOS is more to use microcells to fill in areas that cannot see the main towers. Since we can do a repeater with 1 msec ping times it is no big deal to hop through a few repeaters to hit an area and the prices are way cheaper than the late '90's. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Lonnie, that was helpful. Have you tested StarOS with the Teletronic's HighPower Card? Actually, I just looked at the Teletronic cards... They are Z-Com xg-622H (G-only) I was real surprise on the results that differed from SR2s. I'd love to use the Teletronics, just because they are cheaper (like $75), and Teletronics is located 5 miles from our office, with tons of inventory!! :-) I'm wondering if the SR2 is a bi-directional Amp, and the Z-Com one-way TX only? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get
[WISPA] BGP Question
When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route. As a VoIP provider, it is important that traffic enter and leave via the same provider. We currently have a primary provider picked and force traffic in by incrementing the AS prepends on our other BGP peers. There is still some traffic that enters our network via the other peers regardless of the AS prepends and we are looking to either force all traffic in and out one provider as long as that peer is up, or preferably, allow traffic to enter whichever peer is the best route while forcing the return traffic back out the connection that the traffic entered. - Don Annas Triad Telecom, Inc. 336.510.3800 x111 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] BGP Question
Prepending is not an effective way of forcing other providers to send their traffic through your preferred upstream. In fact, there is no good way to do it at all. It is far better to just have quality upstreams. -Matt Don Annas wrote: When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route. As a VoIP provider, it is important that traffic enter and leave via the same provider. We currently have a primary provider picked and force traffic in by incrementing the AS prepends on our other BGP peers. There is still some traffic that enters our network via the other peers regardless of the AS prepends and we are looking to either force all traffic in and out one provider as long as that peer is up, or preferably, allow traffic to enter whichever peer is the best route while forcing the return traffic back out the connection that the traffic entered. - Don Annas Triad Telecom, Inc. 336.510.3800 x111 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Routers
Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
Ross Cornett wrote: Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.com One more reason I use a cpe with built in router. I know your pain. 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] Routers
I too have that idea in action, but the port forwarding options are non existant... There has to be something out there that works... Thanks for the feedback. - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers Ross Cornett wrote: Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.com One more reason I use a cpe with built in router. I know your pain. George -- 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] Routers
When we used bridged CPEs, we installed TrendNet, Linksys, or Netgear routers. All of them have held up for about 4 years now. Several failures on the Netgears, which were the majority, but we also bought them in bulk and as refurbs. That's what is cheapest and appears to work well. We now install CPEs that are also routers, so at most the clients need a desktop AP or switch in their home/office. -Nick Ross Cornett wrote: Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world. However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost to buy a new router. This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of all new installs to NON-Linksys routers. Linksys makes my favorite, Home Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor their warrantees. Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous. No questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days. Belkin also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see private info. Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS. The only reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients. However that PPOE bug was identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now? The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routers Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
We use WAR boards but if it's resi wireless LAN needed, these work fine http://www.pcbay.net/wgnewirowisu.html. They have Atheros chipset and are $22 delivered. Throw them away when they die. All the consumer grade stuff lasts the same length of time. Ross Cornett wrote: Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Ross Cornett wrote: Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. The answer to this question lies, at least in part, what you are wanting to accomplish. Good low-end routers I've used include trendnet and Belkin. I really like the Trendnet, as they are cheap and have been pretty reliable. As someone else mentioned, the Belkin offers some nice features for the end user to see some data without having to divulge a password (so they can't mess up the config). Also, the radio/router combo is very nice. In fact, this is my preferred setup. Deliberant has some good radios with built in router. Wisp-router sells what I think they call CPE03 that has router functionality built in. Beyond that, if you want higher end, Mikrotik now has a board (the RB150) that is a 5 Ethernet port board that runs about $70. You would need to add about $20-30 for case and power supply, but for about $100, you'd have a VERY functional router. Last I heard, the cases were scarce (or non-existent), however. -- 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/
Re: [WISPA] BGP Question
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Don Annas wrote: When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route. There is no way to insure that traffic will come back to you on any particular interface/connection. Prepending is the best method to add to the probability that the other route will be used. It should be noted that it is possible that a BGP Peer will remove your prepended hops, however. -- 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] Speedtest with BGP
OK.. So now that we are running BGP between multiple providers, we have noticed that none of the Internet speedtest are measuring results anywhere close. One of our circuits are 100MB and the other is 45MB. When running a speed test, it typically shows less than 2MB up or down. When I do a file transfer to an outside host, I can tell that I am getting great speed beyond what the speedtest will report Could this be due to the fact that traffic may route out one provider and back in the other? - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:12 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] BGP Question On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Don Annas wrote: When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route. There is no way to insure that traffic will come back to you on any particular interface/connection. Prepending is the best method to add to the probability that the other route will be used. It should be noted that it is possible that a BGP Peer will remove your prepended hops, however. -- 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: SPAM ? RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.
Oh my lord Marty! I think you are trying to get Patrick back in high gear on his soap box!! :-) SHAME SHAME!! Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marty Dougherty Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:15 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: SPAM ? RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all yourself and stay legal... Marty __ Marty Dougherty CEO Roadstar Internet Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-623-4542 (Cell) 703-554-6620 (office) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards. Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control that is in the Atheros power out section. All drivers set the power using that control. The precise setting is in tables provided by Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the rate goes up. This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates. The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier. We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power. Lonnie On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to cards that adapative modulate. Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 48-56mb. My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard external amp beyond what the card is actually set to. So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in theory. However, its not that simple because the output power will change based on modulation. Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently. It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal distortion. I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card. I thought the chipsets were near the same. I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing. At the SU we tried using both a SR2 and Teletronics. The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than SU, unexplained. The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS. Why did this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still listened to 20Mhz during receives. (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg antennas. Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn anything. We are also proving
[WISPA] MT hotspot
Hi, We have several free hotspots that we use Linksys firewall/access points. The Linksys also serves the DHCP address and lease time, etc. Is there a way with a Mikrotik to have a simple splash screen appear with each new MAC address that comes from the same IP address? Each real IP on the Linksys has a default gateway of a MT router. Travis Microserv -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routers
Hi, Are you serious? You honestly expect a company to honor a warranty for a lifetime, especially on a $30 item? How do you expect them to stay in business? Travis Microserv KyWiFi LLC wrote: We use the Belkin F5D7230-4 wireless router exclusively and I'm proud to report that both us and our subscribers have been VERY pleased with them. We do, however, see a failure rate with them of around 8% - 10% BUT, they have been good about replacing them in a timely manner and have always honored their lifetime warranty. We buy them for $30 - $40 and retail them for $100. Here's a link: http://www.buy.com/prod/Belkin_F5D7230_4_Wireless_G_Router/q/loc/101/201978542.html I'm on a mission right now to align our company with manufacturers, vendors, etc. who offer and honor a lifetime warranty. If someone is only willing to stand behind their product for a year or two, you should question that, I know I do. Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky Your Hometown Broadband Provider http://www.KyWiFi.com Call Us Today: 859.274.4033 === Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy! http://www.ispbuddy.com === - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world. However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost to buy a new router. This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of all new installs to NON-Linksys routers. Linksys makes my favorite, Home Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor their warrantees. Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous. No questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days. Belkin also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see private info. Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS. The only reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients. However that PPOE bug was identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now? The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routers Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
Imagestream has a great one that's under $600. Another $250 will get them to set it up for you as I understand it. MT routers are also nice. I just don't like the idea of using a PC out where I can't keep an eye on it. Fans go out etc. marlon - Original Message - From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:57 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routers Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Routers
Yes, I'm serious. Lots of companies offer a lifetime warranty. If they have a good product, they should stand behind it. If their product is junk, then... Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky Your Hometown Broadband Provider http://www.KyWiFi.com Call Us Today: 859.274.4033 === Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy! http://www.ispbuddy.com === - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers Hi, Are you serious? You honestly expect a company to honor a warranty for a lifetime, especially on a $30 item? How do you expect them to stay in business? Travis Microserv KyWiFi LLC wrote: We use the Belkin F5D7230-4 wireless router exclusively and I'm proud to report that both us and our subscribers have been VERY pleased with them. We do, however, see a failure rate with them of around 8% - 10% BUT, they have been good about replacing them in a timely manner and have always honored their lifetime warranty. We buy them for $30 - $40 and retail them for $100. Here's a link: http://www.buy.com/prod/Belkin_F5D7230_4_Wireless_G_Router/q/loc/101/201978542.html I'm on a mission right now to align our company with manufacturers, vendors, etc. who offer and honor a lifetime warranty. If someone is only willing to stand behind their product for a year or two, you should question that, I know I do. Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky Your Hometown Broadband Provider http://www.KyWiFi.com Call Us Today: 859.274.4033 === Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy! http://www.ispbuddy.com === - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world. However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost to buy a new router. This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of all new installs to NON-Linksys routers. Linksys makes my favorite, Home Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor their warrantees. Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous. No questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days. Belkin also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see private info. Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS. The only reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients. However that PPOE bug was identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now? The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routers Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of router out there for home and small business. We have used linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well. Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best? I am tired of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. Your feedback is very welcome. Ross Cornett VP 217 342 6201 ex 7 HofNet Communications, Inc. www.HofNet-Communications.com HofNet-Communications.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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces
inline... -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2007 10:52 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves: 1. The FCC is not a baby sitter. 2. Mature operators (and industries as a whole) follow the rules as a matter of course and expected cost of business. 3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum. 4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc. As someone who has argued for WISP compliance for years, I've certainly been alarmed by what I see as a new level of non-compliance. WISPs are now commonly assuming the FCC's lack of enforcement is tantamount to its approval of abuse. The general attitude is now that there is but one rule: Don't exceed the power limitations. Everything else has become fair game. Here is a list of things I see that lend anecdotal evidence, if not actual, that abuse is reaching new levels: - many WISPs now believe it is no big deal to use 4.9 GHz to carry some commercial traffic (Hey, there's excess capacity so what's the big deal, right?...) Many disagree with my view on things, but this is clearly wrong. 4.9 GHz is a licensed band for PUBLIC SAFETY ONLY. If know somebody that is using it illegally, they are a criminal. If you don't do something about it, you are an accessory to the crime and just as guilty. - use of STA's to commercially use spectrum is openly being advocated (this is partially responsible for an over 6 month wait in STA filings) - illegal vendors now operate in the clear with prominent U.S. distribution (They must be legal if they have a store front and it only hurts other vendors anyway...) - build your own base station type Google ads are rampant Call me an alarmist, but this accelerating trend is disturbing and such attitudes easily even have the potential to infect safety issues (hey, OSHA rules must not be that big a deal either). We must all appreciate that many violating the rules do so out of ignorance, but that as an excuse. Groups like WISPA should take firm stands on subjects like this. You should strongly encourage compliance, lead the way and educate. You should fight the ignorance that allows for relativism and creative interpretation of the rules. You should also not cave to the hard luck excuses that I'm a small guy and can't afford to follow the rules. (Your response to such should be to point to funding sources/advice or otherwise tell them that there is a minimum cost to legally participate in this business and that following FCC rules is a minimum expectation as responsible stewards of the public's free spectrum.) And finally, WISPs should not treat knowingly illegal operators as equals because in fact they are liabilities to you and the industry at large. And yes, of course I have skin in the game but that in no way alters anything here or devalues my comments. If anything, as a legal vendor with a long professional reputation of compliance and scores of legal operator partners, and as an individual who has been beating this drum for 7 years, it should only increase the weight of my comments. Sincerely, 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 Dawn DiPietro Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 9:26 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces All, Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look bad. Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules. Regards, Dawn DiPietro Patrick Leary wrote: I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. 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 Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05,
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Sorry, The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna. Thanks, Chadd That's 4 watts. At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts. At 40 it would be around 10 watts. Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really 20 miles out? To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would require an amazing amount of power. It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas. Even with that config I show an rssi of -76. I guess they could be running a 2 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind. But I'd find that very unusual. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Well, either way, if it's an ap that talks to more than one client, it's max eirp is 4 watts. 36dB laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Chadd Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:00 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces Sorry, The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna. Thanks, Chadd That's 4 watts. At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts. At 40 it would be around 10 watts. Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really 20 miles out? To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would require an amazing amount of power. It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas. Even with that config I show an rssi of -76. I guess they could be running a 2 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind. But I'd find that very unusual. -- 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/
