RE: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions?
Ubiquiti Ls5 is stickered isn't it ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Tetherow Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:37 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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] per customer computer pricing
In general we only limit the connections for residential and the lowest end business packages- The higher end packages have no limits although we will usually restrict peer to peer unless the business customers asks us not too.. This has proved to be a very effective tool for those residential customers who set up a office at home/barn and then start hiring people. They can start with a residential package but will need to upgrade if they want to have employees on the connection. It also allows us to handle the 1 man offices in a commercial building- We will sometimes allow a residential package in that case and don't have to worry they will share it with others. 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: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Marty, consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- Excellent idea, for residential. Have you played with that practice for Business subscribers? If so, what works appropriatly for business? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:16 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing You could also consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- We limit our residential plans to 75 (Family basic) and 100 (family Power) simultaneous connections. If they share the connections or have many computers they will max out real quick. The numbers have been tested (75 and 100) over the past few years and cover 99% of our residential user's just fine. This also helps with peer to peer traffic as well. We use Allot bandwidth managers but most of the standards traffic managers can do it. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Yes, but how do you explain what 5G/month is to the average sub?? They worry because they don't see this with the 'big boys' that advertize don't sevre their area. Do you find it takes alot more selling/education for each sub? On 2/17/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tell my residential subs that we don't care if they have a hundred PCs. We don't have a cap on bandwidth that is available, but we do tell them that with each subscription is included 5gigs of data transfer per month. We sale bandwidth for a living and it is metered just like electricity and water. Help yourself to all you want, but it is not a free for all or a buffet where you can eat all you want for the low low price of $8.99. I realize I will probably get a scalding rebuke over my 5gigs, but I don't have copper in the ground or FTTH to allow a Hogs feast on my bandwidth. I run a very successful WIRELESS ISP and the BH pipes and APs are all limited in the amount of data they can carry. That is not my fault, but it is my problem and that is how I deal with it! I never have a complaint and I sell a fantastic service. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 12:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing We just tell them that the fact that they have more computers will inevitably increase the expected bandwidth usage. We're flexible on it. Essentially, if we have a customer that is clearly a business setup, we charge more. If it is an ultra-geek setup, we'll charge it. If it's a mom pop shop that just so happens to go over the threshold, we don't worry about it. Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:45 AM Subject: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing I noticed that many WISPs have plans based on how many customer computers are hooked up to the customer's service. How does that work? Your installer counts computers initially, but then what? I have several power users with 5-10 computers and would like to move them to another plan, but need to understand how others do it. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
RE: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range
Good news (I think). Trango has found an issue with the M5580 and is working on a fix. In the mean time, I have replaced the troubled site with an older FOX 5800S and all seems to be well. Here is Trango's update... Don, Unfortunately the solution will take sometime. Looking over the elog messages the following message has our attention. I am unable to give a actually ETA because they are in the process of reviewing the problem to deteremine the issue once the issue is found they have to see how to fix it. 0:17:35.794.560 66 !apPing 5812728 This message appears right before association is lost and indicates that there was a period when the unit has not received an expected communication from the AP. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range I've seen many issues that were fixed by raising the antenna that was shooting to low over a rooftop... -RickG On 2/15/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting... So it is not a good practice in general to shoot across a flat roof without some height on the radio. In looking at the integrated antennal specs, It seemed like I had the clearance but with the power of the radio (being so close), maybe this increases the chance for multi-path? - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooper Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:08 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range We had a similar thing happen to us- our SNR was great, but every so often it would just crash. It was on a flat roof, sled mount that held the radio @ 24 off the roof. After trying everything, we raised the mount up to @ 4ft and it solved the problem. chris On 2/14/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The building the SU is on is not much lower. It appears to have good line of site and the signal is a -60 on both sides. Additionally, when the link is up, it's perfect. One thing that I will note is the AP is only a few feet off the roof and about 12 ft from the edge due to the landlords requirements. Even though, it is clear LOS even an inch off the roof -- 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: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/690 - Release Date: 2/16/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Canopy sync pinout
http://www.vip.net.id/macan/025_AP_CMM_gen_1_manual.pdf Page24 Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:16 AM Subject: [WISPA] Canopy sync pinout Does anyone know what the pin-out would be to make a sync cable to connect to canopy 5750APs ? I was told that if you are only using 2 of the Canopy APs in a single location, that you could pull sync from the other w/o the CMM. Thanks _ Don Annas 336.510.3800 x111 336.510.3801 fax HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] HYPERLINK http://www.triadtelecom.com/www.TriadTelecom.com _ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- 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] Canopy sync pinout
Thank you very much. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Laura Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:39 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Canopy sync pinout http://www.vip.net.id/macan/025_AP_CMM_gen_1_manual.pdf Page24 Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:16 AM Subject: [WISPA] Canopy sync pinout Does anyone know what the pin-out would be to make a sync cable to connect to canopy 5750APs ? I was told that if you are only using 2 of the Canopy APs in a single location, that you could pull sync from the other w/o the CMM. Thanks _ Don Annas 336.510.3800 x111 336.510.3801 fax HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] HYPERLINK http://www.triadtelecom.com/www.TriadTelecom.com _ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range
Yeah, me too. That or LOWER it. Anything to get out of that bounce. marlon - Original Message - From: RickG [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 11:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range I've seen many issues that were fixed by raising the antenna that was shooting to low over a rooftop... -RickG On 2/15/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting... So it is not a good practice in general to shoot across a flat roof without some height on the radio. In looking at the integrated antennal specs, It seemed like I had the clearance but with the power of the radio (being so close), maybe this increases the chance for multi-path? - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooper Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:08 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range We had a similar thing happen to us- our SNR was great, but every so often it would just crash. It was on a flat roof, sled mount that held the radio @ 24 off the roof. After trying everything, we raised the mount up to @ 4ft and it solved the problem. chris On 2/14/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The building the SU is on is not much lower. It appears to have good line of site and the signal is a -60 on both sides. Additionally, when the link is up, it's perfect. One thing that I will note is the AP is only a few feet off the roof and about 12 ft from the edge due to the landlords requirements. Even though, it is clear LOS even an inch off the roof -- 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: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] wisp survey
Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Industry, FCC and WISPA observations
9.) WISPA is run by a volunteer board of operators at this time. To become a truly effective trade association, we must look to hire a full time staff which will form procedures, policy, update website content, email members, collect dues, manage books, lobby more effectively and work through legal matters with FCC versed attorneys. While in its infancy, the volunteer effort was essential. Now that we are gaining ground and presented with industry wide challenges, we need better organization and full time staff to better manage the association and direction. It is best to outsource this to an company that runs associations. (I can give you names.) Most money to an association comes from vendors and events. Dues can only go so far -- especially when every ISP will think this: Why should I pay $200 per year for that? What's the benefit? An idea for that is as follows: 3 levels of membership: Active Members are voting members that are required to hold committee or board seats. Associate Members are voting members who can hold seats but are not required to. Affiliate Members are non-voting and join to support our cause. Active pay less than Associate members. Just a thought. Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range
Don, Are they saying this is with all 5580's or just your particular unit? -RickG On 2/18/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news (I think). Trango has found an issue with the M5580 and is working on a fix. In the mean time, I have replaced the troubled site with an older FOX 5800S and all seems to be well. Here is Trango's update... Don, Unfortunately the solution will take sometime. Looking over the elog messages the following message has our attention. I am unable to give a actually ETA because they are in the process of reviewing the problem to deteremine the issue once the issue is found they have to see how to fix it. 0:17:35.794.560 66 !apPing 5812728 This message appears right before association is lost and indicates that there was a period when the unit has not received an expected communication from the AP. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range I've seen many issues that were fixed by raising the antenna that was shooting to low over a rooftop... -RickG On 2/15/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting... So it is not a good practice in general to shoot across a flat roof without some height on the radio. In looking at the integrated antennal specs, It seemed like I had the clearance but with the power of the radio (being so close), maybe this increases the chance for multi-path? - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooper Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:08 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range We had a similar thing happen to us- our SNR was great, but every so often it would just crash. It was on a flat roof, sled mount that held the radio @ 24 off the roof. After trying everything, we raised the mount up to @ 4ft and it solved the problem. chris On 2/14/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The building the SU is on is not much lower. It appears to have good line of site and the signal is a -60 on both sides. Additionally, when the link is up, it's perfect. One thing that I will note is the AP is only a few feet off the roof and about 12 ft from the edge due to the landlords requirements. Even though, it is clear LOS even an inch off the roof -- 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: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/690 - Release Date: 2/16/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- 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] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range
All of the 5850s! We have tried 2 different units at this site and have seen this issue before. I imagine they will release a firmware patch. Hopefully sooner than later. - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:02 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range Don, Are they saying this is with all 5580's or just your particular unit? -RickG On 2/18/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news (I think). Trango has found an issue with the M5580 and is working on a fix. In the mean time, I have replaced the troubled site with an older FOX 5800S and all seems to be well. Here is Trango's update... Don, Unfortunately the solution will take sometime. Looking over the elog messages the following message has our attention. I am unable to give a actually ETA because they are in the process of reviewing the problem to deteremine the issue once the issue is found they have to see how to fix it. 0:17:35.794.560 66 !apPing 5812728 This message appears right before association is lost and indicates that there was a period when the unit has not received an expected communication from the AP. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range I've seen many issues that were fixed by raising the antenna that was shooting to low over a rooftop... -RickG On 2/15/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting... So it is not a good practice in general to shoot across a flat roof without some height on the radio. In looking at the integrated antennal specs, It seemed like I had the clearance but with the power of the radio (being so close), maybe this increases the chance for multi-path? - Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooper Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:08 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Trango 5850 FOX to 5830 AP at close range We had a similar thing happen to us- our SNR was great, but every so often it would just crash. It was on a flat roof, sled mount that held the radio @ 24 off the roof. After trying everything, we raised the mount up to @ 4ft and it solved the problem. chris On 2/14/07, Don Annas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The building the SU is on is not much lower. It appears to have good line of site and the signal is a -60 on both sides. Additionally, when the link is up, it's perfect. One thing that I will note is the AP is only a few feet off the roof and about 12 ft from the edge due to the landlords requirements. Even though, it is clear LOS even an inch off the roof -- 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: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 2/14/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/690 - Release Date: 2/16/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 2/17/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] wisp survey
Maybe talk to the folks at Pew Internet or the group who started the lawsuit with the FCC for release of the form 477 data? It may sound like a crazy idea but I think both of those groups are just looking for the data to draw conclusions. The idea of a University is a great one too but that might take longer. They would probably want to secure grants to fund a project such as this, not that that is a bad idea since it would relieve the financial burden of funding for the project. Thank You, Brian Webster -Original Message- From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:44 AM To: Principal WISPA Member List Cc: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- 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] wisp survey
I agree with Brian - a Pew Internet study would give the most respected results. Perhaps the other group wants to chip in. 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/
[WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being sticker conscious or not??
Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] ELN wins St. Pete
http://stpete.org/news/021507.htm -- 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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.
Re: [WISPA] wisp survey
Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- 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] per customer computer pricing
Marty, How are you limiting the number of connections to your customer? Sorry if you have answered previously. I am a bit lost in all the posts lately. Thanks, Scriv Marty Dougherty wrote: In general we only limit the connections for residential and the lowest end business packages- The higher end packages have no limits although we will usually restrict peer to peer unless the business customers asks us not too.. This has proved to be a very effective tool for those residential customers who set up a office at home/barn and then start hiring people. They can start with a residential package but will need to upgrade if they want to have employees on the connection. It also allows us to handle the 1 man offices in a commercial building- We will sometimes allow a residential package in that case and don't have to worry they will share it with others. 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: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Marty, consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- Excellent idea, for residential. Have you played with that practice for Business subscribers? If so, what works appropriatly for business? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:16 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing You could also consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- We limit our residential plans to 75 (Family basic) and 100 (family Power) simultaneous connections. If they share the connections or have many computers they will max out real quick. The numbers have been tested (75 and 100) over the past few years and cover 99% of our residential user's just fine. This also helps with peer to peer traffic as well. We use Allot bandwidth managers but most of the standards traffic managers can do it. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Yes, but how do you explain what 5G/month is to the average sub?? They worry because they don't see this with the 'big boys' that advertize don't sevre their area. Do you find it takes alot more selling/education for each sub? On 2/17/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tell my residential subs that we don't care if they have a hundred PCs. We don't have a cap on bandwidth that is available, but we do tell them that with each subscription is included 5gigs of data transfer per month. We sale bandwidth for a living and it is metered just like electricity and water. Help yourself to all you want, but it is not a free for all or a buffet where you can eat all you want for the low low price of $8.99. I realize I will probably get a scalding rebuke over my 5gigs, but I don't have copper in the ground or FTTH to allow a Hogs feast on my bandwidth. I run a very successful WIRELESS ISP and the BH pipes and APs are all limited in the amount of data they can carry. That is not my fault, but it is my problem and that is how I deal with it! I never have a complaint and I sell a fantastic service. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 12:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing We just tell them that the fact that they have more computers will inevitably increase the expected bandwidth usage. We're flexible on it. Essentially, if we have a customer that is clearly a business setup, we charge more. If it is an ultra-geek setup, we'll charge it. If it's a mom pop shop that just so happens to go over the threshold, we don't worry about it. Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:45 AM Subject: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing I noticed that many WISPs have plans based on
RE: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing
We use an Allot bandwidth manager that sits between the customer and our last router. I was mentioning that we limit our basic family plan to 75 connections and our family power plan to 100 connections. Marty -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 1:44 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Marty, How are you limiting the number of connections to your customer? Sorry if you have answered previously. I am a bit lost in all the posts lately. Thanks, Scriv Marty Dougherty wrote: In general we only limit the connections for residential and the lowest end business packages- The higher end packages have no limits although we will usually restrict peer to peer unless the business customers asks us not too.. This has proved to be a very effective tool for those residential customers who set up a office at home/barn and then start hiring people. They can start with a residential package but will need to upgrade if they want to have employees on the connection. It also allows us to handle the 1 man offices in a commercial building- We will sometimes allow a residential package in that case and don't have to worry they will share it with others. 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: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Marty, consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- Excellent idea, for residential. Have you played with that practice for Business subscribers? If so, what works appropriatly for business? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:16 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing You could also consider limiting the number of simultaneous connections- We limit our residential plans to 75 (Family basic) and 100 (family Power) simultaneous connections. If they share the connections or have many computers they will max out real quick. The numbers have been tested (75 and 100) over the past few years and cover 99% of our residential user's just fine. This also helps with peer to peer traffic as well. We use Allot bandwidth managers but most of the standards traffic managers can do it. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing Yes, but how do you explain what 5G/month is to the average sub?? They worry because they don't see this with the 'big boys' that advertize don't sevre their area. Do you find it takes alot more selling/education for each sub? On 2/17/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I tell my residential subs that we don't care if they have a hundred PCs. We don't have a cap on bandwidth that is available, but we do tell them that with each subscription is included 5gigs of data transfer per month. We sale bandwidth for a living and it is metered just like electricity and water. Help yourself to all you want, but it is not a free for all or a buffet where you can eat all you want for the low low price of $8.99. I realize I will probably get a scalding rebuke over my 5gigs, but I don't have copper in the ground or FTTH to allow a Hogs feast on my bandwidth. I run a very successful WIRELESS ISP and the BH pipes and APs are all limited in the amount of data they can carry. That is not my fault, but it is my problem and that is how I deal with it! I never have a complaint and I sell a fantastic service. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 12:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing We just tell them that the fact that they have more computers will inevitably increase the expected bandwidth usage. We're flexible on it. Essentially, if we have a customer that is clearly a business setup, we charge more. If it is an ultra-geek setup, we'll charge it. If it's a mom pop shop that just so happens to go over the
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. On 2/18/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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).
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
rabbtux rabbtux wrote: I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. Ditto for me, the guy just can't control himself. Gosh, it's like he's manic that just goes on and on and on and on -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
Oh, let me add one thing though, the members only list is free of vendors pitching their wares or bragging about their past or trying to influence through propaganda.. Of course it's only open to paying WISPA members. But it is fairly private. George 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
Patrick, Please just pick up the phone and contact the FCC yourself. Apply for the job, get a shiny badge and go out on the range to take down all of the Illegal wisps you see out there. Every other email from you on this list (even when the thread starts with someone asking for advice) ends with an email from Patrick talking about OMG WTFBBQ!one!!!eleven111!! that is illegal! Honestly, you are starting to sound like my nutty neighbor that measures the distance from my bumper to the stop sign every time I park. If you are going to be all ranty about this stuff, you may want to remove your employer's domain name from your sig line. At this point I would be hesitant to use a vendor that shouted OMG YOU ARE ILLEGAL all the time. ryan On Feb 18, 2007, at 11:36 AM, rabbtux rabbtux wrote: I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. On 2/18/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub- $300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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:wireless- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious
Re: [WISPA] wisp survey
The FCC has given some unlicensed spectrum, in part, to help make lower cost access and more access to broadband available in the US. Future access to more of this unlicensed spectrum will require some accountability by the FCC that unlicensed spectrum is helping to serve that purpose. By not filing we show less impact toward filling the digital divide and we are indirectly helping to justify criticism by others that unlicensed spectrum is not effectively serving the public interest in regard to broadband availability. Filling out the forms would help us to ask for and receive more spectrum and policy relief when needed in order to continue to advance the public interests of more access and lower cost access to broadband in the US. As of now Form 477 results show WISPs as serving less than 1% of the public with broadband. This is artificially low due to non-compliance by WISPs to fill out their forms. How can the FCC justify helping WISP interests if we cannot even show what we are doing to deliver broadband using the spectrum we have been given? How would the FCC helping us, in turn, help the public interest if there is no accountability that we are helping to serve the public interest? They (the FCC) are absolutely justified in their desire to see more WISPs fill out these forms and we should be complying with this. It is not a big brother issue at all. Form 477 is there to justify our representation in policy initiatives that we need to survive. One other issue is that it is a matter of the law. We are required to comply. Scriv Larry Yunker wrote: Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
Your competitors thank you for ignoring some of the best gear on the market. I'm not an Alvarion proponent, or apologist. There's lots of other good gear on the market that's the equal of Alvarion. But in no other segment of the telecommunications industry are BASIC, FUNDAMENTAL, CRITICAL decisions that go straight to the fundamental success of a WISP's business as their choice of gear are decided by one person's emotions, as they are in the WISP industry. Sheesh... That Patrick IS speaking fundamental truths that you don't want to hear because they're inconvenient or simply irritating... and you're deciding that you're not going to buy Alvarion gear because of that??? Like I said, your competitors thank you for making bad business choices so that they won't have to compete with you much longer. Thanks, Steve On Feb 18, 2007, at Feb 18 11:36 AM, rabbtux rabbtux wrote: I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - http://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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not??
Steve, problem is not in Patricks message, for sure they are real and we should be thankful that he wants to help. Issue as I see it is, he dominates the list more than some care to read as a vendor. If he toned it down some, he would be doing himself justice. Also, Although Alvarion is a good product, so ain't Trango, Moto, and the others. I doubt the competitors are happy he is not using Alvarion. I bet they would not be very happy to hear he was using Moto and not being co-operative. George Steve Stroh wrote: Your competitors thank you for ignoring some of the best gear on the market. I'm not an Alvarion proponent, or apologist. There's lots of other good gear on the market that's the equal of Alvarion. But in no other segment of the telecommunications industry are BASIC, FUNDAMENTAL, CRITICAL decisions that go straight to the fundamental success of a WISP's business as their choice of gear are decided by one person's emotions, as they are in the WISP industry. Sheesh... That Patrick IS speaking fundamental truths that you don't want to hear because they're inconvenient or simply irritating... and you're deciding that you're not going to buy Alvarion gear because of that??? Like I said, your competitors thank you for making bad business choices so that they won't have to compete with you much longer. Thanks, Steve On Feb 18, 2007, at Feb 18 11:36 AM, rabbtux rabbtux wrote: I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - http://www.bwianews.com -- 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being sticker conscious or not??
-snip- That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. -snip- Patrick, your input on low cost 5.8 CPEs is appreciated. Please let me know where I can purchase 5.8G CPEs at $170? We need to purchase 1-5 units at a time. Is there an Alvarion product to meet this need?? On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Fw: [WISPA] wisp survey
John, I'm certainly not arguing against WISP compliance with the reporting requirement. Rather, I'm trying to clarify WISPA's interest in identifying WISPs across the nation. It sounds to me that you are looking at this from the prospective of a lobbying effort. If we can show more WISPs then we can show more need and thus can obtain more ... (spectrum, assistance, allowances, etc.) These are seem to be legitimate reasons, but they lead to the next question: If WISPA can identify WISPs across the nation, then how can WISPA convince WISPs to self-report? Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) or is WISPA hoping to just inform WISPs of their federal obligations and hope for the best? Is there some other method that would lead to greater compliance without making WISPA look a private attorney-general? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey The FCC has given some unlicensed spectrum, in part, to help make lower cost access and more access to broadband available in the US. Future access to more of this unlicensed spectrum will require some accountability by the FCC that unlicensed spectrum is helping to serve that purpose. By not filing we show less impact toward filling the digital divide and we are indirectly helping to justify criticism by others that unlicensed spectrum is not effectively serving the public interest in regard to broadband availability. Filling out the forms would help us to ask for and receive more spectrum and policy relief when needed in order to continue to advance the public interests of more access and lower cost access to broadband in the US. As of now Form 477 results show WISPs as serving less than 1% of the public with broadband. This is artificially low due to non-compliance by WISPs to fill out their forms. How can the FCC justify helping WISP interests if we cannot even show what we are doing to deliver broadband using the spectrum we have been given? How would the FCC helping us, in turn, help the public interest if there is no accountability that we are helping to serve the public interest? They (the FCC) are absolutely justified in their desire to see more WISPs fill out these forms and we should be complying with this. It is not a big brother issue at all. Form 477 is there to justify our representation in policy initiatives that we need to survive. One other issue is that it is a matter of the law. We are required to comply. Scriv Larry Yunker wrote: Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --
Re: Fw: [WISPA] wisp survey
Larry Yunker wrote: Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) I for one would never betray the trust of another wisp by ratting them out or - forwarding their posted messages on these lists to others - without their prior approval. As has happened recently. Best way to convince is to educate. -- 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] wisp survey
Dylan Oliver wrote: I agree with Brian - a Pew Internet study would give the most respected results. Perhaps the other group wants to chip in. Best, You could probably get a University marketing professor to do it. Cost? Not much more than $500. 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] Following the FCC rules ?????
Many of you probably don't follow the FCC much, so let me tell you about the stroke of a pen: UNE-P which was the magic bullet for CLECs. No facilities needed. Rock bottom pricing on voice lines. Market and sell. Z-Tel and a few others had over 500k lines. Unfortunately, they didn't listen when they were told it would be a stop gap to facilities. In other words, sell UNE-P regionally and convert to facilities. No one listened. Bang! UNE-P ruled no more. One year to move to facilities. Z-Tel just filed BK, following many others that area shadow of their UNE-P selves. Another example: DSL. One day it is tariffed. Bang! No tariff. Go nego with the ILEC. So please heed the warning about 5.4. It won't take much prodding from DoD to wipe oout your business model. This is NOT a threat, folks. This is how telecom regulations works in the US. So skip the forms - 445 and 477. Keep using the unlincesed gear. Next year you can all be pirates. That's okay, because you can celebrate *Gasparilla* Pirate Fest in Tampa after that. Plus you say all this stuff on a PUBLIC, archived email list. DUH! Regards, Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing - let's examine
Well your probably right, but a couple of things. Everyone pays up front an install and activation fee and the numbers I posted are approx. 2nd thing, how much is bandwidth cost? Most people look at their high bandwidth usage and say that is how much they are paying and that is how much it cost. But is that accurate? If you buy bandwidth, say 10 megs at 150.00 per meg. And you have a peak say at 10 megs during that 1 or 4 hours of peak time, how much did the bandwidth cost you at the off peak times thats not being used? maybe your bandwidth is actually costing you even more than is calculated because you have to consider your peak is only 5 or 10% of the time and the rest of the time when you are at say 5 megs it's actually costing you 300.00 per meg So on off peak time, you have ooogles of bandwidth that you are paying for, but not using, how much are you loosing for unused bandwidth? is it wiser to get something for unused over-priced bandwidth or is it better to say NO, I would rather let the bandwidth go unused and not collect any revenue? Now consider from a marketing point of view. Lets do the small town market where everyone is telling everyone their expert opinion and word spreads like wildfire. Word of mouth. And the advertising rates cost you just the same as a big city. Do you want your subs telling your other subs or potential subs that you are charging them more because they downloaded a movie and went over a bit cap of a couple gigs and then have to spend lots and lots of money to advertise to convince people to use your service, or would it be wiser to spend the advertising money with your subs by giving them some beni's like plenty of speed and good service without the extra charges? I think it's kinda complicated, but to me the common denominator in all this is to make the customer happy, and use them for woma. Not saying your wrong, but rather it's how you look at it. I look at it this way. George Peter R. wrote: George Rogato wrote: The very next day a sub called and complained that he was having issues downloading his news groups and was considering changing over to DSL. I've had this sub for 5 years and the original reason he bought broadband from me was because he came to his retirement home here on the coast on some weekends and wanted to be able to download some movies from newsgroups he subscribed to. 5 years = 60 months = $42 per month ($41.66 using the $2500) Does that include the 2 CPE and 2 installs? IN this past month he grabbed 40GB. How much do you pay for 40GB? At even Cogent's rate of $15 per MB + tower rental + overhead, what is the net profit? Does he pay by credit card? So lose 4% or $1.40). (I don't need to know, but you do.) My best advice is to find ways to increase ARPU from these customers. Whether that be affiliate income from shopping; partner income from other services sold that are outsourced; PC maintenece; virus insurance; back-up; etc. Just my 2 cents worth. Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. www.marketingideaguy.com I've always tried to engineer my systems to be able to have the capacity to service this type of customer. I buy extra bandwidth, more than I need. and I try not to load up my ap's and make sure they have nice big fat feeds. We ended up swapping out his cpe and pointing him at a diferent ap. This was the day after Marlons thread. which was about feb 1st. here is his usage up till now: TX Data: 1,556,767,671 RX Data: 39,673,651,793 BYTES or 36.95 gigs to data downloaded and it's only day 17 out of 30. His usagge has not impacted my system and his usage is like once or twice a week. When I look at this guy, I see dollar signs. $2,500 for the money he has given me and I think even more he will give me in the future. I realize not everyone has this business plan, or can even afford the bandwidth, so I'm not implying anyone is doing it wrong, just that we can handle these types of subs and make a profit from it if we engineer our network to accomadate this type of user. George -- 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] Following the FCC rules ?????
Hi, You make good points... however, the better question is how much money did Z-Tel take out of the business during this time? I would bet the owners and investors made BIG money during this time... so, so what if they are out of business now? If they made millions during that time, then it worked out for them. Same for DSL. I know there are companies that are going or gone now, but that made millions in profits during the past 5 years. Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis Peter R. wrote: Many of you probably don't follow the FCC much, so let me tell you about the stroke of a pen: UNE-P which was the magic bullet for CLECs. No facilities needed. Rock bottom pricing on voice lines. Market and sell. Z-Tel and a few others had over 500k lines. Unfortunately, they didn't listen when they were told it would be a stop gap to facilities. In other words, sell UNE-P regionally and convert to facilities. No one listened. Bang! UNE-P ruled no more. One year to move to facilities. Z-Tel just filed BK, following many others that area shadow of their UNE-P selves. Another example: DSL. One day it is tariffed. Bang! No tariff. Go nego with the ILEC. So please heed the warning about 5.4. It won't take much prodding from DoD to wipe oout your business model. This is NOT a threat, folks. This is how telecom regulations works in the US. So skip the forms - 445 and 477. Keep using the unlincesed gear. Next year you can all be pirates. That's okay, because you can celebrate *Gasparilla* Pirate Fest in Tampa after that. Plus you say all this stuff on a PUBLIC, archived email list. DUH! Regards, Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, You make good points... however, the better question is how much money did Z-Tel take out of the business during this time? I would bet the owners and investors made BIG money during this time... so, so what if they are out of business now? If they made millions during that time, then it worked out for them. Same for DSL. I know there are companies that are going or gone now, but that made millions in profits during the past 5 years. Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis Peter R. wrote: Many of you probably don't follow the FCC much, so let me tell you about the stroke of a pen: UNE-P which was the magic bullet for CLECs. No facilities needed. Rock bottom pricing on voice lines. Market and sell. Z-Tel and a few others had over 500k lines. Unfortunately, they didn't listen when they were told it would be a stop gap to facilities. In other words, sell UNE-P regionally and convert to facilities. No one listened. Bang! UNE-P ruled no more. One year to move to facilities. Z-Tel just filed BK, following many others that area shadow of their UNE-P selves. Another example: DSL. One day it is tariffed. Bang! No tariff. Go nego with the ILEC. So please heed the warning about 5.4. It won't take much prodding from DoD to wipe oout your business model. This is NOT a threat, folks. This is how telecom regulations works in the US. So skip the forms - 445 and 477. Keep using the unlincesed gear. Next year you can all be pirates. That's okay, because you can celebrate *Gasparilla* Pirate Fest in Tampa after that. Plus you say all this stuff on a PUBLIC, archived email list. DUH! Regards, Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing - let's examine
I was just asking you to examine what the true costs are of delivering service. You correct about the unused BW - and for most BW is a fixed monthly cost, same as rent, tower, payroll. All that needs to be considered when tackling pricing. Back in the T1 days, the over-subscription was usually 7 to1. The first 3 were expensive costs; the last 4 not so much. I also wanted to remind you to find ways to upsell :) - Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. George Rogato wrote: Well your probably right, but a couple of things. Everyone pays up front an install and activation fee and the numbers I posted are approx. 2nd thing, how much is bandwidth cost? Most people look at their high bandwidth usage and say that is how much they are paying and that is how much it cost. But is that accurate? If you buy bandwidth, say 10 megs at 150.00 per meg. And you have a peak say at 10 megs during that 1 or 4 hours of peak time, how much did the bandwidth cost you at the off peak times thats not being used? maybe your bandwidth is actually costing you even more than is calculated because you have to consider your peak is only 5 or 10% of the time and the rest of the time when you are at say 5 megs it's actually costing you 300.00 per meg So on off peak time, you have ooogles of bandwidth that you are paying for, but not using, how much are you loosing for unused bandwidth? is it wiser to get something for unused over-priced bandwidth or is it better to say NO, I would rather let the bandwidth go unused and not collect any revenue? Now consider from a marketing point of view. Lets do the small town market where everyone is telling everyone their expert opinion and word spreads like wildfire. Word of mouth. And the advertising rates cost you just the same as a big city. Do you want your subs telling your other subs or potential subs that you are charging them more because they downloaded a movie and went over a bit cap of a couple gigs and then have to spend lots and lots of money to advertise to convince people to use your service, or would it be wiser to spend the advertising money with your subs by giving them some beni's like plenty of speed and good service without the extra charges? I think it's kinda complicated, but to me the common denominator in all this is to make the customer happy, and use them for woma. Not saying your wrong, but rather it's how you look at it. I look at it this way. 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] Following the FCC rules ?????
Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, You make good points... however, the better question is how much money did Z-Tel take out of the business during this time? I would bet the owners and investors made BIG money during this time... so, so what if they are out of business now? If they made millions during that time, then it worked out for them. --- How is this the better question? -- How much can I make before the door closes? - Did some CLEC investors make a killing? Sure. Employees and shareholders not so much. Consumers got burned. CLEC Industry takes another black eye. Same for DSL. I know there are companies that are going or gone now, but that made millions in profits during the past 5 years. -- Not in profits. No DLEC has ever been profitable. Playing the stock would make you some money probably. Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
John, Maybe I missed something, but how do you get from Travis' statement that any user could do it, to questioning Travis as to whether that was a claim to have done it himself? John Vogel John Scrivner wrote: Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: snip Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
No kidding. So...in one breath you're saying WISPA isn't playing the FCC Cop, and in another you make a completely unfounded comment like this? shaking head I must have missed where Travis said he was deploying 5.4GHz APs and thumbing his nose at the FCC. Geesh, what an outlandish and overreaching comment from John Scrivner. Talk about FUD. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J. Vogel Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ? John, Maybe I missed something, but how do you get from Travis' statement that any user could do it, to questioning Travis as to whether that was a claim to have done it himself? John Vogel John Scrivner wrote: Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: snip Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis -- 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] per customer computer pricing - let's examine
Upsell, that is where I do not do as well. You are right on Peter. I also have a pc shop, and do fairly well at selling hardware, although that is not as profitable as I would like it to be. George Peter R. wrote: I was just asking you to examine what the true costs are of delivering service. You correct about the unused BW - and for most BW is a fixed monthly cost, same as rent, tower, payroll. All that needs to be considered when tackling pricing. Back in the T1 days, the over-subscription was usually 7 to1. The first 3 were expensive costs; the last 4 not so much. I also wanted to remind you to find ways to upsell :) - Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. George Rogato wrote: Well your probably right, but a couple of things. Everyone pays up front an install and activation fee and the numbers I posted are approx. 2nd thing, how much is bandwidth cost? Most people look at their high bandwidth usage and say that is how much they are paying and that is how much it cost. But is that accurate? If you buy bandwidth, say 10 megs at 150.00 per meg. And you have a peak say at 10 megs during that 1 or 4 hours of peak time, how much did the bandwidth cost you at the off peak times thats not being used? maybe your bandwidth is actually costing you even more than is calculated because you have to consider your peak is only 5 or 10% of the time and the rest of the time when you are at say 5 megs it's actually costing you 300.00 per meg So on off peak time, you have ooogles of bandwidth that you are paying for, but not using, how much are you loosing for unused bandwidth? is it wiser to get something for unused over-priced bandwidth or is it better to say NO, I would rather let the bandwidth go unused and not collect any revenue? Now consider from a marketing point of view. Lets do the small town market where everyone is telling everyone their expert opinion and word spreads like wildfire. Word of mouth. And the advertising rates cost you just the same as a big city. Do you want your subs telling your other subs or potential subs that you are charging them more because they downloaded a movie and went over a bit cap of a couple gigs and then have to spend lots and lots of money to advertise to convince people to use your service, or would it be wiser to spend the advertising money with your subs by giving them some beni's like plenty of speed and good service without the extra charges? I think it's kinda complicated, but to me the common denominator in all this is to make the customer happy, and use them for woma. Not saying your wrong, but rather it's how you look at it. I look at it this way. George -- 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: Fw: [WISPA] wisp survey
COMMENTS INLINE - Where have we asked to identify WISPs at all? I am not looking to identify WISPs. I do get asked all the time by regulators, legislators, press, investors, etc. how many WISPs there are and how much of the US we serve. I cannot give a qualified answer. Nobody can because many WISPs won't file their 477s. How can I answer this question when people will not stand and be counted? I suppose I jumped to the conclusion that it would be important to identify the WISPs rather than just to count up the WISPs. Numerical statistics might be enough to back the claims of coverage, density, and strength-in-numbers. If WISPA can identify WISPs across the nation, then how can WISPA convince WISPs to self-report? All we can do is try to promote the importance of filling out these reports. After that it is up to the WISP themselves to decide. It is out of my hands beyond that. This is where the identity of WISPs would be useful. If WISPA were to identify and contact all of the nation's WISPs, it could do a mass mailing to inform WISPs of their need for compliance, let them know that safe-harbor standards are being created, and in a little self-serving - WISPA could promote itself. Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) or is WISPA hoping to just inform WISPs of their federal obligations and hope for the best? I have never pushed for strong-arm anything and will not start now. This would be a serious step over the line of trying to build the large representative scale we want to see in WISPA. We are not the police. We are a group of operators and others who want to help promote and improve the industry. That is straight from the by-laws. Fair enough I really did not think that WISPA would try to force compliance. In fact, that is EXACTLY why I asked. I expected you to state for the record (archives) that WISPA was not trying to force compliance but rather WISPA was just looking out for the interests of the WISP community. We want to see our customers numbers represented more accurately in order to gain more justification for spectrum and policy reform for our industry. If we cannot prove we are serving the public interest then we cannot expect the public to represent our interests. FCC Form 477 is the most important tool we have in proving we are serving the public good. If you have an idea then please share it. I think we have been very vocal that this form is important to the future representation of our interests in D.C. If WISPs do not act on this they are hurting themselves. I do not think anything else could be presented to a WISP which would make this point any more clear. The main suggestion that I can make is to contact as many WISPs as can be identified within the US and let them know about the FCC reporting requirements, about form 477, about CALEA in general, about WISPA's efforts to enable reasonable CALEA compliance. As you noted... you have used this forum to get the word out. But many WISPs are not on this forum. I think that the WISPA community needs outreach (mail, phone calls, etc) to WISPs offlist if efforts to educate are going to succeed. Reading the CALEA RO's it amazes me that either the FCC or the DoJ believe that broadband ISPs have effectively been put on notice regarding their need to comply with CALEA. The way the Order reads, it appears the agency assumes that ISPs have always held themselves out as telecommunications carriers and that broadband ISPs know or should have known about their obligations to comply with CALEA since CALEA was created in 1995. Furthermore, it indicates that ISPs know that they have an affirmative obligation to obtain a registration number from the FCC and to file with the FCC as a telecommunications provider. I don't believe that poor compliance with regards to CALEA regulations is necessisarily due to the obstanence of ISPs. I contend that the poor compliance with regards to CALEA is due to a severe lack of information and lack of understanding. Lets face it... just a few years ago, broadband ISPs were told that they were information service providers and not telecommunications providers. Therefore, we did not qualify for unbundled-network-elements or co-location facilities within a CO but we were exempt from collecting USF fees. Now, the RO for CALEA has re-interpretted the term and re-classified broadband internet providers as telecommunications providers for the purposes of CALEA. This reinterpretation is at very least confusing and it leaves many ISPs with the feeling that they are or should be exempt from CALEA regulation. Because the FCC has taken such a drastic change in position regarding the regulation and classification of broadband internet service providers, it seems that actual notice to the effected parties would have been more appropriate (during the promulgation of the rule and order). Now that
Re: [WISPA] wisp survey
I've been putting some thought into how to best identify WISPs across the country. Here are the methods that strike me as possibilities assuming that the orgs were willing to cooperate. 1) WISPA member list 2) Part-15.org member list 3) WiNOG list 4) Any state lists generated due to state level reporting, taxation or registration 5) thelist.com (difficult to use... too many national vaporware providers claiming to provide in every area code) 6) onelasvegas.com (shows about 188 providers in Illinois alone) 7) http://www.dslreports.com/isplist?t=wireless (shows about 1,150 Wireless providers) 8) Part 15 WISP locator (478 wireless providers listed) 9) vendors (if any are willing/able to give out client info - doubtful) 10) each other - if each WISP within WISPA were to identify all of the WISPs that he knows about, that would go a long ways towards mapping out the nations WISP population. Realize that their is danger in collecting names because the list could be misused to solicit. On the other hand, a comprehensive list could also be used for legitimate reasons such as to inform of government regulation and to cross-promote each other's services. If every wireless ISP filed a form 477, the government would get a very clear picture of how many hundreds of thousands of miles of coverage WISPs provide this nation! - Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey Dylan Oliver wrote: I agree with Brian - a Pew Internet study would give the most respected results. Perhaps the other group wants to chip in. Best, You could probably get a University marketing professor to do it. Cost? Not much more than $500. 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/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not??
Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not??
Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are
Re: [WISPA] wisp survey
Suggestion to ensure that there is some form of contratoral non-discolosure, etc. Same thing the FCC has. - Original Message - From: Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey I've been putting some thought into how to best identify WISPs across the country. Here are the methods that strike me as possibilities assuming that the orgs were willing to cooperate. 1) WISPA member list 2) Part-15.org member list 3) WiNOG list 4) Any state lists generated due to state level reporting, taxation or registration 5) thelist.com (difficult to use... too many national vaporware providers claiming to provide in every area code) 6) onelasvegas.com (shows about 188 providers in Illinois alone) 7) http://www.dslreports.com/isplist?t=wireless (shows about 1,150 Wireless providers) 8) Part 15 WISP locator (478 wireless providers listed) 9) vendors (if any are willing/able to give out client info - doubtful) 10) each other - if each WISP within WISPA were to identify all of the WISPs that he knows about, that would go a long ways towards mapping out the nations WISP population. Realize that their is danger in collecting names because the list could be misused to solicit. On the other hand, a comprehensive list could also be used for legitimate reasons such as to inform of government regulation and to cross-promote each other's services. If every wireless ISP filed a form 477, the government would get a very clear picture of how many hundreds of thousands of miles of coverage WISPs provide this nation! - Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey Dylan Oliver wrote: I agree with Brian - a Pew Internet study would give the most respected results. Perhaps the other group wants to chip in. Best, You could probably get a University marketing professor to do it. Cost? Not much more than $500. 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/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] [Fwd: Re: [isp-wireless] My FCC visit]
Also something to think about. Moexxxus wrote: Did you speak at all about CALEA? Original Message Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] My FCC visit Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:12:11 -0800 From: geowires [EMAIL PROTECTED] No, we were supposed to, but the weather canceled the FBI. We got some extra time to talk to the FCC and we spent a couple hours talking to the FTC. We stayed until 5.30 talking to them, so they were interested. The FTC has never met or talked to a wisp, ever. We were the first, we talked to their policy people, about nine or ten of them there. That was a most unfortunate fact that has not been discussed on the wispa list. They never met a wisp and they are setting policy for muni wifi Very scary. George -- 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: Fw: [WISPA] wisp survey
As the old saying goes, ignorance is no excuse for knowing the law... Sure, keeping up with the FCC is at times daunting, but they have a website section dedicated to wireless; http://wireless.fcc.gov/ and also a mailing list of FCC actions. There are also many other resources as well. As a business owner, you have a fiduciary responsibility to know, or at least be aware of issues effecting your industry. Doesn't matter what your business is, it could be selling hotdogs for that matter, but there are rules, laws, statues, regulations etc., of many different things a business must be aware of for local, state or federal. Industry groups such as WISPA can't force anyone to listen, let alone that people really need to do their part as part of the industry solidarity. This statement goes back to the same ones we all heard about the wireline associations being responsible for getting the word out. Getting the word out to their supporting members is one thing, being responsible to thousands of others is another. Neither one of these issues, CALEA or Form 477 are new and that there is a sever lack of information is exaggerated. Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA - Original Message - From: Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED] The main suggestion that I can make is to contact as many WISPs as can be identified within the US and let them know about the FCC reporting requirements, about form 477, about CALEA in general, about WISPA's efforts to enable reasonable CALEA compliance. As you noted... you have used this forum to get the word out. But many WISPs are not on this forum. I think that the WISPA community needs outreach (mail, phone calls, etc) to WISPs offlist if efforts to educate are going to succeed. Reading the CALEA RO's it amazes me that either the FCC or the DoJ believe that broadband ISPs have effectively been put on notice regarding their need to comply with CALEA. The way the Order reads, it appears the agency assumes that ISPs have always held themselves out as telecommunications carriers and that broadband ISPs know or should have known about their obligations to comply with CALEA since CALEA was created in 1995. Furthermore, it indicates that ISPs know that they have an affirmative obligation to obtain a registration number from the FCC and to file with the FCC as a telecommunications provider. I don't believe that poor compliance with regards to CALEA regulations is necessisarily due to the obstanence of ISPs. I contend that the poor compliance with regards to CALEA is due to a severe lack of information and lack of understanding. Lets face it... just a few years ago, broadband ISPs were told that they were information service providers and not telecommunications providers. Therefore, we did not qualify for unbundled-network-elements or co-location facilities within a CO but we were exempt from collecting USF fees. Now, the RO for CALEA has re-interpretted the term and re-classified broadband internet providers as telecommunications providers for the purposes of CALEA. This reinterpretation is at very least confusing and it leaves many ISPs with the feeling that they are or should be exempt from CALEA regulation. Because the FCC has taken such a drastic change in position regarding the regulation and classification of broadband internet service providers, it seems that actual notice to the effected parties would have been more appropriate (during the promulgation of the rule and order). Now that the order has already been made and the deadline is quickly approaching, there is no more time to wait for government intervention. Its up to industry groups like WISPA to fill the gap and contact WISPs and let them know about their obligations. - Larry Yunker -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] wisp survey
Larry, Where the heck did you come up with those questions? I don't think WISPA is ever going to try to be a police organization, but we are already a lobbying group. I hate you even brought up such ridiculous notions as those you listed. Mac Behalf Of Larry Yunker: If WISPA can identify WISPs across the nation, then how can WISPA convince WISPs to self-report? Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) or is WISPA hoping to just inform WISPs of their federal obligations and hope for the best? Is there some other method that would lead to greater compliance without making WISPA look a private attorney-general? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey The FCC has given some unlicensed spectrum, in part, to help make lower cost access and more access to broadband available in the US. Future access to more of this unlicensed spectrum will require some accountability by the FCC that unlicensed spectrum is helping to serve that purpose. By not filing we show less impact toward filling the digital divide and we are indirectly helping to justify criticism by others that unlicensed spectrum is not effectively serving the public interest in regard to broadband availability. Filling out the forms would help us to ask for and receive more spectrum and policy relief when needed in order to continue to advance the public interests of more access and lower cost access to broadband in the US. As of now Form 477 results show WISPs as serving less than 1% of the public with broadband. This is artificially low due to non-compliance by WISPs to fill out their forms. How can the FCC justify helping WISP interests if we cannot even show what we are doing to deliver broadband using the spectrum we have been given? How would the FCC helping us, in turn, help the public interest if there is no accountability that we are helping to serve the public interest? They (the FCC) are absolutely justified in their desire to see more WISPs fill out these forms and we should be complying with this. It is not a big brother issue at all. Form 477 is there to justify our representation in policy initiatives that we need to survive. One other issue is that it is a matter of the law. We are required to comply. Scriv Larry Yunker wrote: Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the time and how I calculated things, I think that the real number of wisps was likely closer to 6000. Today my gut tells me that that number is up by 25ish % and that the customers serviced is likely at least double what it was back in late 2004. I know MY customer base has more than doubled since that time. thoughts? marlon -- 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:
RE: [WISPA] wisp survey
I think this needs to be on our member only list as well. I think its ridiculous and harmful for such crazy comments and questions to be made/asked on an open mailing list that is archived for eternity as well!! Both cents worth, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Larry Yunker Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:38 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Fw: [WISPA] wisp survey John, I'm certainly not arguing against WISP compliance with the reporting requirement. Rather, I'm trying to clarify WISPA's interest in identifying WISPs across the nation. It sounds to me that you are looking at this from the prospective of a lobbying effort. If we can show more WISPs then we can show more need and thus can obtain more ... (spectrum, assistance, allowances, etc.) These are seem to be legitimate reasons, but they lead to the next question: If WISPA can identify WISPs across the nation, then how can WISPA convince WISPs to self-report? Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) or is WISPA hoping to just inform WISPs of their federal obligations and hope for the best? Is there some other method that would lead to greater compliance without making WISPA look a private attorney-general? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey The FCC has given some unlicensed spectrum, in part, to help make lower cost access and more access to broadband available in the US. Future access to more of this unlicensed spectrum will require some accountability by the FCC that unlicensed spectrum is helping to serve that purpose. By not filing we show less impact toward filling the digital divide and we are indirectly helping to justify criticism by others that unlicensed spectrum is not effectively serving the public interest in regard to broadband availability. Filling out the forms would help us to ask for and receive more spectrum and policy relief when needed in order to continue to advance the public interests of more access and lower cost access to broadband in the US. As of now Form 477 results show WISPs as serving less than 1% of the public with broadband. This is artificially low due to non-compliance by WISPs to fill out their forms. How can the FCC justify helping WISP interests if we cannot even show what we are doing to deliver broadband using the spectrum we have been given? How would the FCC helping us, in turn, help the public interest if there is no accountability that we are helping to serve the public interest? They (the FCC) are absolutely justified in their desire to see more WISPs fill out these forms and we should be complying with this. It is not a big brother issue at all. Form 477 is there to justify our representation in policy initiatives that we need to survive. One other issue is that it is a matter of the law. We are required to comply. Scriv Larry Yunker wrote: Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the belief that there are a genuine uncontestable 3000 wisps in this country with a minimum of 1,000,000 subscribers. Numbers that the FCC folks still use today as being more accurate than the 477. Does anyone know of a research group that we could hire to repeat my efforts in the past. Something that might be more effective yet? There has to be a better way to do this than the 477. Any ideas on the costs to do this project? Should we even put any effort into it? Could this be done by a group of scholars at a college? Looking back on the data that I'd gotten at the
RE: [WISPA] wisp survey
Larry, Great ideas! It would take some time, people and money to contact each one. Think of all the memberships you could acquire :) Now we need some ideas on how to do the contacting. Any FTC or FCC money available for that?? Frank, something more helpful would have been better than the preaching. - Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. Frank Muto wrote: As the old saying goes, ignorance is no excuse for knowing the law... Sure, keeping up with the FCC is at times daunting, but they have a website section dedicated to wireless; http://wireless.fcc.gov/ and also a mailing list of FCC actions. There are also many other resources as well. As a business owner, you have a fiduciary responsibility to know, or at least be aware of issues effecting your industry. Doesn't matter what your business is, it could be selling hotdogs for that matter, but there are rules, laws, statues, regulations etc., of many different things a business must be aware of for local, state or federal. Industry groups such as WISPA can't force anyone to listen, let alone that people really need to do their part as part of the industry solidarity. This statement goes back to the same ones we all heard about the wireline associations being responsible for getting the word out. Getting the word out to their supporting members is one thing, being responsible to thousands of others is another. Neither one of these issues, CALEA or Form 477 are new and that there is a sever lack of information is exaggerated. Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
No. I am saying anyone with an internet account, credit card and shipping address could purchase 5.4ghz equipment TODAY and deploy it TODAY. Granted its not FCC certified and not technically legal right now... but, it could be done. Travis John Scrivner wrote: Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, You make good points... however, the better question is how much money did Z-Tel take out of the business during this time? I would bet the owners and investors made BIG money during this time... so, so what if they are out of business now? If they made millions during that time, then it worked out for them. Same for DSL. I know there are companies that are going or gone now, but that made millions in profits during the past 5 years. Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis Peter R. wrote: Many of you probably don't follow the FCC much, so let me tell you about the stroke of a pen: UNE-P which was the magic bullet for CLECs. No facilities needed. Rock bottom pricing on voice lines. Market and sell. Z-Tel and a few others had over 500k lines. Unfortunately, they didn't listen when they were told it would be a stop gap to facilities. In other words, sell UNE-P regionally and convert to facilities. No one listened. Bang! UNE-P ruled no more. One year to move to facilities. Z-Tel just filed BK, following many others that area shadow of their UNE-P selves. Another example: DSL. One day it is tariffed. Bang! No tariff. Go nego with the ILEC. So please heed the warning about 5.4. It won't take much prodding from DoD to wipe oout your business model. This is NOT a threat, folks. This is how telecom regulations works in the US. So skip the forms - 445 and 477. Keep using the unlincesed gear. Next year you can all be pirates. That's okay, because you can celebrate *Gasparilla* Pirate Fest in Tampa after that. Plus you say all this stuff on a PUBLIC, archived email list. DUH! Regards, Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not??
Strange as it may seem Rabbtux, you'll not find me saying Oh no, I've gone too far because this guy won't buy my gear now. I will remain consistent and provocative. For sure no other vendor has the chutzpah to do it (or maybe cares about WISPs enough to do it) and someone has to lead. Playing nice on this subject gets the industry no where and there is nothing inconsistent or hypocritical about my statements. This is not about arrogance except to the extent that many of you really don't know how serious this is getting and what's at risk. You are necessarily tending to your businesses, and that's largely as it should be. I am more plugged in than the vast majority of you (that's not a boast, just simple statement of fact) and that gives me some responsibility or I can just ignore it and let the chips fall where they are headed. But, I do have the ability to help be a catalyst; I've done it many times in ways that can be documented. You can call that arrogance, but it's also the truth and credibility and influence is wasted if not used to the greater benefit. It about the future of the industry and that's worth more than a few ruffled feathers and what some of you think must be the loss of a few radios to Alvarion. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:37 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? I try to keep a low profile around here, you listen twice and speak once. Wispa membership has been a good experience for me. However, Patrick has once again, been the HIGH MiGHTY, and jumped all over my one phrase. I did not mean to imply anything illegal about my in tensions, other than I might re-use/re-deploy existing equipment. What I do know now, is that Alvaron is off my shopping list for a long time now, due to their over zealous employee. I also know that more of my posts will go to the members-only list to avoid this nonsense. On 2/18/07, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not??
That'd be Tranzeo. Not sure the volume that gets you that price, but I know some who pay that for their 802.11a stuff. It has some nice features, to include even 5 MHz channels. Tranzeo is doing lots of things right and they've earned the loyalty of some WISPs I respect hugely, and that's good enough for me. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not?? -snip- That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. -snip- Patrick, your input on low cost 5.8 CPEs is appreciated. Please let me know where I can purchase 5.8G CPEs at $170? We need to purchase 1-5 units at a time. Is there an Alvarion product to meet this need?? On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the
Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 09:27:18 -0600 (CST), Butch Evans wrote On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, Tom DeReggi wrote: The idea behind component certification and filing DoC type of certifications, is that there IS a sticker, and that sticker refers to a filing that describes EXACTLY what's in the box, whether it's software, hardware, whateverware. Verifying software in checking and enforcing systems would be hard for the FCC, they'd actually have to login to confirm apposed to a visual check. Well, this is true, but in the end, the thing they want is X amount of EIRP, no more than Y sideband noise. That is the interferance/reuse portion of the law. They don't have to log onto anything to measure that OR to see the components used. In the end, they want compliance with the rules, rules which are designed to protect primary users of a band of spectrum, or licensed users of a band of spectrum. I do not know if the FCC considers the process as sacrosanct, or if their focus is more about how to achieve compliance. I know that the rules for part15 compliance were in NO way designed to have a lot of small businesses innovating with commodity components. Mark Koskenmaki Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] wisp survey
Sorry (Mac, Scriv, Marlon and others)... I didn't mean to stir things up. I really just wondered why there was talk about determining how many WISPs are out there. I think WISPA has the right idea about helping WISPs through lobbying and I now understand that the goal of gathering numbers of WISPs would be to simply to further that lobbying effort. Looking back to Marlon's orginal message, I should clarify that I don't see where I got the notion that anyone wanted to contact people or to encourage compliance. NOTHING MARLON SAID lead to that conclusion. I guess it was just MY OWN FRUSTRATION speaking... I'm frustrated to see that so few WISPs have complied with the filing requirements... I'd like to see more WISPs be informed about their responsibilities, but I would certainly draw the line at informing... compliance is still a business decision that must be made by each individual ISP. If an effort were to be made to inform WISPs of their obligations, I would leave it to the industry groups (WISPA, Part-15, or others) to decide if, how and when to proceed. - Larry \END THREAD - Original Message - From: Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:33 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] wisp survey Larry, Where the heck did you come up with those questions? I don't think WISPA is ever going to try to be a police organization, but we are already a lobbying group. I hate you even brought up such ridiculous notions as those you listed. Mac Behalf Of Larry Yunker: If WISPA can identify WISPs across the nation, then how can WISPA convince WISPs to self-report? Is WISPA planning to use strong-arm tactics (report or we'll report you) or is WISPA hoping to just inform WISPs of their federal obligations and hope for the best? Is there some other method that would lead to greater compliance without making WISPA look a private attorney-general? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] wisp survey The FCC has given some unlicensed spectrum, in part, to help make lower cost access and more access to broadband available in the US. Future access to more of this unlicensed spectrum will require some accountability by the FCC that unlicensed spectrum is helping to serve that purpose. By not filing we show less impact toward filling the digital divide and we are indirectly helping to justify criticism by others that unlicensed spectrum is not effectively serving the public interest in regard to broadband availability. Filling out the forms would help us to ask for and receive more spectrum and policy relief when needed in order to continue to advance the public interests of more access and lower cost access to broadband in the US. As of now Form 477 results show WISPs as serving less than 1% of the public with broadband. This is artificially low due to non-compliance by WISPs to fill out their forms. How can the FCC justify helping WISP interests if we cannot even show what we are doing to deliver broadband using the spectrum we have been given? How would the FCC helping us, in turn, help the public interest if there is no accountability that we are helping to serve the public interest? They (the FCC) are absolutely justified in their desire to see more WISPs fill out these forms and we should be complying with this. It is not a big brother issue at all. Form 477 is there to justify our representation in policy initiatives that we need to survive. One other issue is that it is a matter of the law. We are required to comply. Scriv Larry Yunker wrote: Marlon, I understand that the vast majority of WISPs have chosen not to file the 477 form (or in the alternative they just don't know that they are supposed to file). Just out of curiousity, what do you hope to accomplish by locating the thousands of non-compliant WISPs? Are you hoping to use this as-of-yet unidentified mass to evidence the difficulty of meeting the standard, or are you hoping to convince those non-compliant WISPs to join WISPA in its efforts to develop a workable standard? or are you just hoping to prove out the estimates that you have already provided to the FCC? Or is there some other driving force? Larry Yunker - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: [WISPA] wisp survey Hi All, OK, we're not going to get most wisps to fill out the 477 any time soon. At least it's historically looking that way. 2 years ago I brow beat the major vendors and manufacturers into giving me the number of wisps that they show on the books and/or radios sold into the US market in the last 4 years. That effort lead to the
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
George, ones person's innovation is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. 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 George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not??
Great. I looked into it. From the Tranzeo website, I find the TR5a series for $367, and the lowest cost 5Ghz unit at $287 (16db antenna) which isn't good for the 4-5 mile range. I doubt they will cut prices to $170 for an order of 5. Is there somewhere else I can look, Tranzeo looks like nice gear. On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That'd be Tranzeo. Not sure the volume that gets you that price, but I know some who pay that for their 802.11a stuff. It has some nice features, to include even 5 MHz channels. Tranzeo is doing lots of things right and they've earned the loyalty of some WISPs I respect hugely, and that's good enough for me. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not?? -snip- That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. -snip- Patrick, your input on low cost 5.8 CPEs is appreciated. Please let me know where I can purchase 5.8G CPEs at $170? We need to purchase 1-5 units at a time. Is there an Alvarion product to meet this need?? On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). 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:
[WISPA] No, Patrick, it's not about the stickers...
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 09:32:42 -0800, Patrick Leary wrote Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 - - that's cheap. No, Patrick, it's NOT about the sticker. It's about the fact that I can assemble a geek squad of a few people, that, using freely available software and cheap and easily available hardware, can BUILD FOR OURSELVES better priced and 'better suited for WISP use' equipment in a few weeks than Alvarion, Motorola and Trango have managed to do in years. Not only are we better, we're faster, we advance quicker, and we do more with less, AND CAN PRODUCE IT ALL COMPLIANT WITH THE TECHNICAL LIMITS OF THE LAW, faster than any larger company can dream of doing. Why? Because we live in a free country and we have free minds. But we can't do it legally. Why? Because the rules now PREVENT us from doing it and protect the interests of Alvarion and Motorola, rather than enhance the industry. It's because the best and brightest DO NOT build systems. The best and brightest at building sofware are building software. The best and brightest at building cheap radios are doing so. And the rest of us are assembling the parts we need to do the job that NO MAKER OF CERTIFIED GEAR HAS YET TO ASPIRE to, much less produce. WE ARE CAPABLE of putting those bits together, like it or not. That's why Apple Computers based the latest iteration of their operating system on something produced mostly by amateurs and geeks and ordinary schmucksfor FREE. It was better than ANYTHING Apple could pay any number of software engineers to build on their own. Period. Thus, FreeBSD became the basis of OS X. AGain, the capability of the ordinary schmucks proved to be a giant leap ahead of the #2 choice in pc's. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Well, certainly, NOT A ONE OF US ON THIS LIST wants that. But if you wish to become an advocate for this industry, THEN STOP DEMANDING WE STOP BEING CREATIVE AND ADVANCING OUR INDUSTRY AND INSTEAD BE HELD BACK BY YOUR COMPANY AND THE OTHER manufacturers, and start helping us get a legal and regulatory environment that works, instead of one that's hopelessly broken, so we CAN. I hate to break it to you, but if today, Alvarion, Motorola, Trango, and a host of other names like them vanished from the map, the WISP business could and would go on, and we could do it purely with the talents and skills that exist with the individual operators. TURN IT LOOSE instead of attempting to bottle it up. Or is your loyalty purely to the company and not to US? 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
Aw come on now. Thats was just a not well thought out hip shot slur. Fact was you just said Tranzeo you admired. They were innovative. Been there for 5 years now. I used them when you were selling FHSS as the ultimate 2.4 solution. Here is you chance, list your companies innovations by chronological order starting the day you took the evangelist job up until now, and I will demonstrate to you, how the big manufacturers hold us up. Again, not a rub against Alvarion, I truly respect your company, but, I want to make a point here. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, ones person's innovation is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. 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 George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
I was honestly not sure what he was saying. For all I know he was saying these are available in legal form at this price. I have heard they are out there and that there are two which have been certified for legal use in the Us but nobody has ever said what brand they are, who sells them, what they cost, etc.. I was not insinuating anything. Just curious what he was saying here. Scriv J. Vogel wrote: John, Maybe I missed something, but how do you get from Travis' statement that any user could do it, to questioning Travis as to whether that was a claim to have done it himself? John Vogel John Scrivner wrote: Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: snip Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
And, just list the American UL stuff, skip the non American and licensed gear. George Rogato wrote: Aw come on now. Thats was just a not well thought out hip shot slur. Fact was you just said Tranzeo you admired. They were innovative. Been there for 5 years now. I used them when you were selling FHSS as the ultimate 2.4 solution. Here is you chance, list your companies innovations by chronological order starting the day you took the evangelist job up until now, and I will demonstrate to you, how the big manufacturers hold us up. Again, not a rub against Alvarion, I truly respect your company, but, I want to make a point here. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, ones person's innovation is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. 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 George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:52:04 -0800, Patrick Leary wrote George, ones person's innovation is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. But Patrick, it's NOT uncertified manufacturers as if we're talking about some big greedy corporation. Unless you refer to me. Or the guy down the street. Or even the woman over in the next town. Or THOUSANDS of people all over the world who find that what they want to do is either not supported by something off the shelf, or never even conceived by some engineer, or didn't make it past the marketing and budgeting departments. Download an open and free bit of Linux. Buy a surplus CPU board. Buy whatever radio module you want or need. Put it in a box and VIOLA, you already have more features most WISP Network operators wnat, than Alvarion can figure out how to put in a box. Does it have cutting edge RF qualities? Nope. Does it have Cisco quality routing? Nope. Does it have -100 to +200 degree temperature range? Nope. But, none of those are required. I don't have to the BEST rf front end and features to be successful. I just have to have to have the ones I find necessary, and the ability to get those things changed I need changed. And these people are endlessly exploring and refining mesh networks, customer controls, routing, etc, etc... and THEY NEVER STOP. So, if I want the lowest priced VL stuff to route and do NAT at the customer's end, will Alvarion build it in for me? No? Gee, that's already in the FREE stuff. Huh. Next time you whine that there's uncertified manufacturers, you're talking about the workshops, desks, garages, offices, or even spare bedrooms of THOUSANDS and thousands of people spread all around the country. And we shoulid NOT be stifled by a rigid and corporate-centric regulatory straightjacket. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mark Koskenmaki Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply aboutbeingsticker conscious or not??
Don't make too many assumptions about what your price will be by looking at list prices, for example, our CPE available in the AlvarionCOMNET program for $285 (does require a 25 per quarter commitment), lists with a MSRP of $1,095. Not being too familiar with Tranzeo, you'll have to ask them or their users about what can be done with a qty of 5. Matt Larson is a WISPA leader and one of the most respectable WISPs. He loves Tranzeo and can point you in the right direction. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply aboutbeingsticker conscious or not?? Great. I looked into it. From the Tranzeo website, I find the TR5a series for $367, and the lowest cost 5Ghz unit at $287 (16db antenna) which isn't good for the 4-5 mile range. I doubt they will cut prices to $170 for an order of 5. Is there somewhere else I can look, Tranzeo looks like nice gear. On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That'd be Tranzeo. Not sure the volume that gets you that price, but I know some who pay that for their 802.11a stuff. It has some nice features, to include even 5 MHz channels. Tranzeo is doing lots of things right and they've earned the loyalty of some WISPs I respect hugely, and that's good enough for me. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not?? -snip- That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. -snip- Patrick, your input on low cost 5.8 CPEs is appreciated. Please let me know where I can purchase 5.8G CPEs at $170? We need to purchase 1-5 units at a time. Is there an Alvarion product to meet this need?? On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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
[WISPA] Time off from WISPA
Guys I am taking a vacation from WISPA for a while. I am scheduled to speak in D.C. before New America's caucus at the Senate Office Building before Commerce Committee on this Thursday to lobby for unlicensed access to TV channel spectrum. My Mother-in-law just died unexpectedly about 3 hours ago. I am moving my entire office and NOC over the next 3 days (so far only moved the core router and a couple of extraneous switches, bandwidth appliance, etc.) We still have a mountain of work to complete to have the office moved and completely online on by Feb. 26th which will be the first day at our new office location (and happens to be my birthday). I am now in the process of planning a family funeral and expecting family and such in while I am doing all the rest. I will not be sending anything to this group except possibly requests for support to TV channel space comments and such until Feb 27. I will not be handling any WISPA related business until that time. If anyone has issues that need resolved regarding WISPA billing then email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For email system administration technical support please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For web site issues email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For list issues please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To direct issues to the board you can email a form with your request via the link at http://www.wispa.org. I think I may extend this vacation from WISPA to be as long as March 1. I will not be logging into this email account until then and prefer to be left alone until after that time. I will be unsubscribing from the WISPA lists until my return. I will trust all of you to bring me up to speed on any issues requiring my direct involvement once I return to these lists in March. Kindest regards, John Scrivner President WISPA -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Time off from WISPA
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 23:20:31 -0600, John Scrivner wrote John, my condolences at your loss. Please take whatever time you need to deal with things, you will never regret it, and your family and friends will appreciate it. My prayers are with you and your family at a time of hurt and emotional stress. Guys I am taking a vacation from WISPA for a while. I am scheduled to speak in D.C. before New America's caucus at the Senate Office Building before Commerce Committee on this Thursday to lobby for unlicensed access to TV channel spectrum. My Mother-in-law just died unexpectedly about 3 hours ago. I am moving my entire office and NOC over the next 3 days (so far only moved the core router and a couple of extraneous switches, bandwidth appliance, etc.) We still have a mountain of work to complete to have the office moved and completely online on by Feb. 26th which will be the first day at our new office location (and happens to be my birthday). I am now in the process of planning a family funeral and expecting family and such in while I am doing all the rest. I will not be sending anything to this group except possibly requests for support to TV channel space comments and such until Feb 27. I will not be handling any WISPA related business until that time. If anyone has issues that need resolved regarding WISPA billing then email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For email system administration technical support please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For web site issues email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For list issues please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To direct issues to the board you can email a form with your request via the link at http://www.wispa.org. I think I may extend this vacation from WISPA to be as long as March 1. I will not be logging into this email account until then and prefer to be left alone until after that time. I will be unsubscribing from the WISPA lists until my return. I will trust all of you to bring me up to speed on any issues requiring my direct involvement once I return to these lists in March. Kindest regards, John Scrivner President WISPA -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ Mark Koskenmaki Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] No, Patrick, it's not about the stickers...
...But if you wish to become an advocate for this industry,... LOL, but for better of for worse Mark, that happened a long time ago. As for the FCC protecting Alvarion's interests. Don't make me choke with laughter. The FCC could care a less about the welfare of our company and that's not something they should necessarily care about. I can also say that our company to this day has never hired a lobbyist to press for anything in DC with the FCC, the FTC, the DoD, the NTIA, the USDA, or the local PTA for that matter anyone else...at that is to my everlasting frustration. Anything done on that front at Alvarion has been mostly me and me alone, and originally my efforts were entirely unsanctioned. And the best I have time to do is adhoc and insufficient. Fortunately, when it comes to standards group work (e.g. the IEEE and ETSI), they've always done the opposite and worked like unrelenting sled dogs since the mid 19990's. 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 wispa Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] No, Patrick, it's not about the stickers... On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 09:32:42 -0800, Patrick Leary wrote Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 - - that's cheap. No, Patrick, it's NOT about the sticker. It's about the fact that I can assemble a geek squad of a few people, that, using freely available software and cheap and easily available hardware, can BUILD FOR OURSELVES better priced and 'better suited for WISP use' equipment in a few weeks than Alvarion, Motorola and Trango have managed to do in years. Not only are we better, we're faster, we advance quicker, and we do more with less, AND CAN PRODUCE IT ALL COMPLIANT WITH THE TECHNICAL LIMITS OF THE LAW, faster than any larger company can dream of doing. Why? Because we live in a free country and we have free minds. But we can't do it legally. Why? Because the rules now PREVENT us from doing it and protect the interests of Alvarion and Motorola, rather than enhance the industry. It's because the best and brightest DO NOT build systems. The best and brightest at building sofware are building software. The best and brightest at building cheap radios are doing so. And the rest of us are assembling the parts we need to do the job that NO MAKER OF CERTIFIED GEAR HAS YET TO ASPIRE to, much less produce. WE ARE CAPABLE of putting those bits together, like it or not. That's why Apple Computers based the latest iteration of their operating system on something produced mostly by amateurs and geeks and ordinary schmucksfor FREE. It was better than ANYTHING Apple could pay any number of software engineers to build on their own. Period. Thus, FreeBSD became the basis of OS X. AGain, the capability of the ordinary schmucks proved to be a giant leap ahead of the #2 choice in pc's. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. Well, certainly, NOT A ONE OF US ON THIS LIST wants that. But if you wish to become an advocate for this industry, THEN STOP DEMANDING WE STOP BEING CREATIVE AND ADVANCING OUR INDUSTRY AND INSTEAD BE HELD BACK BY YOUR COMPANY AND THE OTHER manufacturers, and start helping us get a legal and regulatory environment that works, instead of one that's hopelessly broken, so we CAN. I hate to break it to you, but if today, Alvarion, Motorola, Trango, and a host of other names like them vanished from the map, the WISP business could and would go on, and we could do it purely with the talents and skills that exist with the individual operators. TURN IT LOOSE instead of attempting to bottle it up. Or is your loyalty purely to the company and not to US? 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam
Re: [WISPA] CANADA LIST
Thanks Rick, I have subscribed, suggestion though, create a US list also and then all of your FCC and Calea problems can be aired there and we can use the wisp for general private discussion. I would suggest that US Wisps should air the views on the above issues in private and the General list should only see WISPA's official stance and no discussion allowed. Become a member if you have something to say or otherwise shut up. If you can give me the list of the duties that a moderator has to know I will see if I can run the Canadian list. 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 Rick Harnish wrote: There is now a [EMAIL PROTECTED] private mailing listserv. I have designed this list to serve Canadian WISPs only. Membership to this list is moderated but postings are not. If a member of this list wants to become the moderator at some point, they should contact me. The signup for the list is located at http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/canada. English and French are both acceptable languages on this list. Respectfully, Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Founding Member of WISPA -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
Be careful George, you are taunting Patrick with that one. :-) The last time someone did that, he posted a several page book, listing about 50 reasons how the VL series innovated beyond its competitors. Alvarion may not offer all the same flexibility as the other oem products, but it sure is leading the industry with innovation of many unique features. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that we as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but we are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was legal. The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many we are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because that is stated just as simple as it can get. Sincerely, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being stickerconscious or not?? Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
Anything that uses an Atheros chipset can do 5.4Ghz, if the software driver has not been modified to restrict it. Any of these radios packaged for international use, may have an option to select 5.4Ghz. Or for that matter download and flash an Inernational Firmware. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ? I was honestly not sure what he was saying. For all I know he was saying these are available in legal form at this price. I have heard they are out there and that there are two which have been certified for legal use in the Us but nobody has ever said what brand they are, who sells them, what they cost, etc.. I was not insinuating anything. Just curious what he was saying here. Scriv J. Vogel wrote: John, Maybe I missed something, but how do you get from Travis' statement that any user could do it, to questioning Travis as to whether that was a claim to have done it himself? John Vogel John Scrivner wrote: Travis, Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US? Scriv Travis Johnson wrote: snip Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for less than $300... Travis -- 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] Time off from WISPA
John, I send my regards. Stay strong and focused. We'll hold down the fort until your return. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 12:20 AM Subject: [WISPA] Time off from WISPA Guys I am taking a vacation from WISPA for a while. I am scheduled to speak in D.C. before New America's caucus at the Senate Office Building before Commerce Committee on this Thursday to lobby for unlicensed access to TV channel spectrum. My Mother-in-law just died unexpectedly about 3 hours ago. I am moving my entire office and NOC over the next 3 days (so far only moved the core router and a couple of extraneous switches, bandwidth appliance, etc.) We still have a mountain of work to complete to have the office moved and completely online on by Feb. 26th which will be the first day at our new office location (and happens to be my birthday). I am now in the process of planning a family funeral and expecting family and such in while I am doing all the rest. I will not be sending anything to this group except possibly requests for support to TV channel space comments and such until Feb 27. I will not be handling any WISPA related business until that time. If anyone has issues that need resolved regarding WISPA billing then email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For email system administration technical support please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For web site issues email [EMAIL PROTECTED] For list issues please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To direct issues to the board you can email a form with your request via the link at http://www.wispa.org. I think I may extend this vacation from WISPA to be as long as March 1. I will not be logging into this email account until then and prefer to be left alone until after that time. I will be unsubscribing from the WISPA lists until my return. I will trust all of you to bring me up to speed on any issues requiring my direct involvement once I return to these lists in March. Kindest regards, John Scrivner President WISPA -- 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] Following the FCC rules arenow simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not??
George, this is a child's game. The market is the arbiter of who and what is successful and our macro success is there for all to read via any of the market reports about this space since there were reports. And as a public company, our financials are there for all the study. Now, that said, has Alvarion been on the forefront of product innovation for the small WISP? No, not by a long shot. Is that supposed to be some secret? Since 2000'ish our development in UL has been aimed at the premium WISPs and other top UL operators. We are the product many a funded or professional WISP starts with. We are the gear some grow in to. My work of late has been to try to bring this premium product within the realm of most WISPs, thus the AlvarionCOMNET program. When I began my WISP advocacy, there was no small WISP, large WISP, ILEC WISP, utility WISP or muni WISP. There was no Trango (Sunstream had not even launched), there was no Canopy (the technology had been created in the early 90's but the exec engineer that created it did not yet have the internal power to market it), there was no Tranzeo, SmartBridges, etc. All WISPs were small WISPs and we were dominant, maybe only because we paid attention to the market before any professional company and built for it. We did see the stratification coming though (our vision has always been excellent, better than our execution some times), and as was more our technological, corporate and customer character, we aimed for the premium and hit that and then some. Motorola aimed for the center; and with the simplicity and the power of their brand, they hit that and then some. Tranzeo and SmartBridges aimed at smaller WISPs and those with less access to funds. They hit that. 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 George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:57 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules arenow simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Aw come on now. Thats was just a not well thought out hip shot slur. Fact was you just said Tranzeo you admired. They were innovative. Been there for 5 years now. I used them when you were selling FHSS as the ultimate 2.4 solution. Here is you chance, list your companies innovations by chronological order starting the day you took the evangelist job up until now, and I will demonstrate to you, how the big manufacturers hold us up. Again, not a rub against Alvarion, I truly respect your company, but, I want to make a point here. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, ones person's innovation is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. 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 George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout beingstickerconscious or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more innovative What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified. Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. 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 Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingstickerconscious or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being sticker conscious or not??
You know Patrick, I for the most part have respect for you and your opinion, but when it comes to this issue you are so blinded by it you don't even stop to think about your reply. I stated it that way because I have absolutely no idea if rabbtux rabbtux is in the US or not. It is a gmail account so it could be anywhere world wide. They stated that they were looking for something that would work with an MT/SR5 combination so I replied that if the sticker is not important (which it probably isn't since they are use an MT/SR5 as the AP) they could use a RB112 and CM9 with good result. I added on the fact that Tranzeo makes eqiupment that will meet their specifications and is FCC approved so that they (and others) know that there is certified equipment that meet their criteria. I will echo Mark's (?) comment from somewhere in the fact that in the certified realm there isn't much that comes close to the flexibility and power of either StarOS or MT. The problem with the Premium CPE is that it attaches to a Premium PROPRIETARY AP. The power of StarOS and MT is in the fact that the user is not stuck buying everything from a single manufacturer. If PCEngines EOLs a model of wrap board there is always gateworks or MT. If StarOS adds a new advanced routing protocol MT users can switch with only the change of an AP and gain the full advantage and in some cases they doesn't even have to change AP hardware. If Smartbridges equipment goes to crap you can change to Senao, if Senao EOLs a CPE you can switch to Tranzeo. In the Premium world if Trango decides to EOL a line of equipment or manufacturing quality tanks you are stuck with: 1. buy refurb/used equipment 2. hang dual APs to handle new growth 3. swap equipment around in your network so that vendor/product A is on the east side of your coverage area... 4. Replace CPEs with new line of product There is a LOT more to the certified debate than the fact that Motorola, Trango and Alvarion have finally gotten CPE price down to $200. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
wispa wrote: Once we're a regulated industry, and at this point the FCC and Congress are SERIOUSLY attempting to take control the WISP and ISP business, we exist, or we do not exist, at the stroke of a pen, totally at the WHIM of someone who neither knows, nor cares, whether we live or die, nor the impact on the lives of the people we service. This IS a regulated industry. I think people have failed to notice that. - Peter -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
How true, how true. It is just a question of how much regulation Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Peter R. wrote: wispa wrote: Once we're a regulated industry, and at this point the FCC and Congress are SERIOUSLY attempting to take control the WISP and ISP business, we exist, or we do not exist, at the stroke of a pen, totally at the WHIM of someone who neither knows, nor cares, whether we live or die, nor the impact on the lives of the people we service. This IS a regulated industry. I think people have failed to notice that. - Peter -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
NON U.S. and Canada WISPs? was RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ...
Sam, you are right. During this whole thread I have been reflexive about assuming U.S. and I did assume you discussing it from a U.S. standpoint. I was wrong to assume that and I apologize. To all non-U.S. (well, this really does include Canada since the domains share so much in common from a UL standpoint), this must indeed be mind numbing. What would be VERY interesting would be for the non-North American WISPs to tell us their opinions about compliance relative to their regions. I have assumptions there too, but MUCH less knowledge and experience so the better part of valor is shut up and listen. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:40 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about beingsticker conscious or not?? You know Patrick, I for the most part have respect for you and your opinion, but when it comes to this issue you are so blinded by it you don't even stop to think about your reply. I stated it that way because I have absolutely no idea if rabbtux rabbtux is in the US or not. It is a gmail account so it could be anywhere world wide. They stated that they were looking for something that would work with an MT/SR5 combination so I replied that if the sticker is not important (which it probably isn't since they are use an MT/SR5 as the AP) they could use a RB112 and CM9 with good result. I added on the fact that Tranzeo makes eqiupment that will meet their specifications and is FCC approved so that they (and others) know that there is certified equipment that meet their criteria. I will echo Mark's (?) comment from somewhere in the fact that in the certified realm there isn't much that comes close to the flexibility and power of either StarOS or MT. The problem with the Premium CPE is that it attaches to a Premium PROPRIETARY AP. The power of StarOS and MT is in the fact that the user is not stuck buying everything from a single manufacturer. If PCEngines EOLs a model of wrap board there is always gateworks or MT. If StarOS adds a new advanced routing protocol MT users can switch with only the change of an AP and gain the full advantage and in some cases they doesn't even have to change AP hardware. If Smartbridges equipment goes to crap you can change to Senao, if Senao EOLs a CPE you can switch to Tranzeo. In the Premium world if Trango decides to EOL a line of equipment or manufacturing quality tanks you are stuck with: 1. buy refurb/used equipment 2. hang dual APs to handle new growth 3. swap equipment around in your network so that vendor/product A is on the east side of your coverage area... 4. Replace CPEs with new line of product There is a LOT more to the certified debate than the fact that Motorola, Trango and Alvarion have finally gotten CPE price down to $200. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Patrick Leary wrote: Sticker conscious? So this is what we've become as an industry? Following the very clear laws, which were once again just reiterated to us after another in a long chain of WISP visits, or not has now been reduced to simply being sticker conscious or not sticker conscious? Why not go further and call yourself Illegal and proud or just I don't give a ? Let's not have any more gee, I can't afford to be legal! That's not an argument that is credible today, with the range from legal cheap to premium CPE running from about $170 to sub-$300 -- that's cheap. My God, 5.4 is going to be a massive mess. OET will have to install a special phone line just to handle the incoming DoD complaint calls. 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 Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the fcc sticker debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- 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).
[WISPA] George, I've called you to the carpet my friend, so please explain
George, On the isp-wireless list, in your plea to other WISPs imploring them to file FCC form 477 you say, and I quote, Don't ponder whether or not you want to, but rather it's the law and your hurting your industry and are subject to penalties. Damn, that could be an EXACT quote from ME with regard to the certification issue. I must ask you, how can you credibly take this position when on the issue of certification you take the EXACT opposite? These are both FCC mandates, one you blow off and pick and choose what you'll pay attention to, the other you say the above. Do you not understand that your relativism on the cert issue as a vocal WISP is DIRECTLY in part to blame for other WISPs choosing not to file form 477. It goes something like this...George says he does not care about the FCC laws about certification, so I'll choose not to care about what forms they say I must file Do you seriously not understand this? You can't take opposite positions on the same issue - FCC rules - and expect not to confuse other WISPs that might look up to you. It really blows my mind you are getting all bent out of shape at my position when yours is identical, but only as it relates to form 477. I am being consistent, since I say the same about form 477 as any other FCC law for WISPs. Patrick This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). 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] Following the FCC rules ?????
I think everyone is missing the real problem with 5.4ghz. How big of a piece of crap is our military radar that a $49 minipci wireless card and a homemade pringles antenna can render it useless??? ;^) Matt Larsen vistabeam.com J. Vogel wrote: Fair enough. I might have been a little on the touchy side myself there. In the context of what I had been reading, particularly a comment about how the use of 5.4 was going to require someone to install another phone line just to handle complaints from the DoD, coupled with the current excitement around the list that some WISPs have *gasp* been using un-certified gear, it appeared to me that your question might have been motivated by suspicion in that regard. Thanks for the clarification. John Vogel -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
:) But their guns are huge. 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 Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:32 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ? I think everyone is missing the real problem with 5.4ghz. How big of a piece of crap is our military radar that a $49 minipci wireless card and a homemade pringles antenna can render it useless??? ;^) Matt Larsen vistabeam.com J. Vogel wrote: Fair enough. I might have been a little on the touchy side myself there. In the context of what I had been reading, particularly a comment about how the use of 5.4 was going to require someone to install another phone line just to handle complaints from the DoD, coupled with the current excitement around the list that some WISPs have *gasp* been using un-certified gear, it appeared to me that your question might have been motivated by suspicion in that regard. Thanks for the clarification. John Vogel -- 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(43). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(84). 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply aboutbeingsticker conscious or not??
I believe the new Tranzeo SL5-16 is around the $170 price range in quantity 20.They are available directly from Tranzeo or from distributors in the US like ElectroComm, Doubleradius and Streakwave. I have bought from all three places and they have always done good by me. I have about 10 of the little SL5 CPEs deployed at ranges from 1/4 to 8 miles and they are very solid performers. The somewhat larger and more expensive 5a24 radios will work out to 18 miles. 802.11a is good stuff. I have a post on my blog at http://www.thelar.com/ that describes my experience with 802.11a so far. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Patrick Leary wrote: Don't make too many assumptions about what your price will be by looking at list prices, for example, our CPE available in the AlvarionCOMNET program for $285 (does require a 25 per quarter commitment), lists with a MSRP of $1,095. Not being too familiar with Tranzeo, you'll have to ask them or their users about what can be done with a qty of 5. Matt Larson is a WISPA leader and one of the most respectable WISPs. He loves Tranzeo and can point you in the right direction. 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 rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply aboutbeingsticker conscious or not?? Great. I looked into it. From the Tranzeo website, I find the TR5a series for $367, and the lowest cost 5Ghz unit at $287 (16db antenna) which isn't good for the 4-5 mile range. I doubt they will cut prices to $170 for an order of 5. Is there somewhere else I can look, Tranzeo looks like nice gear. On 2/18/07, Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That'd be Tranzeo. Not sure the volume that gets you that price, but I know some who pay that for their 802.11a stuff. It has some nice features, to include even 5 MHz channels. Tranzeo is doing lots of things right and they've earned the loyalty of some WISPs I respect hugely, and that's good enough for me. 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] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
