Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Jack Unger]

Tom,

You disagree - and that's fine - but you disagree WITH WHAT? Please 
re-read what I and others have written.


1. Nowhere does it say that we shouldn't be discussing ideas, opinions, 
and feedback. I only stated that IN MY OPINION, I didn't feel this was a 
priority item for WISPA. If enough people disagree and feel that it IS a 
priority item, then please go ahead and form a committee.


2. Nowhere does it say we shouldn't share our thoughts or discuss the 
issue; we've been doing that.


3. Nowhere does it say we don't need to know more. I've already 
suggested some of the technical questions but your committee is free to 
decide what technical questions need to be asked - and then to seek the 
answers from technically-qualified experts.


If you'll simply re-read the thread you'll see that both the tone and 
the content not only support discussion and debate, the thread is filled 
with discussion and debate. It's only MY opinion that this is not a 
priority issue and that WISPA has more important issues to deal with. At 
least two other people feel that it IS a priority issue; you can ask 
them to volunteer for your committee. If enough people believe this IS a 
priority issue then your committee will be up and running quickly.


It's my opinion that it's NOT appropriate at this time for WISPA to 
submit comments that reflect an OFFICIAL WISPA position - not until 
WISPA HAS a common position. Please study the issues, get experienced 
engineering input, discuss, debate, evaluate, decide and then report 
back. If your committee reaches consensus THEN report the committee's 
conclusions and reasoning and ask for a vote. Then there will be a WISPA 
group-position that can be submitted to the FCC.


If your committee doesn't reach consensus, you can still report the 
technical data, the opinions and the reasoning. Everybody can then make 
up their own minds and decide to submit their own individual comments to 
the FCC. We'll all be better informed because of your work.


jack

(SHEEESH - Why is it 12:40 AM again?)



Tom DeReggi wrote:

I disagree.

The biggest point of this list is that it is a gathering of relevent 
WISP experts.

I want to know the ideas, opinions, and feedback of the members.
Whether WISPA comments officially or forms a committee is irrelevent.  
The membership should share their thoughts, so that those that want to 
comment individually can have a more informed opinion to comment on.


I don't know enough about Licensed, as many of this LIST membership 
doesn't. We need to know more. This should be an open forum topic. We 
can sit around and debate the same old arguements day after day, but it 
gets stale, and we stop growing our knowledge if we do that.  We need 
these fresh new topics, to broaden our minds.


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


- Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz



Brad,

The simple answer (IMHO) is for anyone who wishes to comment to do so 
as an individual.

jack


Brad Belton wrote:

"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study 
the issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The 
simple

question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led 
me to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread 
of the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna 
systems. If that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) 
should be the root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am 
NOT an RF engineer and therefore not truly qualified to make any 
genuine comment on the issue until I hear more from engineers who 
know. If this group wants to devote resources to this issue I am sure 
we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am 
just seeing this as a minor issue. I am sorry to those out there who 
think this makes me short-sighted.

Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:



Brad,

I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
questions, I think it's time for others

Re: [WISPA] fm towers

[Jenco Wireless]

FM kills Ethernet.  Inductors - Period.  Set to 10 Mbps until then.


Brad H





On 3/30/07, Edward J. Hatfield III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Nearly 40 dB of variations in the link S/N ratio? Holy cat crap, Batman!



How accurate is the test equipment yielding that measurement? SNR
variations
of 40 dB means four orders of magnitude in signal levels relative to the
noise floor, a 10,000:1 change in the power ratio. No wonder the bloody
link
isn't stable!



Frankly I'm not inclined to trust the accuracy of those measurements
over-much; it's been my experience that few people own or even have access
to the kind of test equipment (like Network Vector Analyzers and Power
Meters) required to properly trouble shoot microwave systems. But there
obviously IS a problem.



OK, now for the (hopefully) helpful part: My hunch is that the FM
broadcast
signal, being in relatively close proximity to your antenna mount, is
generating harmonics or other spurious energy of sufficient power to
overload the front end of your radio. (Sharp Q, ultra-deep microwave
filters
are expensive and I'd be very surprised if your radio was so equipped).



So, the question before you is: How important is this site to your overall
network? Is it worth the expense of having a properly trained and equipped
microwave field engineer find and characterize the problem, and suggest
some
options for corrective measures?



Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh but sometimes there aren't any easy
answers
to difficult problems .



Hope this helps, Ted



Edward J. Hatfield III, President

E.J. Hatfield & Company

5142 Edgemoor Drive

Norcross, GA  30071-4342  USA

1-770-209-9236 - Office

1-770-209-9238 - Fax

1-770-560-0736 - Sprint

1-678-457-8411 - Cingular

154*273*18   - NexTel



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 4:01 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] fm towers



mikrotik 5.8 ptp links off an FM tower. We have a ptp link with a signal
to
noise of 66 to 103. Our access points will only link for a few seconds and
quit. we have the exact same links on other towers that work great and the
one to this fm tower will not work. any suggestions?

--
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] Wireless ISP's

[John Scrivner]

I don't know who told you that. We had our best growth and highest 
earning year last year and this year looks to break that record. Most 
WISPs I talk to say the same.

Scriv


Matt wrote:


I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Fwd: [OpenCALEA] release v0.5

[Clint Ricker]

FYI

-- Forwarded message --
From: Manish Karir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mar 30, 2007 4:17 PM
Subject: [OpenCALEA] release v0.5
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




All,

I have just place a tar.gz for release v0.5 of the opencalea software.
We wanted to get this out so that more people can start testing things
out and reporting bugs back.
The main features added are:
- batch-start : the ability to start simultaneous tap at multiple
locations
- batch-stop : the ability to stop these taps at multiple sites

- lots of code cleanups and fixes thanks to Jesse Norell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

everyone should upgrade to this release from the 0.4 release.

comments/corrections/patches are welcome.  Experiences from people trying
to run this are also welcome on the list.  Early next week I will try to
outline the new features we want to target for the 0.6 release.


thanks
manish



--
Clint Ricker
Kentnis Technologies
800.783.5753
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones

[David Hughes]

I judge on video quality on my Sprint 6700 smartphone. If I have at least 1
EVDO  bar I can usually get full motion video with good resolution on the
small screen. Sound is pretty good, excellent if you use the stereo
headphones instead of crappy speaker on the phone.

But, it does eat batteries at a bodacious clip (grin).

Dave


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 1:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones

Can you tell me what quality this is? Frames per second? Lines of 
resolution? Image size supported? This is amazing if it can deliver 
decent quality.
Scriv


Peter R. wrote:

> Compression for video is down to 135k to stream video
>
>
> David Hughes wrote:
>
>> Let us hope that the cable companies will also eat the bandwidth that 
>> will
>> be involved in this.  I have a TIVO attached to a Slingbox and use my 
>> cell
>> (Sprint 6700) to watch DC programming anywhere I can get an EVDO 
>> signal or
>> Wi-Fi, but it is a real bandwidth hog.
>> ___
>>
>> MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones
>> Service Could Be Offered As Part of Sprint Nextel Joint Venture with 
>> Cable
>> Operators
>> By Todd Spangler & David Cohen 3/27/2007 8:40:00 PM
>>
>>
>> Orlando, Fla. -- MobiTV CEO Phillip Alvelda said the mobile-technology
>> provider is developing a way for cable operators to let subscribers 
>> stream
>> programming stored on their digital-video recorders to mobile phones.
>>
>> The DVR-to-mobile service could be offered as part of the four 
>> operators'
>> joint venture with Sprint Nextel, which announced Pivot as the new brand
>> name for their mobile-wireless packages Monday at the CTIA Wireless 2007
>> convention here.
>>
>> However, according to Sprint spokeswoman Melinda Tiemeyer, the 
>> Sprint-Cable
>> JV doesn't currently have a DVR-to-mobile-phone feature on its road map.
>> "When we get to that point there are going to be a lot of different 
>> people
>> involved, not just MobiTV," she said in a voice-mail message.
>>  
>>
-- 
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] fm towers

[Edward J. Hatfield III]

Nearly 40 dB of variations in the link S/N ratio? Holy cat crap, Batman!

 

How accurate is the test equipment yielding that measurement? SNR variations
of 40 dB means four orders of magnitude in signal levels relative to the
noise floor, a 10,000:1 change in the power ratio. No wonder the bloody link
isn't stable!

 

Frankly I'm not inclined to trust the accuracy of those measurements
over-much; it's been my experience that few people own or even have access
to the kind of test equipment (like Network Vector Analyzers and Power
Meters) required to properly trouble shoot microwave systems. But there
obviously IS a problem.

 

OK, now for the (hopefully) helpful part: My hunch is that the FM broadcast
signal, being in relatively close proximity to your antenna mount, is
generating harmonics or other spurious energy of sufficient power to
overload the front end of your radio. (Sharp Q, ultra-deep microwave filters
are expensive and I'd be very surprised if your radio was so equipped).

 

So, the question before you is: How important is this site to your overall
network? Is it worth the expense of having a properly trained and equipped
microwave field engineer find and characterize the problem, and suggest some
options for corrective measures?

 

Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh but sometimes there aren't any easy answers
to difficult problems .

 

Hope this helps, Ted

 

Edward J. Hatfield III, President

E.J. Hatfield & Company

5142 Edgemoor Drive

Norcross, GA  30071-4342  USA

1-770-209-9236 - Office

1-770-209-9238 - Fax

1-770-560-0736 - Sprint

1-678-457-8411 - Cingular

154*273*18   - NexTel

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 4:01 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] fm towers

 

mikrotik 5.8 ptp links off an FM tower. We have a ptp link with a signal to
noise of 66 to 103. Our access points will only link for a few seconds and
quit. we have the exact same links on other towers that work great and the
one to this fm tower will not work. any suggestions? 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Tom DeReggi]

Jack,

I have to agree fully with your post, from that point of view.

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


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz



Marlon,

Just for info... see inline...


Marlon K. Schafer wrote:


All due respect right back at ya!  grin

Anyhow, to think that manufacturers all have our best interests at heart 
is a bit naive I think.  What's better for them?  A 4' dish sale or a 
cheap and easy 2' or 1' dish?


DISH SIZE - Licensed microwave links are engineered with the proper 
antenna to deliver the proper amount of fade margin to achieve your 
desired reliability (for example, 99.9%, 99.99%, 99.995%, 99.999%) over 
the actual path in the actual rain zone that the link will be operating 
in. The engineering is all cut and dried. You know before you purchase the 
system what dish size you need to achieve the reliability that you want. 
You also know the dish hardware cost, the dish mounting cost, and the 
largest size dish that the tower can handle at the specific height that 
the terrain and link distance determine is needed. If the cost is too high 
(or the tower too small) you can choose to go with a smaller antenna and 
have less reliability.




I'm not willing to get into technical arguments about this issue.  The 
fact is, each link is different.  Each tower is different.  It should be 
left up to the local operator to figure out what's best.  ESPECIALLY in a 
licensed band.  If they get interference, they can fix it.  If they cause 
interference they have to fix it.


INTERFERENCE - Interference is not left up to the local operator. 
Interference is avoiding by the the company that handles the link 
licensing, not by the WISP operator. A licensing company will do a proper 
frequency search and select a frequency that will not cause interference 
or be interfered with. Freedom from interference is the basic reason for 
selecting (and paying for) a licensed link.




I just don't like the idea of micro managing the pro's in our industry. 
Keep the interference issues dealt with but let folks use the latest and 
greatest technologies available to them.


MICROMANAGING THE PROS - Nobody in their right mind would micromanage a 
licensed link design engineer and everybody wants to use the best 
technology that they can afford.




If I want to build a link across the train tracks, 100', there's NO 
reason for a large dish.  Small dishes with lower power radios will do 
the trick nicely.  And if we mandate atpc we can get away with 3 to 5 (or 
some other such really small number) fade margins too.  No need for the 
typical microwave 30 dB fade margins.


SHORT LINKS AND ATPC - Once again, nobody would advocate using a large 
antenna on a short link because a small antenna that provides the desired 
reliability will cost a lot less than a large antenna. We're not the 
experts when it comes to "mandating" ATPC. How do we know; perhaps ATPC is 
already in use? If it's not, we're not the fade margin experts who can 
state unequivocally that ATPC is needed. If ATPC is not in use, what are 
the costs to redesign a $30,000 licensed microwave link to add ATPC? I'd 
suggest leaving the issue of ATPC to the experienced microwave equipment 
design engineers who do this for a living every day.





The problem with trying to engineer everything is that the real world 
often doesn't give a rats behind what the engineers say.  I've spend my 
adult life (such as it is) finding ways to make what works on paper 
really work in the field.


ENGINEERING EVERYTHING - Engineering a real-world microwave link is a 
science that is at least 60 years old. When you spend $30,000 in hardware 
costs plus $10,000 in equipment mounting costs for a licensed microwave 
link, believe me - you want it fully engineered so it will deliver the 
reliability that you need. An experienced microwave engineer can design a 
microwave link with whatever reliability you want. That's a lot different 
than you or me finding a way to "make it work". "Making it work" is 
nowhere near the same thing as engineering a wireless link to deliver 
99,999 out of 100,000 packets error-free 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.


If we're going to be going on record with the FCC, we need to be going on 
record with actual, factual engineering knowledge. IMHO, "making it work" 
is just not good enough.


jack



We need the paper, to be sure.  But we also need the flexibility to do 
what's expedient in the field.


marlon

- Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz



Marlon,

With all due respect... We need solid engineering arguements if we're 
going to present an official WISPA positio

Re: [WISPA] price

[Tom DeReggi]

Charles,

The prices are broken down by speed that correspond to specific modulations. 
Do the higher price units open support for higher modulation, or is the 
speed limiting based on bandwdith management, or channel width?


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:04 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] price


Depends on the config -- per end @ LIST (2 sides = 1 link), you're
looking at

9 Mb: 1940
18 Mb: 2245
27 Mb: 2840
36 Mb: 3340
54 Mb: 4540
108 Mb: 5440

-Charles


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


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:49 PM
To: WISPA General List; isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
Subject: [WISPA] price

Hi,

Anyone happen to know the MSRP of the new Redline AN-80 5.4ghz p2p
system?

Travis
Microserv
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Tom DeReggi]

Agreed. But the fight is not to allow smaller dishes in 11Ghz, its to fight 
from allowing smaller dishes.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:08 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


Hi Bob,

Short is relative to rain zone

In your world, where rain isn't that much of a problem -- it's nice to
have 18 GHz to go 8+ miles on a 2' dish
However, go to East TX or LA, and in those rain zones, being able to use
something smaller for 5 miles would be nice

That said, now that someone has gotten a 2.5' dish accepted for 11 GHz,
A fight over 0.5' of antenna, IMO, isn't that big of a deal, a better
fight would be to allow 3-4' dishes for 6 GHz

-Charles


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


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bob Moldashel
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:21 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

11 Ghz.Short distance hops.NO

There is spectrum for short hops.  There is spectrum for medium hops.
There is even spectrum for long hops.

11 Ghz. is not appropriate for short hops.  Not when there is 18, 23,
24, 38, 60 and 80 Ghz.  Even smack in the center of NYC I can get higher
channels to do what is needed for short hops. There is no reason to use
11 Ghz. period for short hops...

-B-


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Tom DeReggi]

The idea is to put yourself in a spot that you won't feel the squeeze.

When enough of your gear is paid for, enough of your cell sites are traded, 
once you've reached a scale to have rock bottom bandwidth, and spread your 
business around without all your eggs in one basket/market, it becomes 
easier.  One of your markets can subsidize the other.   When you send the 
message that under pricing you doesn't harm you, and doesn't help them 
succeed, they have no motive to continue wasting their money in that type of 
marketing.  This is the year to figure out how to make your business less 
vulnerable, and be more competitive. The sooner one acknowledge that the 
competition is comming, the sooner one can prepair for it.  If you aren't in 
a position to prepare for it, the only choice is to sell it to someone that 
is, or milk it for all its worth while it dies. But the idea that a First-in 
WISP can't compete, is wrong.  What you need to do is identify the Anchor 
tenants and get them as fast as you can, preferably in long term contracts, 
to subsidize the others.  Ironically, the markets that I'm growing fastest 
right now, are my most competitive markets.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Alan Cain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?



George Rogato wrote:

Travis Johnson wrote:
I agree with almost everything you said... except the "triple play" 
revenue... Qwest is doing a triple play system (Qwest DSL, Qwest VoIP 
and DirecTV) for $99 per month with $0 install.


Also, I don't have a problem with 30-50 year ROI for fiber... but 
ClearWire is wireless... all the equipment will have to swapped out in 5 
years.


Travis
Microserv


Qwest is finally doing better. More dsl revenue.

But I wonder what the 99.00 doesn't include and how much the total 
package costs, with extra charges.


They never tell the total price, they just quote a unit price.


And quoting unit prices is fully effective enough. One of my POPs has gone 
from 20 customers to 1 customer, as Qwest has aggressively targeted the 
area with phone calls to each (!) of my customers 4, 5 and 6 times a week, 
offering 1.7 Mbps service for 37.50/month. The contract is vaguely and 
worded in very fine print so no one gets that it is an introductory price, 
with miscellaneous services and taxes extra. Many will probably rue the 
day, but I can't hold on to that POP with one customer.


And how the heck did they get so specific on the customer list? Do they 
offer a cut to judas goats?


I begin to think the big guys are now starting the big squeeze. Oh, 
expletive deleted.

--
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] Why Customers leave

[Jack Unger]

Tom DeReggi wrote:

Not an accurate list, it leaves off a big category.

- Customer doesn't know who or what they are using, nor why.  Therefore 
makes uninformed decisions.


So lack of communication with client base I believe is one of the 
biggest reasons for custoemr churn.  For example, customer's staff 
change, will result in a new decission maker not being aware of 
history.  I believe our best most trouble free customers (that fall off 
the radar) are the most likely to leave. Because we forget to remind 
them we are there and why they chose us.



   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm


I just don't believe that.  Are most businesses that stupid to allow 



That may be what Peter is trying to get us to think about and/or address.

It takes only one bad customer experience which can easily be provided 
by one employee who either:


1. Lacks customer skills, or
2. Who is having a bad day, or
3. Who has just been shit upon by his or her manager

to "sour" a customer on a whole company.



that to happen?

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


- Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:40 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Why Customers leave



Why do customers leave?

   * 1% die
   * 3% move
   * 5% develop other relationships
   * 9% competitive reasons
   * 14% product dissatisfaction
   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm

Source: U.S. News and World Report

What to do about it?
http://www.rad-info.net/whyleave.htm

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Tom DeReggi]

I disagree.

The biggest point of this list is that it is a gathering of relevent WISP 
experts.

I want to know the ideas, opinions, and feedback of the members.
Whether WISPA comments officially or forms a committee is irrelevent.  The 
membership should share their thoughts, so that those that want to comment 
individually can have a more informed opinion to comment on.


I don't know enough about Licensed, as many of this LIST membership doesn't. 
We need to know more. This should be an open forum topic. We can sit around 
and debate the same old arguements day after day, but it gets stale, and we 
stop growing our knowledge if we do that.  We need these fresh new topics, 
to broaden our minds.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz



Brad,

The simple answer (IMHO) is for anyone who wishes to comment to do so as 
an individual.

jack


Brad Belton wrote:

"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the 
issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The 
simple

question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are here. 
It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me to 
believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which determines 
the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of the spurious 
side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If that is the 
case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the root of the 
discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer and 
therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the issue 
until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to devote 
resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 
11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. I am 
sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.

Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:



Brad,

I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There was 
an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken the time 
(that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right questions, I think 
it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's an important issue.


Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 GHz 
antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available when 
they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, Crown 
Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies would want 
to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of frequencies or 
the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower properties.


Have a good day,

jack



Brad Belton wrote:



Hello Jack,

Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
11GHz

question/concerns.

Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't have time for 
this.
John simply dittoed your comments, so what was the group left to 
believe?  I
apologize if I misunderstood your intent.  Your questions/response below 
illustrate the type of post I would have

expected from you in the first place.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,

I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can come 
from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be correctly 
answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments with the FCC 
that are technically incomplete or technically incorrect.


Here's a repost of my original post.

** Begin Original Post *

It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.


I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may want 
to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need to be 
focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.


I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will 

Re: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

[Dawn DiPietro]

Matt,

If that is what the buzz was at WISPCON then it sounds like they were 
reaching for straws. Since they canceled the last few shows before the 
most recent show maybe it just lost momentum. You might want to head to 
some other industry related trade shows also to find out for yourself if 
what you heard is true or not. There are a few trade shows coming up in 
the coming months where wireless is predominantly featured.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Matt wrote:

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Why Customers leave

[Tom DeReggi]

Not an accurate list, it leaves off a big category.

- Customer doesn't know who or what they are using, nor why.  Therefore 
makes uninformed decisions.


So lack of communication with client base I believe is one of the biggest 
reasons for custoemr churn.  For example, customer's staff change, will 
result in a new decission maker not being aware of history.  I believe our 
best most trouble free customers (that fall off the radar) are the most 
likely to leave. Because we forget to remind them we are there and why they 
chose us.



   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm


I just don't believe that.  Are most businesses that stupid to allow that to 
happen?


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


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

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:40 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Why Customers leave



Why do customers leave?

   * 1% die
   * 3% move
   * 5% develop other relationships
   * 9% competitive reasons
   * 14% product dissatisfaction
   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm

Source: U.S. News and World Report

What to do about it?
http://www.rad-info.net/whyleave.htm

--
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] Wireless ISP's

[Dawn DiPietro]

Tell us how you really feel.
;-)

JohnnyO wrote:

There weren't that many at the last WISPCON because of the peckerhead
who runs WISPCON 


JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt
  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

[Tom DeReggi]

Funny. That should raise some feedback :-)

WISPs are growing faster than ever, and most WISPs aren't selling out, 
because its to early to sell out.
As WISPs get more educated and mature there is less for them to learn at the 
shows, and harder for them to leave their demanding business growth.
There are however fewer startup WISPs each year, as the later in the game 
one enters the lesss chance they have to grow to the stage to get an ROI.


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


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

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:04 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's



I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt
--
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] Wireless ISP's

[Travis Johnson]

LMAO

JohnnyO wrote:

There weren't that many at the last WISPCON because of the peckerhead
who runs WISPCON 


JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt
  

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

[JohnnyO]

There weren't that many at the last WISPCON because of the peckerhead
who runs WISPCON 

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Wireless ISP's

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt
-- 
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] Wireless ISP's

[George Rogato]

Where did you hear this Matt?



Matt wrote:

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

Matt


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Wireless ISP's

[Matt]

I was just wandering.  I have heard that wireless ISP's are on the
decline and most of the ones that remain are selling out or just
holding there own.  Is that true?  I heard there were not as many at
the last wispcon due to that.

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

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

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

RE: [WISPA] New Principal Member of WISPA - Surfmore.net

[Jeff Broadwick]

Hi Ray/Jean,

Welcome!

I have to ask, do you pronounce the name of your town PulaskE (like ski) or
do you pronounce it PulaskI (like sky)?  

I ask because there is a Pulaski County near me and they use the "sky"
version and I have no idea why.  

Jeff
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:05 PM
To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WISPA] New Principal Member of WISPA - Surfmore.net

Please welcome Ray and Jean Hill of Surfmore.net as WISPA's newest Principal
Members! Thank you for your support. Welcome to WISPA! Here is a brief
introduction in their own words:

We have been an ISP since October 1999, starting out with just dial-up and
ISDN services. We seen the need for speed and then starting offering DSL as
well. We were hesitant about going wireless because of the many hills and
trees in our area. We choose 900 MHz Waverider equipment for our first &
second access point, for our third, fourth and fifth we are using Microtek
equipment. We also offer computer repairs and sales and services. We offer
web hosting & design. We serve Giles County Tennessee. Heading toward
northern Alabama with our wireless services. 
We try to provide the countryside with broadband wireless. So far they love
it.

Raymond & Jean Hill
Surfmore.Net & Smwb.Net
16724 W. College St
Pulaski, Tn. 38478
931-363-7700
931-363-7760 fax
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] IPTV

[Peter R.]

There is a pretty good article about Telco TV here:
http://www.broadbandproperties.com/2007issues/jan07issues/independenttelco-Ken%20Pyle.pdf

--


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] New Principal Member of WISPA - Surfmore.net

[John Scrivner]

Please welcome Ray and Jean Hill of Surfmore.net as WISPA's newest 
Principal Members! Thank you for your support. Welcome to WISPA! Here is 
a brief introduction in their own words:


We have been an ISP since October 1999, starting out with just dial-up 
and ISDN services. We seen the need for speed and then starting offering 
DSL as well. We were hesitant about going wireless because of the many 
hills and trees in our area. We choose 900 MHz Waverider equipment for 
our first & second access point, for our third, fourth and fifth we are 
using Microtek equipment. We also offer computer repairs and sales and 
services. We offer web hosting & design. We serve Giles County 
Tennessee. Heading toward northern Alabama with our wireless services. 
We try to provide the countryside with broadband wireless. So far they 
love it.


Raymond & Jean Hill
Surfmore.Net & Smwb.Net
16724 W. College St
Pulaski, Tn. 38478
931-363-7700
931-363-7760 fax
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Our First WISP Consultant Vendor Member - Butch Evans

[John Scrivner]

I am sure many of you know a friend of mine, Butch Evans, who has been 
here helping for as long as I can remember on all the WISP lists out 
there. Butch is one of my favorite people in this industry. He is not 
just a good consultant, he is a good person who genuinely cares about 
the people as much as the work. He is a friend and I am very happy to be 
making his introduction here today. Butch has helped WISPA by serving on 
our nominations committee and CALEA committee and has supported our 
efforts to build WISPA since the beginning. He signed up as an Associate 
Member a while back and has now upgraded his membership to a full Vendor 
Membership in WISPA. This makes him our first WISP Consultant Vendor 
Member I believe. You are one of the truly good ones Butch Evans and I 
thank you for making this step up in WISPA. Here is some background 
information about Butch in his own words:


In January of 1994, I began working as an ISP with a small company in 
rural south east Missouri.  I have been (since then) either an employee 
of or partner in 4 ISPs.  The ISP business is a passion for me.  I have 
spent countless hours reading and "tinkering" with my network.  During 
the period of 1994-2006, I have become quite proficient with network 
designs that make an ISP network behave as it should.


In 2001, I began using Mikrotik RouterOS on my network to build out my 
infrastructure.  This software (in my opinion) fills nearly every need 
that most small ISPs or other small businesses could ever need for a 
routing infrastructure.  I began working on a curriculum to train other 
ISPs about this software in 2003 as part of a partnership with 
WISP-Router that we called WISP-Training.  The WISP-Training 
organization has trained HUNDREDS of WISPs, small business, hobbyists 
and government employees to use the Mikrotik software.  I am 1 of only 2 
certified Mikrotik RouterOS trainers in the United States.


In February 2006, I went full time in consulting and training.  My time 
is dedicated to assisting WISPs in building, troubleshooting and 
designing their networks.  As much as I misss being an ISP, teaching has 
become a real passion for me.  I now have 2 fully developed training 
courses and will (by the end of the year) have another 2.  I have 
training partnerships with several WISP equipment resellers and am 
working to develop further relationships in this area.


Butch Evans Consulting is passionate about the WISP industry and our 
goal is to see your business succeed through proper network design, 
education and management of existing resources.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6
Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] fm towers

[rbarnhart]

mikrotik 5.8 ptp links off an FM tower

We have a ptp link with a signal to noise of 66 to 103

Our access points will only link for a few seconds and quit

we have the exact same links on other towers that work great
and the one to this fm tower will not work

any suggestions?



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[George Rogato]

Alan Cain wrote:

What speeds and price were you offering that they picked of most of 
your subs?




40.00 per month, 3 Mbps (actual). And we do offer hand holding, 
antivirus filtering, spam filtering and usually free truck rolls for 
problems (we only charge for the most clearly definable "not our fault" 
issues, such as computer repairs).


We pride ourselves on customer service. Every one of the departing has 
said "so sorry to go - loved your service". Boils down to perfect 
service and perceived lowest price.


Same thing I do here. Customer service is everything. Probably one 
reason we have not took a bath since both DSL and Cable turned on years ago.


We get quite a few conversions from cable and dsl to us, and that always 
makes me happy. Although we do loose a few to them as well.


The majority of the time we loose to a dsl sub, it's price and it's 
usually misinformed price.


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] CALEA Test

[Clint Ricker]

Again with the CALEA.

The following is the contact if you want to "test" / verify that your
CALEA implimentation works.

--
Mr. John Cutright (Manager CIU Test Team) at 703-632-6484 or at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Thanks,
--
Clint Ricker
Kentnis Technologies
800.783.5753
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Hello John,

Nope, I'm not a RF Engineer and not qualified to make formal comment on the
petition.  Does the affect of smaller antennas really need to be revisited?
Isn't it safe to say smaller antennas result in wider patterns?  Wider
patterns result in less frequency reuse ability and the basis of the
resistance to the petition?

The question was; should we as a group care about this?  The initial
response Jack and you made was misinterpreted as "we don't have time for
it."

I among others commented that we should care and why.
Jack clarified his intent was not that he didn't care.
I commented no harm no foul.
You continue to beat a dead horse by suggesting a committee be formed?

What am I missing?  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,
Do you care to address my comments about F/D ratios and beam width? I 
think that is more pertinent in mitigating interference than dish size. 
If there is one qualified RF engineer in this group who can post a 
single message here that is thought out about the issues around 11 GHz 
dish size, F/D ratios, etc. then we can and should consider the 
possibility of addressing this as a genuine concern of WISPA. If all we 
have are people saying we should comment on this with no basis of RF 
fact as to why we should comment then I will stand by my original 
assertion that it is not an issue we will be addressing here.

Are you an engineer Brad? Do you know the actual facts concerning this 
issue along with the outcomes of supporting or denying support to the 
petition? I guess we should address this issue since it looks like we 
are addressing the idea of addressing this over and over again. If this 
issue is that important to you, Brad, then why don't you Chair this 
effort yourself and convince us of what the issues are, what the RF 
facts are supporting the issues and why and how we should comment as 
WISPA. I am not trying to stop you from helping, quite the contrary. You 
obviously feel strongly about this issue so please send us what you find 
so we can make an informed decision on how best to proceed.
Scriv



Brad Belton wrote:

>"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
>issues."
>
>That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.
>
>
>No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the
issue
>as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
>question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
>comment on it.
>
>Best,
>
>
>Brad
>
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of John Scrivner
>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>
>The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
>here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
>to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
>determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
>the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
>that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
>root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
>and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
>issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
>devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
>work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
>I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.
>Scriv
>
>
>Jack Unger wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Brad,
>>
>>I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
>>was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
>>the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
>>questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
>>an important issue.
>>
>>Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
>>GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
>>frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
>>when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
>>Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
>>would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 
>>frequencies or the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower 
>>properties.
>>
>>Have a good day,
>>
>>jack
>>
>>
>>
>>Brad Belton wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hello Jack,
>>>
>>>Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
>>>11GHz
>>>question/concerns.
>>>
>>>Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't ha

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Alan Cain]

Dylan Oliver wrote:

What exactly is it you're going to file against this student?


That is the question, isn't it. I am not a lawyer. Just pissed.

I could file him with a nice rasp. (that is a joke)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones

[John Scrivner]

Can you tell me what quality this is? Frames per second? Lines of 
resolution? Image size supported? This is amazing if it can deliver 
decent quality.

Scriv


Peter R. wrote:


Compression for video is down to 135k to stream video


David Hughes wrote:

Let us hope that the cable companies will also eat the bandwidth that 
will
be involved in this.  I have a TIVO attached to a Slingbox and use my 
cell
(Sprint 6700) to watch DC programming anywhere I can get an EVDO 
signal or

Wi-Fi, but it is a real bandwidth hog.
___

MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones
Service Could Be Offered As Part of Sprint Nextel Joint Venture with 
Cable

Operators
By Todd Spangler & David Cohen 3/27/2007 8:40:00 PM


Orlando, Fla. -- MobiTV CEO Phillip Alvelda said the mobile-technology
provider is developing a way for cable operators to let subscribers 
stream

programming stored on their digital-video recorders to mobile phones.

The DVR-to-mobile service could be offered as part of the four 
operators'

joint venture with Sprint Nextel, which announced Pivot as the new brand
name for their mobile-wireless packages Monday at the CTIA Wireless 2007
convention here.

However, according to Sprint spokeswoman Melinda Tiemeyer, the 
Sprint-Cable

JV doesn't currently have a DVR-to-mobile-phone feature on its road map.
"When we get to that point there are going to be a lot of different 
people

involved, not just MobiTV," she said in a voice-mail message.
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Peter R.]

Loved your service buy left?
They didn't really know what they had then.

Do you combat these special offers with a mailing comparing the real 
billing from Qwest with yours?
Plus add in the extras plus add in the time for one service call to 
Qwest per billing period.


Alan Cain wrote:

40.00 per month, 3 Mbps (actual). And we do offer hand holding, 
antivirus filtering, spam filtering and usually free truck rolls for 
problems (we only charge for the most clearly definable "not our 
fault" issues, such as computer repairs).


We pride ourselves on customer service. Every one of the departing has 
said "so sorry to go - loved your service". Boils down to perfect 
service and perceived lowest price.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[John Scrivner]

Brad,
Do you care to address my comments about F/D ratios and beam width? I 
think that is more pertinent in mitigating interference than dish size. 
If there is one qualified RF engineer in this group who can post a 
single message here that is thought out about the issues around 11 GHz 
dish size, F/D ratios, etc. then we can and should consider the 
possibility of addressing this as a genuine concern of WISPA. If all we 
have are people saying we should comment on this with no basis of RF 
fact as to why we should comment then I will stand by my original 
assertion that it is not an issue we will be addressing here.


Are you an engineer Brad? Do you know the actual facts concerning this 
issue along with the outcomes of supporting or denying support to the 
petition? I guess we should address this issue since it looks like we 
are addressing the idea of addressing this over and over again. If this 
issue is that important to you, Brad, then why don't you Chair this 
effort yourself and convince us of what the issues are, what the RF 
facts are supporting the issues and why and how we should comment as 
WISPA. I am not trying to stop you from helping, quite the contrary. You 
obviously feel strongly about this issue so please send us what you find 
so we can make an informed decision on how best to proceed.

Scriv



Brad Belton wrote:


"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.

Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:

 


Brad,

I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
an important issue.


Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 
frequencies or the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower 
properties.


Have a good day,

jack



Brad Belton wrote:

   


Hello Jack,

Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
11GHz

question/concerns.

Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't have time for 
this.
John simply dittoed your comments, so what was the group left to 
believe?  I
apologize if I misunderstood your intent.  
Your questions/response below illustrate the type of post I would have

expected from you in the first place.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,

I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can 
come from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be 
correctly answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments 
with the FCC that are technically incomplete or technically incorrect.


Here's a repost of my original post.

** Begin Original Post *

It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.


I'm not sure this dish-size issue would imp

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Dylan Oliver]

What exactly is it you're going to file against this student?

--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Alan Cain]

Dylan Oliver wrote:

Alan,

You offer wireless service at $40/mo, don't you? I'm surprised that 
anyone

left you for $2.50 a month. Inertia alone is worth far more to people ..
especially when it comes to things like changing internet addresses, 
and the
prospect of having to learn something new. How fast is your service in 
that
area? Have customers experienced any big outages recently? Could you 
*ask*

them to rate your service vs. Qwest's, as they now experience it? Include
points like: Speed .. Extra Services .. Price .. Quality of Customer 
Support

.. Stability of Service.

I can only imagine that Qwest targeted the whole area, not just your
customers. How could they possibly know, short of driving around 
looking for

antennas? Why would they waste the time looking when they could just call
everyone in the area?

Best,
I *AM* probably certifiably paranoid. I have had to work with our 
favorite Grant County PUD (which is currently being sued for antitrust 
activities against local ISPs - you should check out www.sliderule.net 
for some Very Interesting Reading), and having had my face rubbed into 
how agencies and companies can truly act, I am a bit sensitive.


I have JUST found out that they have a retired Qwest telecom  engineer  
guy in the neighborhood who has been urging management to push hard; 
there is a new vacation home development coming on strong which would 
have been a big payoff for my investment there. A vacation spot for 
Microsofties (we are on the shores of a beautiful lake in Eastern 
Washington).


And, I also found out yesterday that there is the issue of the 
Electrical Engineering/Computer Science student who has a Motorola 
Frequency Hopper. His senior project this winter (2006) was 
"Non-line-of-sight still image and telemetry communications using 
certain wireless technologies". He has been turning it on and off (yes, 
I can see it on my spectrum analyzer). Yesterday was very informative 
and a little discouraging.


He had the gall to tell a non-technical neighbor that he had a frequency 
hopper at his house. We had a talk, and he said "Gee, I'm innocent - you 
don't suppose my smartbridge could fail that way, do you? Gosh, that 
would be like a denial of service attack - you do believe me, don't you?"


I am pondering filing against him; that makes no friends but acts in a 
preventive fashion. I imagine everyone on this list has a strong opinion 
on that one.


Sometimes you can have ticks, fleas and tapeworms. Sometimes they can 
suck you dry.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Travis Johnson]

I have a suggestion for you... your pricing is currently at $40/month. 
That's the same price we had for the previous 4 years and we just 
changed it... to $39.95 and guess what? It made a huge difference. We 
changed all of our existing customers, and made all the changes on all 
of our other accounts as well... it cost us a few hundred per month from 
existing customers, but we have made that back easily by new signups.


There is a HUGE perceived difference from $37.95 to $40 vs $37.95 to 
$39.95. You should consider such a change... it will make a difference.


Travis
Microserv

Alan Cain wrote:

George Rogato wrote:



Alan Cain wrote:

And quoting unit prices is fully effective enough. One of my POPs 
has gone from 20 customers to 1 customer, as Qwest has aggressively 
targeted the area with phone calls to each (!) of my customers 4, 5 
and 6 times a week, offering 1.7 Mbps service for 37.50/month. The 
contract is vaguely and worded in very fine print so no one gets 
that it is an introductory price, with miscellaneous services and 
taxes extra. Many will probably rue the day, but I can't hold on to 
that POP with one customer.


And how the heck did they get so specific on the customer list? Do 
they offer a cut to judas goats?



They do the same thing around here.

What speeds and price were you offering that they picked of most of 
your subs?




40.00 per month, 3 Mbps (actual). And we do offer hand holding, 
antivirus filtering, spam filtering and usually free truck rolls for 
problems (we only charge for the most clearly definable "not our 
fault" issues, such as computer repairs).


We pride ourselves on customer service. Every one of the departing has 
said "so sorry to go - loved your service". Boils down to perfect 
service and perceived lowest price.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Alan Cain]

George Rogato wrote:



Alan Cain wrote:

And quoting unit prices is fully effective enough. One of my POPs has 
gone from 20 customers to 1 customer, as Qwest has aggressively 
targeted the area with phone calls to each (!) of my customers 4, 5 
and 6 times a week, offering 1.7 Mbps service for 37.50/month. The 
contract is vaguely and worded in very fine print so no one gets that 
it is an introductory price, with miscellaneous services and taxes 
extra. Many will probably rue the day, but I can't hold on to that 
POP with one customer.


And how the heck did they get so specific on the customer list? Do 
they offer a cut to judas goats?



They do the same thing around here.

What speeds and price were you offering that they picked of most of 
your subs?




40.00 per month, 3 Mbps (actual). And we do offer hand holding, 
antivirus filtering, spam filtering and usually free truck rolls for 
problems (we only charge for the most clearly definable "not our fault" 
issues, such as computer repairs).


We pride ourselves on customer service. Every one of the departing has 
said "so sorry to go - loved your service". Boils down to perfect 
service and perceived lowest price.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Why Customers leave

[George Rogato]

Thats a good list Peter.

My broadband churn is almost 100% people dying and moving. I think it's 
like 2:1 moving over dying, Thank god the housing market is in the toilet.


Every week I open the newspaper and see which of my customers passed 
away. This week I lost 2. One a broadband sub and the other a dial up sub.
Aside from the fact that they are no longer paying me, it's sad to watch 
one's life end so suddenly.



Peter R. wrote:

Why do customers leave?

   * 1% die
   * 3% move
   * 5% develop other relationships
   * 9% competitive reasons
   * 14% product dissatisfaction
   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm

Source: U.S. News and World Report

What to do about it?
http://www.rad-info.net/whyleave.htm



--
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/

[WISPA] Why Customers leave

[Peter R.]

Why do customers leave?

   * 1% die
   * 3% move
   * 5% develop other relationships
   * 9% competitive reasons
   * 14% product dissatisfaction
   * 68% perceived indifference by a representative of your firm

Source: U.S. News and World Report

What to do about it?
http://www.rad-info.net/whyleave.htm

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Jack Unger]

Brad,

The simple answer (IMHO) is for anyone who wishes to comment to do so as 
an individual.

jack


Brad Belton wrote:

"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.

Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:



Brad,

I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
an important issue.


Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 
frequencies or the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower 
properties.


Have a good day,

jack



Brad Belton wrote:



Hello Jack,

Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
11GHz

question/concerns.

Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't have time for 
this.
John simply dittoed your comments, so what was the group left to 
believe?  I
apologize if I misunderstood your intent.  
Your questions/response below illustrate the type of post I would have

expected from you in the first place.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,

I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can 
come from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be 
correctly answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments 
with the FCC that are technically incomplete or technically incorrect.


Here's a repost of my original post.

** Begin Original Post *

It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.


I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may 
want to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need 
to be focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.


I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will 
probably deal with adequately, without harming our interests. When we 
decide to purchase a licensed 11 GHz link, we'd be buying it from 
them anyway.


Finally, WISPA doesn't have an engineering staff that can adequately 
analyze the technical implications and prepare an informed technical 
response to submit to the FCC.


 End Original Post *


NOWHERE did I say that the licensed frequency bands are not important 
to WISPS. Licensed backhauls are very important to WISPs. WISPs 
SHOULD use licensed backhauls wherever interference levels are high, 
where reliability is crucial, where throughput needs are high, and/or 
where full duplex links are needed.


NOWHERE did I say that the focus of the group should be limited to 
unlicensed frequencies only.


TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR, I will restate each original paragraph and I 
will list the questions that each paragraph is implicitly asking.





*

Re: [WISPA] MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones

[Peter R.]

Compression for video is down to 135k to stream video


David Hughes wrote:


Let us hope that the cable companies will also eat the bandwidth that will
be involved in this.  I have a TIVO attached to a Slingbox and use my cell
(Sprint 6700) to watch DC programming anywhere I can get an EVDO signal or
Wi-Fi, but it is a real bandwidth hog.
___

MobiTV to Link Cable DVRs to Phones
Service Could Be Offered As Part of Sprint Nextel Joint Venture with Cable
Operators
By Todd Spangler & David Cohen 3/27/2007 8:40:00 PM


Orlando, Fla. -- MobiTV CEO Phillip Alvelda said the mobile-technology
provider is developing a way for cable operators to let subscribers stream
programming stored on their digital-video recorders to mobile phones.

The DVR-to-mobile service could be offered as part of the four operators'
joint venture with Sprint Nextel, which announced Pivot as the new brand
name for their mobile-wireless packages Monday at the CTIA Wireless 2007
convention here.

However, according to Sprint spokeswoman Melinda Tiemeyer, the Sprint-Cable
JV doesn't currently have a DVR-to-mobile-phone feature on its road map.
"When we get to that point there are going to be a lot of different people
involved, not just MobiTV," she said in a voice-mail message.
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Dylan Oliver]

Alan,

You offer wireless service at $40/mo, don't you? I'm surprised that anyone
left you for $2.50 a month. Inertia alone is worth far more to people ..
especially when it comes to things like changing internet addresses, and the
prospect of having to learn something new. How fast is your service in that
area? Have customers experienced any big outages recently? Could you *ask*
them to rate your service vs. Qwest's, as they now experience it? Include
points like: Speed .. Extra Services .. Price .. Quality of Customer Support
.. Stability of Service.

I can only imagine that Qwest targeted the whole area, not just your
customers. How could they possibly know, short of driving around looking for
antennas? Why would they waste the time looking when they could just call
everyone in the area?

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] squeeze is on

[Peter R.]

Don't you have customers sign contracts?

The thing is if it is just the price and they are leaving, then you need 
to do something extra to make it sticky.


The RBOCs have gotten that it is more than connectivity. They now offer 
firewall, anti-virus, anti-spyware, and security suites for extra MRC.


They bundle (so that people have no idea what they are paying).

WISPs have a similar problem to Y! and AOL. So take some cues like 
giving them a storage locker, data back-up, address book saver, blogs, 
classifieds, photo album, classes, seminars, child internet nanny, 
eSecurity, etc.
Let them keep their email if they leave -- so you still get an MRC and 
you still have a connection with the customer.



- Peter

George Rogato wrote:



Alan Cain wrote:

And quoting unit prices is fully effective enough. One of my POPs has 
gone from 20 customers to 1 customer, as Qwest has aggressively 
targeted the area with phone calls to each (!) of my customers 4, 5 
and 6 times a week, offering 1.7 Mbps service for 37.50/month. The 
contract is vaguely and worded in very fine print so no one gets that 
it is an introductory price, with miscellaneous services and taxes 
extra. Many will probably rue the day, but I can't hold on to that 
POP with one customer.


And how the heck did they get so specific on the customer list? Do 
they offer a cut to judas goats?




They do the same thing around here.

What speeds and price were you offering that they picked of most of 
your subs?



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.
Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:

> Brad,
>
> I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
> was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
> the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
> questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
> an important issue.
>
> Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
> GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
> frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
> when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
> Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
> would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 
> frequencies or the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower 
> properties.
>
> Have a good day,
>
> jack
>
>
>
> Brad Belton wrote:
>
>> Hello Jack,
>>
>> Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
>> 11GHz
>> question/concerns.
>>
>> Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't have time for 
>> this.
>> John simply dittoed your comments, so what was the group left to 
>> believe?  I
>> apologize if I misunderstood your intent.  
>> Your questions/response below illustrate the type of post I would have
>> expected from you in the first place.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>>
>> Brad,
>>
>> I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can 
>> come from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be 
>> correctly answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments 
>> with the FCC that are technically incomplete or technically incorrect.
>>
>> Here's a repost of my original post.
>>
>> ** Begin Original Post *
>>
>> It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
>> changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.
>>
>> I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may 
>> want to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need 
>> to be focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.
>>
>> I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will 
>> probably deal with adequately, without harming our interests. When we 
>> decide to purchase a licensed 11 GHz link, we'd be buying it from 
>> them anyway.
>>
>> Finally, WISPA doesn't have an engineering staff that can adequately 
>> analyze the technical implications and prepare an informed technical 
>> response to submit to the FCC.
>>
>>  End Original Post *
>>
>>
>> NOWHERE did I say that the licensed frequency bands are not important 
>> to WISPS. Licensed backhauls are very important to WISPs. WISPs 
>> SHOULD use licensed backhauls wherever interference levels are high, 
>> where reliability is crucial, where throughput needs are high, and/or 
>> where full duplex links are needed.
>>
>> NOWHERE did I say that the focus of the group should be limited to 
>> unlicensed frequencies only.
>>
>> TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR, I will restate each original paragraph and I 
>> will list the questions that each paragraph

Re: [WISPA] Atlanta Police and One Ring Networks Team Up To Fight Crime the Hi-tech Way

[Matt Liotta]

George Rogato wrote:

2 questions Matt.
What cameras are you using.

Vicon

and

How did you become one of the largest wireless providers in the nation?

Not sure what you are asking exactly... we became large by growing fast.

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

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Atlanta Police and One Ring Networks Team Up To Fight Crime the Hi-tech Way

[Matt Liotta]

Jack Unger wrote:

So... what kind of cameras are you using, Matt?
We are not the camera vendor; just the backhaul provider. The cameras 
though are from Vicon.


-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Martin: Broadband Wireless Must Be on ‘Same Footing’

[Mike Healy]

Orlando, Fla. -- Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin J. 
Martin, speaking at the CTIA Wireless 2007  
conference here, said broadband-wireless services need to be "on the 
same footing" as wired high-speed-Internet services from cable and 
telephone companies.


"It’s going to be important for consumers to develop that third 
broadband pipe as a competitor to DSL [digital subscriber line] and 
cable," he added.


Martin pointed to the FCC’s ruling issued last week 
, 
which declared that wireless-broadband Internet-access service will be 
treated as an information service under the Communications Act of 1934. 
The ruling, released March 23, means broadband-wireless services will be 
regulated the same way cable’s high-speed services are, rather than as 
traditional telecommunications services.


Martin said it was "critical" that broadband-wireless services receive 
"the same lighter regulatory treatment as other information services. It 
was important to put broadband wireless on the same footing as cable and 
DSL."



The full article can be found at: 
http://multichannel.com/article/CA6428126.html


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] CALEA compliance

[Clint Ricker]

I've posted a lot on CALEA here, and some of you are likely tired of
hearing from me, if you haven't already filtered :)

Just a general point from reading:

Some of you are going to / have already gone with TTPs.  Just be
careful.  Having read some of their posts over in the AskCALEA forums,
there is a lot of smoke and mirrors going on.  They are NOT doing
anything magical or difficult--it is basic networking concepts wrapped
up in a bunch of legalese.

That is not to discourage going that route.  For many shops out there,
especially those who don't have a strong networking background (which
is fine!), it is the most "economically advantageous route" to CALEA
compliance.

However, be careful.  The law CLEARLY states that the service
provider, NOT the TTP, bears the legal responsibility and liability
for CALEA compliance, even if the service provider engages with a TTP.

In other words, if you hire a TTP, and pay them $20,000 or $50,000 or
whatever, and, come six months later and you get supenoed, and the TTP
can't provide the information, YOU are still liable.

Be careful, and make sure that any contracts you sign pass liability
and then some onto the TTP.  Make them insure their product in the
contract.  While there are valid TTPs out there (the majority, even),
I'm pretty certain from reading comments that there are likely to be a
couple of frauds out there looking for the easy money with no
intention of actually providing services.


--
Clint Ricker
Kentnis Technologies
800.783.5753
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] CALEA

[Clint Ricker]

I'm not a lawyer, so take what I say with a grain of salt--it is based
on an amateur reading on legal documents.

To get to my actual point, just skip to the end of my post, the rest
is just background (supporting information).

None of the legal framework around CALEA specifies any particular
mechanisms for CALEA implimentation, only what defines CALEA
compliance.  The mechanisms were officially designated as "up to the
industry".

The actual wording of the law is that the government is not authorized
to require "any specific design of equipment, facilities, services,
features, or system configurations to be adopted by any provider ..."
and is not authorized "to prohibit the adoption of any equipment,
facility, service, or feature by any provider ...".

CALEA compliance consists of, upon receipt of legal notification under
CALEA, providing the following (in loose term):
1. Contents of data flow--ie the traffic being passed by the customer
2. Control data--ie radius/AAA information.  When the user logged on,
logged off,  etc...  For VoIP, this is basically a CDR
3. Deliver the information.  This is the part about standards.  The
T1.IAS standard defines a "common" standard for delivering the
information; this, according to the law, can't be the only acceptable
means of information.  Nevertheless, it does provide a level of safety
in that, if you use other forms of packaging (which is allowed under
the law!), then you do have some burden of proof, if questioned, that
you did comply with the law.

To get to the actual point, it doesn't matter as long as the
information can be supplied.  However, there are three caveats with
relying on upstream providers

1. Ultimately, you still can be held responsible.  This is just a
guess, but is logical given that a. downstream providers can be
supenoed as necessary and b. Even if you pay for a TTP and they, in
the moment of crisis, can't provide the information, you are still
liable.
2. Multiple upstream providers make this difficult.  That doesn't
apply to everyone, but just keep that in mind.
3. An upstream provider most likely doesn't have access to your
control information.  You still have to provide this in some fashion
or another.

--
Clint Ricker
Kentnis.com


On 3/30/07, John Scrivner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I doubt that is the case. If the upstream is inline and can provide the
data flow from a point of aggregation (upstream network connection) then
the TTP hardware connected upstream should be compliant.
Scriv


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

> A ttp is compliant.  But it's entirely possible (probably likely) that
> the ttp's hardware will have to be at the wisp's local.  Not at the
> upstream.
>
> Marlon
> (509) 982-2181
> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
> 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since
> 1999!
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
>
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA
>
>
>> Butch Evans wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> This is not acceptable.  ALL facilities based service providers are
>>> required to be compliant.
>>
>> How is using a 3rd party not compliant? I seem to recall the FCC
>> specifically allows for 3rd parties to provide your compliance.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> --
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] one-third of U.S. households have no Internet...and do not plan to get it

[Dawn DiPietro]

All,

If you read the article it also says 22% of those people said they did 
not feel they could not afford the computer and everything associated 
with getting on the Internet so that number is a little misleading in my 
opinion. Plus 17% of those respondents not on the Internet said they did 
not know how to use it. If this was not the case then I bet they would 
subscribe for Internet services. So it sounds to me like if these people 
were educated in how to use the Internet and could afford it they might 
see the value.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


John Scrivner wrote:
Remember this the next time someone tells you how "the US is behind in 
broadband".

Scriv


George Rogato wrote:

MOUNTAIN VIEW, California (Reuters) - A little under one-third of 
U.S. households have no Internet access and do not plan to get it, 
with most of the holdouts seeing little use for it in their lives, 
according to a survey released on Friday.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070326/od_nm/internet_holdouts_odd_dc;_ylt=Ajd_D_JeLhjUgI3IVOtLYJntiBIF 





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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