Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Rogelio]

Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>   it is free to install on any server. I have a
> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I don't
> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only got
> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.

I would seriously stay away from untangle as an ISP-level solution.

Sure, it's cool if you're a small shop with no budget, but this is not 
something that you want to mess with.

I'm guessing (because you're asking this question on this list) that are 
looking for something easy.  If so, seriously consider doing the Postini 
thing like others have suggested.  I would recommend several other 
managed Barracuda solutions I've tried, but honestly, I've never had 
with them the seamless experience I've had with Postini.

Or...build your own solution!

Like I said in an earlier email, Qmailtoaster is solid

http://www.qmailtoaster.org/

You can easily have it forward to other boxes, and it's an excellent 
(IMO) "first defense" solution for those who are budget conscious and 
willing to put in some (but not too much) elbow grease to fix their problem.

Their listserv is good, in my opinion.  The people I've talked to there 
have been quite helpful.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Rogelio]

Travis Johnson wrote:
> We have been a Postini customer since their first year in business. Once 
> you "outsource" that part of it, you wonder how you ever did it before. 
> Right now it is probably saving us at least 10Mbps of bandwidth, which 
> in our area is over $500 per month. We also charge customers $1 per 
> email per month, and businesses pay per domain. So, we are making money 
> on this service, and we don't have to even touch it most of the time 
> (and we have hundreds of domains, including full school districts, etc.) 
> and thousands of individual users.

Ditto on Postini.  It is truly the only "spam killer" I know of.

Slightly off topic, but if I have a friend or associate who is heavily 
invested in Outlook and needs something quick and easy (and is willing 
to pay for it), I highly recommend Cloudmark.

Sure, it's expensive and not that much more effective compared to other 
solns, but if it's not possible to rehaul their MTAs and redesign things 
on the network end, it's a godsend for certain c-level types.

(One big "problem" with it is that it works so well for certain c-level 
types that they forget how bad the spam problem is for everyone else on 
the domain and the project soon loses priority)



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Rogelio]

Frank Muto wrote:
> Then you should be working with a reseller/distributor like us. Some of the 
> services do require an annual fee, but none that 
> require a minimum 3-year commitment.
> 
> At 60k emails, plus using Exchange; you are at a whole different level of 
> resources even with Barracuda, compared to the 
> average service provider.

Slightly off topic, but a friend of mine put in a Qmailtoaster box in 
front of his Exchange server and then made sure that his Exchange box 
only talked to the Qmailtoaster box.

That was his ghetto-fabulous version of a Barracuda, and it seemed to 
work quite well and is/was insanely easy to set up.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] free optics / MRV's Terescope soln

[Rogelio]

Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> It's pretty hard to beat plaintree.
> 
> As for backup radios, use good switches with spanning tree and put in 
> your own radios backup link.

Interesting, I might try that.

BelAir Networks' switched radio mesh uses RSTP (or something very similar)



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Frank Muto]

Then you should be working with a reseller/distributor like us. Some of the 
services do require an annual fee, but none that 
require a minimum 3-year commitment.

At 60k emails, plus using Exchange; you are at a whole different level of 
resources even with Barracuda, compared to the 
average service provider.



Frank Muto
Postini - Google Apps Distributor
www.SecureEmailPlus.com




- Original Message - 
From: "John Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:54 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda


> Unless you know something I don't, all the quotes we have received from
> Postini require a 3 year commitment, with a minimum of 1 years payment
> up front.
>
> For my client that has 60,000 + emails coming into his Barracuda, his
> Exchange 2003 server is happily running along.
>
> John Thomas
>
>
> Frank Muto wrote:
>> Since when does Postini require a 3-year commitment? IMO there is more to 
>> the Frontbridge saga and even Barracuda can not 
>> fix
>> the hiccups of MS Exchange.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Frank Muto
>> Postini - Google Apps Distributor
>> www.SecureEmailPlus.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "John Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:10 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>
>>
>>
>>> Travis, because there is an element of control that you lose when you
>>> outsource. I have a client that got really upset when an email that was
>>> addressed to 3 companies only made it to one employee. Long story short,
>>> Frontbridge saw that the email came into their servers, but only one
>>> copy went out to 1 of the companies employees. This took *several* hours
>>> and 3 different Frontbridge employees to find out.  If this client had
>>> been using a Barracuda, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Before
>>> you start to flame me, I know that you aren't supposed to use email in
>>> this manner, i.e. mission critical, time sensitive Purchase orders from
>>> Asia to the US, but this client did, and they were furious. Another
>>> reason I have a problem is that both Frontbridge and Postini *require* a
>>> 3 year commitment, and you may not have to pay up front, but once you
>>> sign on, they have you for 3 years. I have a BIG problem with any
>>> business that operates like that. In this instance, the cleint is now
>>> stuck with Frontbridge for 2 1/2 years, and their attitude when asked
>>> about a refund was "tough, you agreed to a 3 year term, and we have your
>>> money."
>>>
>>> John Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>> Travis Johnson wrote:
>>>
 And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a
 service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and
 resources? Like Postini... or others.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Frank Muto wrote:

> Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 
> 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit 
> on
> to
> 600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user 
> accounts. This is where most of our cross-over
> sales
> are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying 
> around out there, even active user accounts
> under
> 250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.
>
>
> Frank Muto
> www.secureemailplus.com
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>
>
>
>
>> Kurt,
>>
>>  What firmware are you running?
>> How many emails are you filtering?
>> Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
>> How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
>> Traffic graph/email that tell you this)
>>
>> I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
>> that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for 
>> months)
>> by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.
>>
>> I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
>> this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, 
>> Freeside...etc)
>> for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are 
>> crossed
>> and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
>> report on how things are going.
>>
>> Mac
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
>>> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
>>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>>> Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>>
>>> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://w

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[John Thomas]

Unless you know something I don't, all the quotes we have received from 
Postini require a 3 year commitment, with a minimum of 1 years payment 
up front.

For my client that has 60,000 + emails coming into his Barracuda, his 
Exchange 2003 server is happily running along.

John Thomas


Frank Muto wrote:
> Since when does Postini require a 3-year commitment? IMO there is more to the 
> Frontbridge saga and even Barracuda can not fix 
> the hiccups of MS Exchange.
>
>
>
>
> Frank Muto
> Postini - Google Apps Distributor
> www.SecureEmailPlus.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "John Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:10 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>
>
>   
>> Travis, because there is an element of control that you lose when you
>> outsource. I have a client that got really upset when an email that was
>> addressed to 3 companies only made it to one employee. Long story short,
>> Frontbridge saw that the email came into their servers, but only one
>> copy went out to 1 of the companies employees. This took *several* hours
>> and 3 different Frontbridge employees to find out.  If this client had
>> been using a Barracuda, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Before
>> you start to flame me, I know that you aren't supposed to use email in
>> this manner, i.e. mission critical, time sensitive Purchase orders from
>> Asia to the US, but this client did, and they were furious. Another
>> reason I have a problem is that both Frontbridge and Postini *require* a
>> 3 year commitment, and you may not have to pay up front, but once you
>> sign on, they have you for 3 years. I have a BIG problem with any
>> business that operates like that. In this instance, the cleint is now
>> stuck with Frontbridge for 2 1/2 years, and their attitude when asked
>> about a refund was "tough, you agreed to a 3 year term, and we have your
>> money."
>>
>> John Thomas
>>
>>
>> Travis Johnson wrote:
>> 
>>> And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a
>>> service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and
>>> resources? Like Postini... or others.
>>>
>>> Travis
>>> Microserv
>>>
>>> Frank Muto wrote:
>>>   
 Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 
 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on 
 to
 600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user 
 accounts. This is where most of our cross-over 
 sales
 are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying 
 around out there, even active user accounts 
 under
 250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.


 Frank Muto
 www.secureemailplus.com





 - Original Message - 
 From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 To: "'WISPA General List'" 
 Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda



 
> Kurt,
>
>  What firmware are you running?
> How many emails are you filtering?
> Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
> How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
> Traffic graph/email that tell you this)
>
> I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
> that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for 
> months)
> by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.
>
> I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
> this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, 
> Freeside...etc)
> for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are 
> crossed
> and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
> report on how things are going.
>
> Mac
>
>
>
>
>   
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
>> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>
>> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>>   it is free to install on any server. I have
>> a
>> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
>> don't
>> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
>> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
>> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
>> got
>> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
>> subscription when you can't even log into it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Travis Johnson]

Hi,

We have been a Postini customer since their first year in business.
Once you "outsource" that part of it, you wonder how you ever did it
before. Right now it is probably saving us at least 10Mbps of
bandwidth, which in our area is over $500 per month. We also charge
customers $1 per email per month, and businesses pay per domain. So, we
are making money on this service, and we don't have to even touch it
most of the time (and we have hundreds of domains, including full
school districts, etc.) and thousands of individual users.

The other advantage is if your internet backbone goes down (for
whatever reason), Postini will automatically "cache" your email so once
you are back up, all the email gets delivered. (same if your email
server dies, etc.)

(Maybe I should become a Postini reseller, eh? :) )

Travis
Microserv

John Thomas wrote:

  Travis, because there is an element of control that you lose when you 
outsource. I have a client that got really upset when an email that was 
addressed to 3 companies only made it to one employee. Long story short, 
Frontbridge saw that the email came into their servers, but only one 
copy went out to 1 of the companies employees. This took *several* hours 
and 3 different Frontbridge employees to find out.  If this client had 
been using a Barracuda, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Before 
you start to flame me, I know that you aren't supposed to use email in 
this manner, i.e. mission critical, time sensitive Purchase orders from 
Asia to the US, but this client did, and they were furious. Another 
reason I have a problem is that both Frontbridge and Postini *require* a 
3 year commitment, and you may not have to pay up front, but once you 
sign on, they have you for 3 years. I have a BIG problem with any 
business that operates like that. In this instance, the cleint is now 
stuck with Frontbridge for 2 1/2 years, and their attitude when asked 
about a refund was "tough, you agreed to a 3 year term, and we have your 
money."

John Thomas


Travis Johnson wrote:
  
  
And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a 
service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and 
resources? Like Postini... or others.

Travis
Microserv

Frank Muto wrote:


  Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on to 
600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user accounts. This is where most of our cross-over sales 
are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying around out there, even active user accounts under 
250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.


Frank Muto
www.secureemailplus.com





- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda


  
  
  
Kurt,

 What firmware are you running?
How many emails are you filtering?
Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
Traffic graph/email that tell you this)

I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.

I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, Freeside...etc)
for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are crossed
and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
report on how things are going.

Mac






  -Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
  it is free to install on any server. I have
a
Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
don't
even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
got
<200 email addresses and its rated for 500.



I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
subscription when you can't even log into it.





Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com









---
-
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
---
-

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Arch

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Frank Muto]

Since when does Postini require a 3-year commitment? IMO there is more to the 
Frontbridge saga and even Barracuda can not fix 
the hiccups of MS Exchange.




Frank Muto
Postini - Google Apps Distributor
www.SecureEmailPlus.com






- Original Message - 
From: "John Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda


> Travis, because there is an element of control that you lose when you
> outsource. I have a client that got really upset when an email that was
> addressed to 3 companies only made it to one employee. Long story short,
> Frontbridge saw that the email came into their servers, but only one
> copy went out to 1 of the companies employees. This took *several* hours
> and 3 different Frontbridge employees to find out.  If this client had
> been using a Barracuda, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Before
> you start to flame me, I know that you aren't supposed to use email in
> this manner, i.e. mission critical, time sensitive Purchase orders from
> Asia to the US, but this client did, and they were furious. Another
> reason I have a problem is that both Frontbridge and Postini *require* a
> 3 year commitment, and you may not have to pay up front, but once you
> sign on, they have you for 3 years. I have a BIG problem with any
> business that operates like that. In this instance, the cleint is now
> stuck with Frontbridge for 2 1/2 years, and their attitude when asked
> about a refund was "tough, you agreed to a 3 year term, and we have your
> money."
>
> John Thomas
>
>
> Travis Johnson wrote:
>> And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a
>> service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and
>> resources? Like Postini... or others.
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>> Frank Muto wrote:
>>> Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 
>>> 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on 
>>> to
>>> 600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user 
>>> accounts. This is where most of our cross-over 
>>> sales
>>> are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying 
>>> around out there, even active user accounts 
>>> under
>>> 250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank Muto
>>> www.secureemailplus.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>>
>>>
>>>
 Kurt,

  What firmware are you running?
 How many emails are you filtering?
 Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
 How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
 Traffic graph/email that tell you this)

 I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
 that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
 by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.

 I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
 this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, 
 Freeside...etc)
 for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are 
 crossed
 and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
 report on how things are going.

 Mac




> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>
> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>   it is free to install on any server. I have
> a
> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
> don't
> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
> got
> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.
>
>
>
> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
> subscription when you can't even log into it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> -
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> ---
> -
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscrib

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[John Thomas]

Travis, because there is an element of control that you lose when you 
outsource. I have a client that got really upset when an email that was 
addressed to 3 companies only made it to one employee. Long story short, 
Frontbridge saw that the email came into their servers, but only one 
copy went out to 1 of the companies employees. This took *several* hours 
and 3 different Frontbridge employees to find out.  If this client had 
been using a Barracuda, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Before 
you start to flame me, I know that you aren't supposed to use email in 
this manner, i.e. mission critical, time sensitive Purchase orders from 
Asia to the US, but this client did, and they were furious. Another 
reason I have a problem is that both Frontbridge and Postini *require* a 
3 year commitment, and you may not have to pay up front, but once you 
sign on, they have you for 3 years. I have a BIG problem with any 
business that operates like that. In this instance, the cleint is now 
stuck with Frontbridge for 2 1/2 years, and their attitude when asked 
about a refund was "tough, you agreed to a 3 year term, and we have your 
money."

John Thomas


Travis Johnson wrote:
> And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a 
> service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and 
> resources? Like Postini... or others.
>
> Travis
> Microserv
>
> Frank Muto wrote:
>> Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 
>> 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on to 
>> 600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user 
>> accounts. This is where most of our cross-over sales 
>> are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying 
>> around out there, even active user accounts under 
>> 250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.
>>
>>
>> Frank Muto
>> www.secureemailplus.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>
>>
>>   
>>> Kurt,
>>>
>>>  What firmware are you running?
>>> How many emails are you filtering?
>>> Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
>>> How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
>>> Traffic graph/email that tell you this)
>>>
>>> I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
>>> that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
>>> by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.
>>>
>>> I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
>>> this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, Freeside...etc)
>>> for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are crossed
>>> and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
>>> report on how things are going.
>>>
>>> Mac
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
 Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

 Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
   it is free to install on any server. I have
 a
 Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
 don't
 even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
 un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
 pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
 got
 <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.



 I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
 subscription when you can't even log into it.





 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com









 ---
 -
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG.
 Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.2/1523 - Release Date:
 6/28/2008 7:00 AM
   
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@w

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[tonylist]

Crap this was a typo should have been 10Mhz channel. Also right now 802.16m
and LTE are doing 5bits/Hertz that has happen in field tests.  Most of what
I am talking about is OFDMA, MIMO with some type of advanced antenna system.
I have seen test of AAS that are very cost effective it's just a matter of
getting this all into a single package to be cost effective. Point is as
these chipsets start to hit mass market we can start finding ways of using
them :)

Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:10 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

Personally, I really wonder if it is possible to have 10 bits/HZ that a 60
Mbps channel in 6 MHz would have.  8VSB of HDTV was pretty advanced when it
was originally proffered as a standard. It does 19.2 Mbps in a 6 MHz
channel.  Or approx 3 bits / Hz.  That seems to be the upper limit of many
systems these days.  To triple this with any kind of realistic C/I ration
will be a wondrous method of modulation.  No doubt you could do it with
2048QAM with 1 KW behind it, but that is not reality AFAIK.  If this
modulation exists, please point me toward a reference work so I can become
less ignorant.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 9:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

The problem, here Tony, is that the MAC's and PHY that accomlishes this kind

of performance isn't built into chipsets that are mass produced like 
consumer chipsets are.   Even I'm going to end up with Atheros based 3.6 ghz

products, because nothing else currently makes any sense at all, dollar 
wise.   And with prices like that, there is simpluy NO way to market to 
"consumers".

The performance levels ou're talking about will never be sold for numbers 
less than what I said and Mike seconded.   And with the trends in currency 
value we're seeing,  it's very doubtful it will ever reach that low.







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>
> Mike
>
> - It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about 
> channel
> reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
> - It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with 
> the
> right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
> - The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
> protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[tonylist]

I agree with you 100% right now they are not and I should make the point
that what I am talking about is what will be coming down the line in the
next 18-24 months. I understand most WISP are in the here and now :) But
with this said things are in the works.

Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

The problem, here Tony, is that the MAC's and PHY that accomlishes this kind
of performance isn't built into chipsets that are mass produced like
consumer chipsets are.   Even I'm going to end up with Atheros based 3.6 ghz
products, because nothing else currently makes any sense at all, dollar
wise.  And with prices like that, there is simpluy NO way to market to
"consumers".

The performance levels ou're talking about will never be sold for numbers
less than what I said and Mike seconded.   And with the trends in currency
value we're seeing,  it's very doubtful it will ever reach that low.





- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>
> Mike
>
> - It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about 
> channel
> reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
> - It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with 
> the
> right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
> - The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
> protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[Brian Webster]

Never say never. My first cell phone (a 3 watt Uniden bag phone) cost me
over $1000.00. It may take time but the price levels will come down. It
won't happen right away but it will happen. You can't have relatively
protected spectrum and still have a throw away consumer priced piece of
gear. This will be gear you can expect a longer life span and thus be able
to spread your ROI over more time. While the prices may be more than you are
used to spending, with the spectrum and longer life span you might also find
it easier to finance the same equipment. This is how carriers like cell
phone companies, cable operators and phone companies have done it time and
time again. We can't get stuck in the same current thought paradigm when
looking at whitespace plans.. This may require a step back, deep breath
and try to look at things fresh. I can't tell you how many times in my 18
years of wireless I thought things could not be done or the public would
never use features like that. I have been wrong many times. What I have
learned is that we need to keep an open mind. Change will come and sometimes
things happen we never would have imagined. I remember reading in a magazine
as a kid about cellular mobile phones and it requiring all these new towers
and frequency re-use. I thought to myself that it would cost way too much
money to build all the towers and that they would never make
moneyboy was I wrong...

Think positive and think "we can make this work!"



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


The problem, here Tony, is that the MAC's and PHY that accomlishes this kind
of performance isn't built into chipsets that are mass produced like
consumer chipsets are.   Even I'm going to end up with Atheros based 3.6 ghz
products, because nothing else currently makes any sense at all, dollar
wise.   And with prices like that, there is simpluy NO way to market to
"consumers".

The performance levels ou're talking about will never be sold for numbers
less than what I said and Mike seconded.   And with the trends in currency
value we're seeing,  it's very doubtful it will ever reach that low.







- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>
> Mike
>
> - It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about
> channel
> reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
> - It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with
> the
> right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
> - The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
> protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[Chuck McCown - 3]

Personally, I really wonder if it is possible to have 10 bits/HZ that a 60
Mbps channel in 6 MHz would have.  8VSB of HDTV was pretty advanced when it
was originally proffered as a standard. It does 19.2 Mbps in a 6 MHz
channel.  Or approx 3 bits / Hz.  That seems to be the upper limit of many
systems these days.  To triple this with any kind of realistic C/I ration
will be a wondrous method of modulation.  No doubt you could do it with
2048QAM with 1 KW behind it, but that is not reality AFAIK.  If this
modulation exists, please point me toward a reference work so I can become
less ignorant.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 9:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

The problem, here Tony, is that the MAC's and PHY that accomlishes this kind

of performance isn't built into chipsets that are mass produced like 
consumer chipsets are.   Even I'm going to end up with Atheros based 3.6 ghz

products, because nothing else currently makes any sense at all, dollar 
wise.   And with prices like that, there is simpluy NO way to market to 
"consumers".

The performance levels ou're talking about will never be sold for numbers 
less than what I said and Mike seconded.   And with the trends in currency 
value we're seeing,  it's very doubtful it will ever reach that low.







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>
> Mike
>
> - It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about 
> channel
> reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
> - It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with 
> the
> right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
> - The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
> protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[reader]

The problem, here Tony, is that the MAC's and PHY that accomlishes this kind 
of performance isn't built into chipsets that are mass produced like 
consumer chipsets are.   Even I'm going to end up with Atheros based 3.6 ghz 
products, because nothing else currently makes any sense at all, dollar 
wise.   And with prices like that, there is simpluy NO way to market to 
"consumers".

The performance levels ou're talking about will never be sold for numbers 
less than what I said and Mike seconded.   And with the trends in currency 
value we're seeing,  it's very doubtful it will ever reach that low.







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>
> Mike
>
> - It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about 
> channel
> reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
> - It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with 
> the
> right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
> - The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
> protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Travis Johnson]

And on another thought... with that much junk mail, why not use a
service that blocks the spam BEFORE it uses your bandwidth and
resources? Like Postini... or others.

Travis
Microserv

Frank Muto wrote:

  Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 1x10/100 Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on to 
600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user accounts. This is where most of our cross-over sales 
are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying around out there, even active user accounts under 
250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.


Frank Muto
www.secureemailplus.com





- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda


  
  
Kurt,

 What firmware are you running?
How many emails are you filtering?
Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
Traffic graph/email that tell you this)

I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.

I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, Freeside...etc)
for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are crossed
and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
report on how things are going.

Mac





  -Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
  it is free to install on any server. I have
a
Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
don't
even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
got
<200 email addresses and its rated for 500.



I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
subscription when you can't even log into it.





Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com









---
-
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.2/1523 - Release Date:
6/28/2008 7:00 AM
  




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[tonylist]

Mike

- You really need to read the full 802.22 spec :) There is A LOT more than
just channel bonding that make 802.22 good.
- 6Mhz is more than enough for all WISPs needs when it's used correctly,
again (I know) not 802.11
- 3.65Mhz is just in the startup Wimax was first to hit the street but this
will be changing. So Demarc will have a 3.65Ghz base unit and CPE with our
own MAC base on top of the Atheros radio that takes full advantage of the
50Mhz. So the costs for the base and CPE will not be much higher than 2.4Ghz
is now :) This also will help 900Mhz.

Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:19 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

802.22 sounds good if the channel bonding makes it through to the end and is

usable.  THAT would be wonderful.  If not, 6 MHz isn't going to get us very 
far in terms of delivering real throughput to any significant number of 
users.

Price always comes into play and if we're looking at $10k APs and $800 CPE 
like we are for 3.65, again, that won't fly with a typical WISP.


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>I clearly understand this, where did you get $50k per AP and $800 per CPE??
> Wimax? I would not care if a WISP had the money of a cellular company, 
> these
> prices would not make scenes in either case.  On top of this, cost of the
> equipment was not the point, but I am fully aware this makes a differences
> in a WISP business. My point is simply to the quote "20 MHz here and there
> just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real throughput requires that 
> much
> per sector." Which is 100% wrong 20Mhz here and there will make a HUGE
> difference to WISP as long as you have cost effective equipment to deploy 
> in
> these frequencies ranges.
>
> My prediction is over the next 18-36 months is any WISP that is going to 
> say
> in the business will start to migrate fully over to 3.65Ghz and depending 
> on
> what happens with white space, which is the holy grail for WISP if we can
> get 802.22 as the standard like ATSC is for digital TV, start looking at 
> it
> for the best WISP solutions for most of the country.
>
> Comments Welcome! :)
>
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 10:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
> Tony, the average Wisp is NOT a cellular company and cannot invest 50K per
> AP and 800 per CPE.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
>
>> Mike
>>
>> I do not agree with this at all. Most WISP are used to using 20Mhz 802.11
>> devices which are VERY frequency inefficient. With 20Mhz and a radio
>> designed to make the most use of the spectrum could easily create 
>> channels
>> using 3.5Mhz or 7Mhz in size plus channel reuse and polarizations. I 
>> could
>> have well over 1Gb per cell site with users in the 2-3000 range.
>>
>> 802.22 is working on a protocol that is perfect for WISP and can make use
>> of any spectrum very efficiently.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely, Tony Morella
>> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
>> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
>> http://www.demarctech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:25 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>> Hopefully he's not referring to the 20 MHz they're trying to make for 
>> free
>> access there.
>>
>> 20 MHz here and there just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real
>> throughput requires that much per sector.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:56 PM
>> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>
http://telephonyonline.com/external.html?q=http://www.pcworl

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[tonylist]

Mike

- It's not just a single antenna on one channel, I am talking about channel
reuse. Again need to stop thinking 802.11
- It is possible to have 50Mb-60Mb real data in a 70Mb/7Mhz channel with the
right MAC and PHY and in real deployments.
- The only reason a single user could use all the bandwidth is because the
protocol does not have a dynamic polling algorithm, again not 802.11 :)

Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

What equipment lets me have 1 GB of throughput on a single site in only 20 
MHz of available frequency?

WISPs need to be able to deploy 10 megabit plus pipes to the home.  A single

user then chews up most of your 3.5 or 7 MHz channel.

I know physics comes into play.  I know government policy comes into play. 
I know money comes into play.  The above is what we should be striving for.


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


> Tony, the average Wisp is NOT a cellular company and cannot invest 50K per
> AP and 800 per CPE.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
>
>> Mike
>>
>> I do not agree with this at all. Most WISP are used to using 20Mhz 802.11
>> devices which are VERY frequency inefficient. With 20Mhz and a radio
>> designed to make the most use of the spectrum could easily create 
>> channels
>> using 3.5Mhz or 7Mhz in size plus channel reuse and polarizations. I 
>> could
>> have well over 1Gb per cell site with users in the 2-3000 range.
>>
>> 802.22 is working on a protocol that is perfect for WISP and can make use
>> of
>> any spectrum very efficiently.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely, Tony Morella
>> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
>> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
>> http://www.demarctech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:25 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>> Hopefully he's not referring to the 20 MHz they're trying to make for 
>> free
>> access there.
>>
>> 20 MHz here and there just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real
>> throughput requires that much per sector.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:56 PM
>> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>>
>>>
>>
http://telephonyonline.com/external.html?q=http://www.pcworld.com/businessce
>>>
nter/article/147485/fcc_member_lessig_unveil_us_broadband_initiative.html
>>>
>>> Looks like this could be the start of a good thing. The mention freeing
>>> up
>>> more spectrum for wireless.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Scottie Arnett
>>>
>>> ---
>>> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>>
>>>
>>> Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth.
>>> Check out www.info-ed.com for information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>


>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe

Re: [WISPA] TV Whitespaces

[tonylist]

Mike

Right now it is in draft but very close to going to the next stage. But
there is a lot more going on here than just a standard. 
- The 802.22 is setting a precedence, besides the engineers that are
creating 802.22 also involved are the incumbents that hold the TV channels
and they have been very valuable in making the standard will not interface
with digital TV and vice versa. And the FCC has to be an integrated part to
make 802.22 THE standard for data whitespace as they have with ATSC, the
only way this is going to happen is if every WISP gets involved now.
- We need to get the FCC to do a light licensed in the same way
3.65Ghz has been done, at least for part of the band. The channels we are
talking about are VHF and UHF from 2-51 (not including 37) which are as
follows for the US:

VHF UHF UHF
UHF
Channel Frequency   Channel Frequency   Channel Frequency
Channel Frequency
2   54Mhz   14  471.25Mhz   27
549.25Mhz   40  627.25Mhz
3   60Mhz   15  477.25Mhz   28
555.25Mhz   41  633.25Mhz
4   66Mhz   16  483.25Mhz   29
561.25Mhz   42  639.25Mhz
5   76Mhz   17  489.25Mhz   30
567.25Mhz   43  645.25Mhz
6   82Mhz   18  495.25Mhz   31
573.25Mhz   44  651.25Mhz
7   174Mhz  19  501.25Mhz   32
579.25Mhz   45  657.25Mhz
8   180Mhz  20  507.25Mhz   33
585.25Mhz   46  663.25Mhz
9   186Mhz  21  513.25Mhz   34
591.25Mhz   47  669.25Mhz
10  192Mhz  22  519.25Mhz   35
597.25Mhz   48  675.25Mhz
11  198Mhz  23  525.25Mhz   36
603.25Mhz   49  681.25Mhz
12  204Mhz  24  531.25Mhz   37*
609.25Mhz   50  687.25Mhz
13  210Mhz  25  537.25Mhz   38
615.25Mhz   51  693.25Mhz
26  543.25Mhz   39
621.25Mhz   52  699.25Mhz
* Cannot be used

As you can see there is a large jump from VHF to UHF. We have already
confirmed we can make two radios, one for the lower VHF bands covering the
156Mhz that could be used as well as one to cover UFH which is 228Mhz wide.
>From a manufacturing perspective it is not cost effective to make a radio
that covers 645Mhz, even 228Mhz is pushing it. 

- From the table above it seems very simple, to me at lease, use VHF for the
Wireless Innovation Alliance
(http://www.wirelessinnovationalliance.com/index.cfm) and UFH for WISP using
part 90 light licensed using 802.22 in this part of the band.
- The reason for this is two-fold, first the incumbents are already
working with 802.22 and without them on our side it is going to be very hard
to get this done. Don't forget DTV is first tier in the band everything else
is 2nd tier we must not interface and the 802.22 protocol make sure of this.
Second, is the flip side, the WIA does not have the incumbents support (from
what I read anyone this is my option only!) and it trying to make the white
space another Wifi which as all WISP know will not work well for outdoor
networks!

- I highly recommend that everyone takes the time to read the FULL 802.22
spec as it really is all WISP have ever wanted in a protocol! I am CC Carl
Stevenson on this email as he is the chair of IEEE 802.22 and he can double
check the above to make sure there are no issues.

- Comments?

Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:32 PM
To: WISPA List
Subject: [WISPA] TV Whitespaces

What is the status of this?  I am investigating it more since Tony made
reference to 802.22.  I became interested when I saw a provision for channel
bonding.

Have there been any references to a 3.65 esque license so the bands won't be
filled with junk?


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

S

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Frank Muto]

Just a thought, unless you have a 600 or better unit, you are running 1x10/100 
Ethernet on 100-400 units vs. 2xGigabit on to 
600-1000 units, IMO creating a bottleneck even with low to moderate user 
accounts. This is where most of our cross-over sales 
are from, in the lower model units. With the amount of junk email flying around 
out there, even active user accounts under 
250 are pulling in substantial amounts of junk and direct harvest attacks.


Frank Muto
www.secureemailplus.com





- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda


> Kurt,
>
>  What firmware are you running?
> How many emails are you filtering?
> Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
> How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
> Traffic graph/email that tell you this)
>
> I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
> that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
> by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.
>
> I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
> this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, Freeside...etc)
> for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are crossed
> and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
> report on how things are going.
>
> Mac
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
>> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
>>
>> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>>   it is free to install on any server. I have
>> a
>> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
>> don't
>> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
>> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
>> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
>> got
>> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
>> subscription when you can't even log into it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kurt Fankhauser
>> WAVELINC
>> P.O. Box 126
>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>> 419-562-6405
>> www.wavelinc.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> -
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> 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/
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.2/1523 - Release Date:
>> 6/28/2008 7:00 AM
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
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] TV Whitespaces

[Mike Hammett]

What is the status of this?  I am investigating it more since Tony made 
reference to 802.22.  I became interested when I saw a provision for channel 
bonding.

Have there been any references to a 3.65 esque license so the bands won't be 
filled with junk?


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[Mike Hammett]

802.22 sounds good if the channel bonding makes it through to the end and is 
usable.  THAT would be wonderful.  If not, 6 MHz isn't going to get us very 
far in terms of delivering real throughput to any significant number of 
users.

Price always comes into play and if we're looking at $10k APs and $800 CPE 
like we are for 3.65, again, that won't fly with a typical WISP.


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


>I clearly understand this, where did you get $50k per AP and $800 per CPE??
> Wimax? I would not care if a WISP had the money of a cellular company, 
> these
> prices would not make scenes in either case.  On top of this, cost of the
> equipment was not the point, but I am fully aware this makes a differences
> in a WISP business. My point is simply to the quote "20 MHz here and there
> just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real throughput requires that 
> much
> per sector." Which is 100% wrong 20Mhz here and there will make a HUGE
> difference to WISP as long as you have cost effective equipment to deploy 
> in
> these frequencies ranges.
>
> My prediction is over the next 18-36 months is any WISP that is going to 
> say
> in the business will start to migrate fully over to 3.65Ghz and depending 
> on
> what happens with white space, which is the holy grail for WISP if we can
> get 802.22 as the standard like ATSC is for digital TV, start looking at 
> it
> for the best WISP solutions for most of the country.
>
> Comments Welcome! :)
>
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 10:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
> Tony, the average Wisp is NOT a cellular company and cannot invest 50K per
> AP and 800 per CPE.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
>
>> Mike
>>
>> I do not agree with this at all. Most WISP are used to using 20Mhz 802.11
>> devices which are VERY frequency inefficient. With 20Mhz and a radio
>> designed to make the most use of the spectrum could easily create 
>> channels
>> using 3.5Mhz or 7Mhz in size plus channel reuse and polarizations. I 
>> could
>> have well over 1Gb per cell site with users in the 2-3000 range.
>>
>> 802.22 is working on a protocol that is perfect for WISP and can make use
>> of any spectrum very efficiently.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely, Tony Morella
>> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
>> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
>> http://www.demarctech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:25 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>> Hopefully he's not referring to the 20 MHz they're trying to make for 
>> free
>> access there.
>>
>> 20 MHz here and there just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real
>> throughput requires that much per sector.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:56 PM
>> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>>
>>>
>>
> http://telephonyonline.com/external.html?q=http://www.pcworld.com/businessce
>>> nter/article/147485/fcc_member_lessig_unveil_us_broadband_initiative.html
>>>
>>> Looks like this could be the start of a good thing. The mention freeing
>>> up
>>> more spectrum for wireless.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Scottie Arnett
>>>
>>> ---
>>> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>>
>>>
>>> Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth.
>>> Check out www.info-ed.com for information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> -

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[Mike Hammett]

What equipment lets me have 1 GB of throughput on a single site in only 20 
MHz of available frequency?

WISPs need to be able to deploy 10 megabit plus pipes to the home.  A single 
user then chews up most of your 3.5 or 7 MHz channel.

I know physics comes into play.  I know government policy comes into play. 
I know money comes into play.  The above is what we should be striving for.


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


> Tony, the average Wisp is NOT a cellular company and cannot invest 50K per
> AP and 800 per CPE.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
>
>> Mike
>>
>> I do not agree with this at all. Most WISP are used to using 20Mhz 802.11
>> devices which are VERY frequency inefficient. With 20Mhz and a radio
>> designed to make the most use of the spectrum could easily create 
>> channels
>> using 3.5Mhz or 7Mhz in size plus channel reuse and polarizations. I 
>> could
>> have well over 1Gb per cell site with users in the 2-3000 range.
>>
>> 802.22 is working on a protocol that is perfect for WISP and can make use
>> of
>> any spectrum very efficiently.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely, Tony Morella
>> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
>> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
>> http://www.demarctech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:25 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>> Hopefully he's not referring to the 20 MHz they're trying to make for 
>> free
>> access there.
>>
>> 20 MHz here and there just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real
>> throughput requires that much per sector.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:56 PM
>> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>>
>>
>>>
>> http://telephonyonline.com/external.html?q=http://www.pcworld.com/businessce
>>> nter/article/147485/fcc_member_lessig_unveil_us_broadband_initiative.html
>>>
>>> Looks like this could be the start of a good thing. The mention freeing
>>> up
>>> more spectrum for wireless.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Scottie Arnett
>>>
>>> ---
>>> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>>
>>>
>>> Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth.
>>> Check out www.info-ed.com for information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@

Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

[tonylist]

I clearly understand this, where did you get $50k per AP and $800 per CPE??
Wimax? I would not care if a WISP had the money of a cellular company, these
prices would not make scenes in either case.  On top of this, cost of the
equipment was not the point, but I am fully aware this makes a differences
in a WISP business. My point is simply to the quote "20 MHz here and there
just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real throughput requires that much
per sector." Which is 100% wrong 20Mhz here and there will make a HUGE
difference to WISP as long as you have cost effective equipment to deploy in
these frequencies ranges.

My prediction is over the next 18-36 months is any WISP that is going to say
in the business will start to migrate fully over to 3.65Ghz and depending on
what happens with white space, which is the holy grail for WISP if we can
get 802.22 as the standard like ATSC is for digital TV, start looking at it
for the best WISP solutions for most of the country.

Comments Welcome! :)


Sincerely, Tony Morella
Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
http://www.demarctech.com 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 10:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

Tony, the average Wisp is NOT a cellular company and cannot invest 50K per 
AP and 800 per CPE.







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative


> Mike
>
> I do not agree with this at all. Most WISP are used to using 20Mhz 802.11
> devices which are VERY frequency inefficient. With 20Mhz and a radio
> designed to make the most use of the spectrum could easily create channels
> using 3.5Mhz or 7Mhz in size plus channel reuse and polarizations. I could
> have well over 1Gb per cell site with users in the 2-3000 range.
>
> 802.22 is working on a protocol that is perfect for WISP and can make use 
> of any spectrum very efficiently.
>
>
> Sincerely, Tony Morella
> Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
> Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
> http://www.demarctech.com
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:25 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
> Hopefully he's not referring to the 20 MHz they're trying to make for free
> access there.
>
> 20 MHz here and there just isn't going to work for broadband.  Real
> throughput requires that much per sector.
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:56 PM
> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
>
>
>>
>
http://telephonyonline.com/external.html?q=http://www.pcworld.com/businessce
>> nter/article/147485/fcc_member_lessig_unveil_us_broadband_initiative.html
>>
>> Looks like this could be the start of a good thing. The mention freeing 
>> up
>> more spectrum for wireless.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Scottie Arnett
>>
>> ---
>> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>>
>>
>> Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth.
>> Check out www.info-ed.com for information.
>>
>>
>>
>

> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> 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 Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 



-

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Mac Dearman]

Kurt,

  What firmware are you running?
How many emails are you filtering?
Have you done a "hard reboot" on it lately?
How many Spam emails are you killing per hour? Per day? (There is a Daily
Traffic graph/email that tell you this)

I know mine too (Cuda) is sluggish, but it's the amount of incoming spam
that is bogging us down. We are getting hammered (and have been for months)
by spam in excess of 500,000 per 24 hours.

 I will agree - Cuda is a PITA and we will begin testing with Jeremy Davis
this week. He hosts the backend (web hosting, email, radius, Freeside...etc)
for a bunch of other WISPs including SPAM filtering - My fingers are crossed
and if you will holler at me off list later this week I will give you a
report on how things are going.

Mac



> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 11:00 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda
> 
> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>   it is free to install on any server. I have
> a
> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I
> don't
> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
> got
> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
> subscription when you can't even log into it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> -
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> 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/
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.2/1523 - Release Date:
> 6/28/2008 7:00 AM




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Gotta love lighting....

[Dennis Burgess - LinkTechs.net]

Mark,

We are NOT far at all, in House Springs, just south of St. Louis.  Rolla 
is just about 1 1/2 hours from us!

Give Jim a call on his cell at 314-565-6863.  We are a MT distributor 
and can get you whatever you need! 

--
* Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services*
314-735-0270
http://www.linktechs.net 

*/ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training 
/*



Mark McElvy wrote:
> I have lost three towers in the last two days. I got one back this
> morning and may be able to get a second up this afternoon if it will
> quit raining. The third tower I need some equipment for. I am in central
> Missouri, near Rolla, and need RB532 or equivalent, an XR2, and a
> Tranzeo TR5a-24.  If anyone can help that is close by, 4to 5 hr drive,
> please call. 
>
>  
>
> Mark McElvy
> AccuBak Data Systems, Inc.
> 573.247.9980 - Mobile
>  
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[Kurt Fankhauser]

I have not called them, I am running about 20,000 emails a day through this
200.

Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Thomas
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 1:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

Have you called Barracuda Support? They are good to work with and may be 
able to help you-you could have something weird going on in the box that 
needs to be fixed.  We don't generally sell the 200's, but I have had 
300's that handle 60,000 + emails a day and aren't breaking a sweat.

John Thomas

Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>   it is free to install on any server. I have a
> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I don't
> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only
got
> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500. 
>
>  
>
> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
> subscription when you can't even log into it.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] alternative to Barracuda

[John Thomas]

Have you called Barracuda Support? They are good to work with and may be 
able to help you-you could have something weird going on in the box that 
needs to be fixed.  We don't generally sell the 200's, but I have had 
300's that handle 60,000 + emails a day and aren't breaking a sweat.

John Thomas

Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> Has anyone used this spam firewall? http://www.untangle.com
>   it is free to install on any server. I have a
> Barracuda SF200 and this thing is making me angry. It is so slow I don't
> even bother trying to log into it. It times out constantly and is so
> un-responsive. When it does work it takes a min of 30 seconds to change
> pages and that's when it is working properly. Its not overloaded I only got
> <200 email addresses and its rated for 500. 
>
>  
>
> I'm looking for anything this Barracuda junk is not worth the $500 year
> subscription when you can't even log into it.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> 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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] DNS help

[Rogelio]

Rogelio wrote:
> One thing I use to monitor domains is check_dns on Nagios.  With it, I 
> can monitor the IP of A records, DNS authorities, etc.  You might 
> consider using this tool if this becomes an ongoing problem.

I just checked, and there is a new plugin that looks like it does more 
than check_dns

http://nagiosplugins.org/man/check_dig

If you need any help with it, let me know, and I'd be happy to point you 
in the right direction.  Nagios is a life saver!



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] DNS help

[Rogelio]

Travis Johnson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We are currently having a DNS issue with etsy.com. We are able to ping 
> and traceroute to their nameservers and webservers, but we are unable to 
> resolve their IP info using our DNS servers. Therefore, we have users 
> calling us that they can't access the website. Any ideas on where I 
> could start troubleshooting this? Our DNS guru is gone for a week. :(

Not sure if someone has answered this or not, but nslookup is your 
friend here (as is dig).

More info on both tools can be found here:

http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch10/

One thing I use to monitor domains is check_dns on Nagios.  With it, I 
can monitor the IP of A records, DNS authorities, etc.  You might 
consider using this tool if this becomes an ongoing problem.

I use it for my clients who have 100s of domains, and it works like a champ!



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/