Re: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65
David, In your haste to sell equipment you may have failed to understand that the question was about availability of unlicensed equipmement. The correct answer is that there is NO UNLICENSED 3650 OPERATION. All 3650 operation requires an FCC license. jack David Peterson wrote: Have them contact me offlist. We carry the top WiMax manufacturers in 3.65GHz. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 6/30/08 1:57 PM, Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone I know is looking for unlicensed wimax on 3.65 GHz. I told him I didn't know if that was available (but hadn't looked). Does anyone else have any comments or experience on this? -- -- 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] unlic wimax on 3.65
Dustin, I appreciate your thoughtful post. I general, I can help WISPs get equipment certified but 3650 is a little more difficult. The lab I work with hasn't been too responsive on 3650 inquiries. I have a contact at an alternate lab but I have not yet sounded them out regarding 3650. You are right on when you mentioned that I charge fees for certification work. I have done so many things for free that I DO have to charge someone for something in order to be able to pay for food, car insurance, Internet access, etc. :) jack Dustin Jurman wrote: A while back Jack Unger explained how to get your product and antenna through FCC licensing (Certified System). If you are doing this and you have UBNT radio's then I believe he said that the costs of certification could be less because you would only have to do a mini certification. I also believe he suggested that he could assist with the process for a fee. If you need something right away then I would suggest that you consider doing something like this yourself, asking WISPA for some help, or possibly getting with other WISPA members in need. Current WIMAX gear is limited to 7.5 mhz channels at max so you're only going to produce a certain amount of bandwidth (18 meg at the port). UBNT cards can run at 20mhz and if you can get them tested they can run closer to 29.00 real world bandwidth. (Tested at the port in the lab on UBNT cards). If I'm wrong about that Jack can slap me for mis-understanding a post. Dustin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 2:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65 Someone I know is looking for unlicensed wimax on 3.65 GHz. I told him I didn't know if that was available (but hadn't looked). Does anyone else have any comments or experience on this? 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Job Search...
I have a customer that is needing a part time assistant. He is in the Manor, TX area and being in that area would be considered a big plus. What he needs is someone who understands Mikrotik very well. He is using OSPF extensively, NAT is in several places as well. He needs a self-starter with 5-7 hours per week to spend with his network. I am available to assist with anyone who is interested in getting you acquainted with his network. Please contact me directly for further information and introductions. -- *Butch Evans*Professional Network Consultation * *Network Engineering*MikroTik RouterOS * *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* 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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
That's nice, but in real life the FCC has simply gotten on a tear and decided that NOTHING qualifies for what they want. I have no idea what the purpose of this rather odd bit of nonsense is about, but when it declares that 802.11 does not detect dissimilar systems, then nothing can EVER be made to work. After all, the whole listen before talk is AN RF ENERGY DETECTOR.If that doesn't work, nothing can. Or, only that device or mechanism the person passing judgement wants to promote will work. We would spectulate who has bought this favor from the FCC, but in reality, it doesn't matter. I predict NO equipment will be certified for the rest of the spectrum and it will be auctioned for big bucks to some large entity. We'll still be in the same boat 2 years from now, with statements about we're watching the development of insert technology du jour here with interest. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Update from the FCC. This makes is very clear to me what the FCC is looking for, if there are any questions or comments feel free. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com Tony: Thank you for your inquiry. In the email you mentioned that several companies have obtained equipment authorization for operation in the lower 25 MHz of the 3650-3700 MHz band. This is correct. In the Commission's evaluation these devices met the requirements for restricted contention based protocol operation. Thus all of these devices support contention based protocol, but they only support that for similar types of systems. They do not provide for recognizing and coexistence with other dissimilar systems. In order to obtain the authorization for the full 50 MHz operation the system has to demonstrate coexistence with different protocols. At the present time the Commission reviews each application on its merit to determine if the system meets the requirements for such unrestricted operation. The Commission is monitoring the progress of IEEE 802.16h and 802.11y working groups in terms of their plans to extend their respective protocols to support coexistence. We are encouraged by this development and think that they are in the right direction. However, it is not a precondition for authorization. In the absence of any industry standard, we treat each application on a case-by-case basis. One of the tests we do apply is the co-existence analysis recommendation currently under review by the 802.19 committee. We would expect to see some simulation to show how the proposed system would behave in the presence of other systems, the back-off strategies employed and approaches to fair sharing mechanisms. Please let us know if you have further questions. Thank you, Rashmi Doshi, PhD Chief, FCC Laboratory Division 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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
The RF energy detection mechanism of 802.11a is sort of based on power level. If the preamble is detected and decoded, then the mechanism is activated at -82dBm. Otherwise it requires a relatively high energy level (-62dBm). Although I agree that even -62dBm seems fair. It would be very useful to know what part of the CCA mechanism of 802.11a does not work for the FCC's contention requirement. If it is not the detection mechanism, then perhaps it is the backoff mechanism? -Hal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:23:31 -0700 That's nice, but in real life the FCC has simply gotten on a tear and decided that NOTHING qualifies for what they want. I have no idea what the purpose of this rather odd bit of nonsense is about, but when it declares that 802.11 does not detect dissimilar systems, then nothing can EVER be made to work. After all, the whole listen before talk is AN RF ENERGY DETECTOR.If that doesn't work, nothing can. Or, only that device or mechanism the person passing judgement wants to promote will work. We would spectulate who has bought this favor from the FCC, but in reality, it doesn't matter. I predict NO equipment will be certified for the rest of the spectrum and it will be auctioned for big bucks to some large entity. We'll still be in the same boat 2 years from now, with statements about we're watching the development of insert technology du jour here with interest. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Update from the FCC. This makes is very clear to me what the FCC is looking for, if there are any questions or comments feel free. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com Tony: Thank you for your inquiry. In the email you mentioned that several companies have obtained equipment authorization for operation in the lower 25 MHz of the 3650-3700 MHz band. This is correct. In the Commission's evaluation these devices met the requirements for restricted contention based protocol operation. Thus all of these devices support contention based protocol, but they only support that for similar types of systems. They do not provide for recognizing and coexistence with other dissimilar systems. In order to obtain the authorization for the full 50 MHz operation the system has to demonstrate coexistence with different protocols. At the present time the Commission reviews each application on its merit to determine if the system meets the requirements for such unrestricted operation. The Commission is monitoring the progress of IEEE 802.16h and 802.11y working groups in terms of their plans to extend their respective protocols to support coexistence. We are encouraged by this development and think that they are in the right direction. However, it is not a precondition for authorization. In the absence of any industry standard, we treat each application on a case-by-case basis. One of the tests we do apply is the co-existence analysis recommendation currently under review by the 802.19 committee. We would expect to see some simulation to show how the proposed system would behave in the presence of other systems, the back-off strategies employed and approaches to fair sharing mechanisms. Please let us know if you have further questions. Thank you, Rashmi Doshi, PhD Chief, FCC Laboratory Division 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:
Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative
As an ISP, you have to keep up with the Joneses. The reason why dial-up has died, is because companies began to engineer their web applications for the up to 1 meg service of DSL and cable (20 times faster than dialup). With cable at 15+ megs, DSL available at 10 - 15 megs, and new fiber plants offering 50 megs, even 1 meg service is starting to be the dial-up of today. I would much rather pressure industry to develop faster technologies before I need them than be forced by my customers to get faster equipment when we haven't been pressuring industry. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative WISPs need to be able to deploy 10 megabit plus pipes to the home. No they don't. WISPs need to deploy 10mbps pipes to homes in order to compete equally with Cable Cos and RBOCs. I serve many neighborhoods today, with 900Mhz inteference haven, and they are glad I'm there. 30% of America still does not use broadband. I'm sure they'll be thrilled with their new abilty to ahve always on Email and basic Web just like today's broadband users were 5 years ago. But there are many applications that 20Mhz will solve. I agree, giving an additional 20Mhz will not solve the world's wireless broadband problems, but every bit helps, and 20Mhz helps alot. People's 25 Mhz 3650 now becomes 45Mhz, when they combine 2155 with 3650. Manufactureres need to build multi-band radios, bit that apears to be no problem, based on current tri-band plaus radios on the market today. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 4:11 PM 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 wireless@wispa.org 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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org 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' wireless@wispa.org 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
Re: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65
If you can call the current Light-licensed scheme put in place by the FCC, then yes naturally you have to register your towers and equipment with the FCC. However, the procedure is not terribly difficult to navigate and the cost is not prohibitive. What I was referring to was the WiMax 3.65GHz vendors not the UNLICENSED portion of the post. David On 7/1/08 2:06 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, In your haste to sell equipment you may have failed to understand that the question was about availability of unlicensed equipmement. The correct answer is that there is NO UNLICENSED 3650 OPERATION. All 3650 operation requires an FCC license. jack David Peterson wrote: Have them contact me offlist. We carry the top WiMax manufacturers in 3.65GHz. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 6/30/08 1:57 PM, Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone I know is looking for unlicensed wimax on 3.65 GHz. I told him I didn't know if that was available (but hadn't looked). Does anyone else have any comments or experience on this? -- -- 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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
The energy level for backoff CAN be adjusted. The FCC says that NEITHER is acceptable, and even though the atheros mechanism is just an energy detection, it will not be allowed. This is what I gathered from an assortment of emails on the topic, some of which were from the FCC to someone wanting certification. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:52 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP The RF energy detection mechanism of 802.11a is sort of based on power level. If the preamble is detected and decoded, then the mechanism is activated at -82dBm. Otherwise it requires a relatively high energy level (-62dBm). Although I agree that even -62dBm seems fair. It would be very useful to know what part of the CCA mechanism of 802.11a does not work for the FCC's contention requirement. If it is not the detection mechanism, then perhaps it is the backoff mechanism? -Hal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:23:31 -0700 That's nice, but in real life the FCC has simply gotten on a tear and decided that NOTHING qualifies for what they want. I have no idea what the purpose of this rather odd bit of nonsense is about, but when it declares that 802.11 does not detect dissimilar systems, then nothing can EVER be made to work. After all, the whole listen before talk is AN RF ENERGY DETECTOR.If that doesn't work, nothing can. Or, only that device or mechanism the person passing judgement wants to promote will work. We would spectulate who has bought this favor from the FCC, but in reality, it doesn't matter. I predict NO equipment will be certified for the rest of the spectrum and it will be auctioned for big bucks to some large entity. We'll still be in the same boat 2 years from now, with statements about we're watching the development of insert technology du jour here with interest. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Update from the FCC. This makes is very clear to me what the FCC is looking for, if there are any questions or comments feel free. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com Tony: Thank you for your inquiry. In the email you mentioned that several companies have obtained equipment authorization for operation in the lower 25 MHz of the 3650-3700 MHz band. This is correct. In the Commission's evaluation these devices met the requirements for restricted contention based protocol operation. Thus all of these devices support contention based protocol, but they only support that for similar types of systems. They do not provide for recognizing and coexistence with other dissimilar systems. In order to obtain the authorization for the full 50 MHz operation the system has to demonstrate coexistence with different protocols. At the present time the Commission reviews each application on its merit to determine if the system meets the requirements for such unrestricted operation. The Commission is monitoring the progress of IEEE 802.16h and 802.11y working groups in terms of their plans to extend their respective protocols to support coexistence. We are encouraged by this development and think that they are in the right direction. However, it is not a precondition for authorization. In the absence of any industry standard, we treat each application on a case-by-case basis. One of the tests we do apply is the co-existence analysis recommendation currently under review by the 802.19 committee. We would expect to see some simulation to show how the proposed system would behave in the presence of other systems, the back-off strategies employed and approaches to fair sharing mechanisms. Please let us know if you have further questions. Thank you, Rashmi Doshi, PhD Chief, FCC Laboratory Division 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!
Re: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65
Yes, I do call the current 3650 licensed-lite licensing rules licensed because it IS licensed. It's true that the 3650 licensing requirements are not prohibitively expensive or difficult but a licensed service is significantly different than a license-exempt service where the rules were not made to be enforced. A licensed service requires a higher level of both knowledge and responsibility from the licensee compared to the license-exempt environment. David Peterson wrote: If you can call the current Light-licensed scheme put in place by the FCC, then yes naturally you have to register your towers and equipment with the FCC. However, the procedure is not terribly difficult to navigate and the cost is not prohibitive. What I was referring to was the WiMax 3.65GHz vendors not the UNLICENSED portion of the post. David On 7/1/08 2:06 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, In your haste to sell equipment you may have failed to understand that the question was about availability of unlicensed equipmement. The correct answer is that there is NO UNLICENSED 3650 OPERATION. All 3650 operation requires an FCC license. jack David Peterson wrote: Have them contact me offlist. We carry the top WiMax manufacturers in 3.65GHz. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 6/30/08 1:57 PM, Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone I know is looking for unlicensed wimax on 3.65 GHz. I told him I didn't know if that was available (but hadn't looked). Does anyone else have any comments or experience on this? -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] biz-grade PTL solutions
In friends' homes, I've been been recommending various PTL solutions to snake their network connection in some nook and cranny. Thus far, I've found Netgear's solution good http://tinyurl.com/2cfekl In fact, a few years ago, I used this unit in my parents' house. http://tinyurl.com/2cvnht I have not yet found anything business-grade in this department. If anyone has any good recommendations, I'd love to hear them. 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] RouterBoard 112
Anyone happen to know the Power Supply voltage for the old RouterBoard 112? Just got some of them and I can't find it on the RouterBoard ste Thanks. -- Blair Davis AOL IM Screen Name -- Theory240 West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 A division of: Camp Communication Services, INC 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] RouterBoard 112
* Blair Davis wrote, On 7/1/2008 2:33 PM: Anyone happen to know the Power Supply voltage for the old RouterBoard 112? Just got some of them and I can't find it on the RouterBoard ste Thanks. up to 48volts leon 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] RouterBoard 112
Blair, This is what was on the 112 spec sheet. Powering The board accepts 11..60 V DC from either power jack or Ethernet port: ? direct-input power jack J7 ・5.5mm outside and 2mm inside diameter, female, pin positive plug. ? PoE compliant with IEEE802.3af Power over Ethernet standard (except for no power over data lines is supported), which also accepts a wide range of non-standard input voltages. IEEE802.3af PoE controller is only operational starting from 22-24V DC, so the JP2 jumper should only be opened when powering from high-voltage standard compliant PoE injector. Note that the JP2 jumper position applies for both the power jack and PoE input. The maximal output of the power supply is normally 3.0A, but the efficiency is decreased on lower voltages, so it is about 2- 2.5A when powered from 12V DC. Here is the PDF spec sheet http://www.routerboard.com/pdf/rb110mA.pdf Mike Goicoechea -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Blair Davis Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 1:33 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] RouterBoard 112 Anyone happen to know the Power Supply voltage for the old RouterBoard 112? Just got some of them and I can't find it on the RouterBoard ste Thanks. -- Blair Davis AOL IM Screen Name -- Theory240 West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 A division of: Camp Communication Services, INC 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: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1528 - Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:26 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1528 - Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:26 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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I would like to see WiMax approved for the entire 50 MHz and do away with the contention mechanism requirement for the upper 25 MHz as required under the rules. I know this is a flip-flop of position from our earlier position but frankly I see this as a god opportunity for WISPs to move up to the next level of reliability and scale. Many people are building in WiMax with success in the 3.5 to 3.8 GHz bands across the world. If WiMax were the standard for the 3650 band across 50 MHz then carriers could easily work together to band plan and move away from interference. With GPS sync the bands can be reused multiple times anyway. Sticking with one standard in this band just makes sense for us. It can be a WISP band if we do this. Spanking more out of 802.11 is old news and needs to be put to bed. It is time to use a real platform for scalable and reliable outdoor wireless broadband. WiMax is the path to this in 3.65 GHz. 802.22 will be the standard in the TV whitespaces (hopefully). It is time for us to standardize and use something better than repurposed WiFi. Scriv On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:15 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The energy level for backoff CAN be adjusted. The FCC says that NEITHER is acceptable, and even though the atheros mechanism is just an energy detection, it will not be allowed. This is what I gathered from an assortment of emails on the topic, some of which were from the FCC to someone wanting certification. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:52 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP The RF energy detection mechanism of 802.11a is sort of based on power level. If the preamble is detected and decoded, then the mechanism is activated at -82dBm. Otherwise it requires a relatively high energy level (-62dBm). Although I agree that even -62dBm seems fair. It would be very useful to know what part of the CCA mechanism of 802.11a does not work for the FCC's contention requirement. If it is not the detection mechanism, then perhaps it is the backoff mechanism? -Hal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:23:31 -0700 That's nice, but in real life the FCC has simply gotten on a tear and decided that NOTHING qualifies for what they want. I have no idea what the purpose of this rather odd bit of nonsense is about, but when it declares that 802.11 does not detect dissimilar systems, then nothing can EVER be made to work. After all, the whole listen before talk is AN RF ENERGY DETECTOR.If that doesn't work, nothing can. Or, only that device or mechanism the person passing judgement wants to promote will work. We would spectulate who has bought this favor from the FCC, but in reality, it doesn't matter. I predict NO equipment will be certified for the rest of the spectrum and it will be auctioned for big bucks to some large entity. We'll still be in the same boat 2 years from now, with statements about we're watching the development of insert technology du jour here with interest. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Update from the FCC. This makes is very clear to me what the FCC is looking for, if there are any questions or comments feel free. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com Tony: Thank you for your inquiry. In the email you mentioned that several companies have obtained equipment authorization for operation in the lower 25 MHz of the 3650-3700 MHz band. This is correct. In the Commission's evaluation these devices met the requirements for restricted contention based protocol operation. Thus all of these devices support contention based protocol, but they only support that for similar types of systems. They do not provide for recognizing and coexistence with other dissimilar systems. In order to obtain the authorization for the full 50 MHz operation the system has to demonstrate coexistence with different protocols. At the present time the Commission reviews each application on its merit to determine if the system meets the requirements for such unrestricted operation. The Commission is monitoring the progress of IEEE 802.16h and 802.11y working groups in terms of their plans to extend their respective protocols to support coexistence. We are encouraged by this development and think that
[WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!
All, I'm at wits end as my network is crippled and I'm having problems getting the replacement system to talk. Both systems have the correct security key, as they will not register to each other correctly without it. The new system is ros3.9 and it is PTP with another ros2.9.50 system. These two systems connect with 65dbm signal strength but I can't ping from either end. I, of course double/triple checked interface IPs and masks. I have used MT for about a year and a half, without issue, however, I'm probably missing something here as I work with looming customer calls about when will the replacement system be up! Anyway, It would be great to speak to someone with more MT experience than myself on this one! Please hit me off list for details. Thank you kindly, Marshall Craw Rabbit Meadows Tech. 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] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!
Are the IP addresses on a bridge or an Interface? Mark Nash UnwiredWest 78 Centennial Loop Suite E Eugene, OR 97401 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.unwiredwest.com - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:18 PM Subject: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects,but no ping! All, I'm at wits end as my network is crippled and I'm having problems getting the replacement system to talk. Both systems have the correct security key, as they will not register to each other correctly without it. The new system is ros3.9 and it is PTP with another ros2.9.50 system. These two systems connect with 65dbm signal strength but I can't ping from either end. I, of course double/triple checked interface IPs and masks. I have used MT for about a year and a half, without issue, however, I'm probably missing something here as I work with looming customer calls about when will the replacement system be up! Anyway, It would be great to speak to someone with more MT experience than myself on this one! Please hit me off list for details. Thank you kindly, Marshall Craw Rabbit Meadows Tech. 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] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!
1. Kill all encryption on both ends, get them to pass traffic and then proceed with enabling encryption. 2. be sure you have WDS in the bridge or have both sides set to dynamic bridge1 (or whatever it is) 3. Be sure of your gateway on both sides (this is generally the easiest to jack up) Mac -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 7:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping! IP address on singel CM9 radio interface. Just Swapped out the pre configured RB333 system with a clean RB133 and freshly configured to the other AP. Still, it associates with encryption key, but no ping! (hope I still have hair by morning :-) On 7/1/08, Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are the IP addresses on a bridge or an Interface? Mark Nash UnwiredWest 78 Centennial Loop Suite E Eugene, OR 97401 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.unwiredwest.com - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:18 PM Subject: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects,but no ping! All, I'm at wits end as my network is crippled and I'm having problems getting the replacement system to talk. Both systems have the correct security key, as they will not register to each other correctly without it. The new system is ros3.9 and it is PTP with another ros2.9.50 system. These two systems connect with 65dbm signal strength but I can't ping from either end. I, of course double/triple checked interface IPs and masks. I have used MT for about a year and a half, without issue, however, I'm probably missing something here as I work with looming customer calls about when will the replacement system be up! Anyway, It would be great to speak to someone with more MT experience than myself on this one! Please hit me off list for details. Thank you kindly, Marshall Craw Rabbit Meadows Tech. --- - 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/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1528 - Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:26 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] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!
On the AP side (producion system for year), it shows this test rb133 registered with rx 1M and tx to it of 6M. Its like the rb133 system refuses to transmit at any rate above 1M?? Still, no ping between the two. On 7/1/08, rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no WDS and no Bridging involved. Using MT ping utility from either end. I have swapped out CM9 radios and gone to a 'clean' rb133 with the same ros2.9.50 as the AP. I moved the client closer and noticed one ODD thing. With -72db on both sides or even with -62db, the Registered rate is always 1M? yes, this is 802.11a, yes the radios are set to 5.8G. The 'default' rates are selected for radios on each end. Any ideas?? On 7/1/08, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Kill all encryption on both ends, get them to pass traffic and then proceed with enabling encryption. 2. be sure you have WDS in the bridge or have both sides set to dynamic bridge1 (or whatever it is) 3. Be sure of your gateway on both sides (this is generally the easiest to jack up) Mac -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 7:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping! IP address on singel CM9 radio interface. Just Swapped out the pre configured RB333 system with a clean RB133 and freshly configured to the other AP. Still, it associates with encryption key, but no ping! (hope I still have hair by morning :-) On 7/1/08, Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are the IP addresses on a bridge or an Interface? Mark Nash UnwiredWest 78 Centennial Loop Suite E Eugene, OR 97401 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.unwiredwest.com - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:18 PM Subject: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects,but no ping! All, I'm at wits end as my network is crippled and I'm having problems getting the replacement system to talk. Both systems have the correct security key, as they will not register to each other correctly without it. The new system is ros3.9 and it is PTP with another ros2.9.50 system. These two systems connect with 65dbm signal strength but I can't ping from either end. I, of course double/triple checked interface IPs and masks. I have used MT for about a year and a half, without issue, however, I'm probably missing something here as I work with looming customer calls about when will the replacement system be up! Anyway, It would be great to speak to someone with more MT experience than myself on this one! Please hit me off list for details. Thank you kindly, Marshall Craw Rabbit Meadows Tech. --- - 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/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1528 - Release Date: 7/1/2008 7:26 AM WISPA Wants You! Join today!
Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!
A quick way to check connectivity is to look at the neighbor list. You should see the other system (and as a bonus its IP). If you do not then something else is wrong (be sure the interfaces have it enabled). As mentioned, turn off the encryption and get it working first. Double check the arp tables too. How often and how much does your signal bounce? Are the antennas very firmly mounted? I have a 13 mile link that one end needs a stiffer mount, moderate wind causes enough deflection that the link rate drops. Still, no ping between the two. On 7/1/08, rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no WDS and no Bridging involved. Using MT ping utility from either end. I have swapped out CM9 radios and gone to a 'clean' rb133 with the same ros2.9.50 as the AP. I moved the client closer and noticed one ODD thing. With -72db on both sides or even with -62db, the Registered rate is always 1M? yes, this is 802.11a, yes the radios are set to 5.8G. The 'default' rates are selected for radios on each end. Any ideas?? On 7/1/08, Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Kill all encryption on both ends, get them to pass traffic and then proceed with enabling encryption. 2. be sure you have WDS in the bridge or have both sides set to dynamic bridge1 (or whatever it is) 3. Be sure of your gateway on both sides (this is generally the easiest to jack up) Mac -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rabbtux rabbtux Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 7:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping! IP address on singel CM9 radio interface. Just Swapped out the pre configured RB333 system with a clean RB133 and freshly configured to the other AP. Still, it associates with encryption key, but no ping! (hope I still have hair by morning :-) On 7/1/08, Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are the IP addresses on a bridge or an Interface? Mark Nash UnwiredWest 78 Centennial Loop Suite E Eugene, OR 97401 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.unwiredwest.com - Original Message - From: rabbtux rabbtux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:18 PM Subject: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects,but no ping! All, I'm at wits end as my network is crippled and I'm having problems getting the replacement system to talk. Both systems have the correct security key, as they will not register to each other correctly without it. The new system is ros3.9 and it is PTP with another ros2.9.50 system. These two systems connect with 65dbm signal strength but I can't ping from either end. I, of course double/triple checked interface IPs and masks. I have used MT for about a year and a half, without issue, however, I'm probably missing something here as I work with looming customer calls about when will the replacement system be up! Anyway, It would be great to speak to someone with more MT experience than myself on this one! Please hit me off list for details. Thank you kindly, Marshall Craw Rabbit Meadows Tech. --- - 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:
