Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread Jeromie Reeves 
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" 
>>  >  > >  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.

Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
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" 
>  >  > >  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@wisp

Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
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" 
>  > >  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.o

Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread Mac Dearman 
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" 
> >  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!

2008-07-01 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
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" 
>  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/

Re: [WISPA] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread Mark Nash 
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" 
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] help! replacement MT based 5.8G system connects, but no ping!

2008-07-01 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP

2008-07-01 Thread John Scrivner 
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.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Harold Bledsoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> 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 
>> To: WISPA General List 
>> 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  with
>> interest".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> 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 respectiv

Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 112

2008-07-01 Thread Mike Goicoechea 
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] RouterBoard 112

2008-07-01 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE 
* 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/

[WISPA] RouterBoard 112

2008-07-01 Thread Blair Davis 
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/

[WISPA] biz-grade PTL solutions

2008-07-01 Thread Rogelio 
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/

Re: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65

2008-07-01 Thread Jack Unger 
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 
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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP

2008-07-01 Thread reader 
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.







- Original Message - 
From: "Harold Bledsoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
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 
> To: WISPA General List 
> 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  with
> interest".
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> 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/
>
>
>
>

Re: [WISPA] unlic wimax on 3.65

2008-07-01 Thread David Peterson 
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] FCC Member, Lessig Unveil U.S. Broadband Initiative

2008-07-01 Thread Mike Hammett 
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" 
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" 
> 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" 
>> 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
>

Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP

2008-07-01 Thread Harold Bledsoe 
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 
To: WISPA General List 
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  with 
interest".







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
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: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP

2008-07-01 Thread reader 
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  with 
interest".







- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
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/