Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
John, I support that opinion. I was never for splitting the band. That was always the worst choice in my opinion. I was not against WiMax use of it, I was just dead against Full Licensing of any of it, liek the WIMax guys originally were asking for. Although a mute point for me, as I'm in a quietzone :-( However, getting that changed is a tough battle politically. 3650 was always meant to be the science project. 3650 is what was encouraging 802.22 and 802.16h explorations to have standards tested before whitespaces got here. What we really need is a Labeling requirement. I scouted out another interferer today in 5.8Ghz with their radio blasting on ALL channels, mounted on local government right of way. No phone number, No name. I feel like considering it abandoned property, and having target practice. Just kidding. Wish these morons would label their gear with contact info. Argg. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:14 PM Subject: 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
Re: [WISPA] Spam from ligowave?
Not only is Ligowave a WISPA member, but... If you read your Ligowave advertisement, you might actually learn about a really cool product. I wouldn't advise opting out. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband 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
Every once in a while you read a post, that you say, I'm really glad I read that. That was one of them. Well said. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I am reminded of a short story I read many years ago. A salesman for farm equipment was out calling on customers in middle America and following his directions found himself turning off the maintained county road into a side road and was immediately confronted with a wide, very deeply rutted, muddy road, which disappeared around a bend just a short distance away. Immediately to his right was a hand lettered sign tacked to a fence corner that read PIck your rut carefully, you'll be in it for miles. Now, I suggest before we attempt to all climb into the same wagon, that we think long and hard about whether we all wish to be in the same rut. On another part of your topic, I don't know anyone who understands the 802.11 standard who likes it, much less loves it. On the other hand, we live in a world constrained by reality, and that reality is, that consumer driven development of the 802.11 chipsets has resulted in vast economies of scale which are tied to the 802.11 world. That allows us economical deployments that generate revenue, which pays for research into new and better ideas. Not just a few people ARE attempting to find the means of applying the mass produced hardware without being chainganged to the 802.11 weaknesses. I, for one, believe many of us are improving those odds by sticking with those software innovators, who will in time create viable and competitive alternatives to a monopoly. Whether we are chained to an 802.11 monopoly or a WiMax monopoly, neither is wise or wanted, in my view. As 'tempting' as it may seem, I never found that following a crowd resulted in my success - only my mediocrity. If the ONLY means by which I can compete is the colors painted on my install rig, the name I choose, and the gullibility of my investors to throw money into a sinking pit until I have squashed all other competition and then am a monooly free to rape and pillage until I am the equivalent of Standard Oil, then I'm already excluded from this game. The combined might of all the WISP's behind a single standard will definitely cause inflation, not economies of scale in innovative research. Innovation comes from thinking outside the box... outside the rut... outside of what everyone else is doing. We'll simply stifle any outside the box development. This is not to say that Much miles are not made from DOCSIS - to use a given example - but that two cable companies have no means of actual competition with each otehr... Besides the name, protecting territory via by law, slicker advertising, or by driving the otehr out of business - or finding more or deeper pocket investors. We could all probably dig and find at least a score of spectacular examples of this kind of let's all choose one road to follow, which DID result in at least one or two big winners, to the exclusion of everyone else. I'm thinking...Telco, Cableco, desktop OS's... None of which today we admire for thier innovation and continual striving for stunningly new results. How many years did it take phone companies to bring us ubuquitous broadband, even though they all agreed on wonderful standards? Seen the latest contender for desktop OS's at Walmart lately? Seen any companies outside of the Cable TV realm making any original research into a better mousetrap for delivering a network to clients over a CATV environment? Nope, they're all in one box and you'd have to be stupid to waste your money. Even a better system will never sell, the market has only a few players in a tight club. If you really think that success is found in travelling the road of life, all single file on the same road, by all means, speak up. I, for one, think this notion is one of the worst ideas I've seen in a years. Then again, there are those who aspire to be seen in the eyes of whoever they consider their peers, to be some specific type or image, and the prestige of being in an industry of a few big players playing footsie with the rich, powerful, or famous, seems really tempting to a lot of politcal aspirants. In my less than fully humble opinion, this is playing politics, not entrepreneurism. It may result in what they define as success, but it will not by my definition, certainly. Just call me a highly skeptical curmudgeon. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 1:36 PM
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I agree that CBP should not have been a requirement for the hardware. A listen before you speak protocol makes some bad assumptions about the chances of a successful packet delivery. For example, on a longer PTP link, just because there is noise at the transmitter, it does not mean that there is the same noise at the receiver. On the other hand, there may be a client that is trying to receive that is right next to the transmitter, and it may not be detected by a listen-before-speak protocol. I do agree with a provision to mandate cooperation (although the effectiveness or enforcement of this could be debated). At least this is encouraging parties to work together and in fact is usually in their best interest to work together. -Hal -Original Message- From: Tom DeReggi [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: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:53:53 -0500 Just to clarify my last post... I was not supportive in all 50Mhz being allocated to WiMax. I was supportive in all 50Mhz being allocated without the contention protocol requirement, So there would be 50 contiguous mhz for a common platform. Not requiring contention base, still allows choice of platform and technology, it just doesn't restrict platforms, nor protect any.. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 2:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I respectfully disagree. In my opinion, any frequency that is tied to a particular standard by regulation will do nothing but stifle innovation in that band. -Hal -Original Message- From: John Scrivner [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 16:14:48 -0500 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
Re: [WISPA] Spam from ligowave?
Fair enough. All of our account sign-up forms have a required Ok to email selection where there is no default and you must choose yes or no. https://store.ligowave.com/createaccount.aspx? I guess this could be opt-in or opt-out depending on your view on life. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Spam from ligowave? Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 00:00:23 -0500 (CDT) On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Harold Bledsoe wrote: No, really, we didn't harvest anyone's email from any mailing lists. We are very careful to only market to customers of our companies (Deliberant, Ligowave, Wiligear, Wilibox) and have a very simple removal and opt out policy that we honor. The world has changed somewhat over the past few years. While I appreciate your opt-out policy, I feel the need to ask...is your marketing list opt-in in the first place? I am not attacking here, but just wanted a bit of clarification. For me, most of my customers are on an opt-out list, but the first email sent to that list was one that was not marketing at all, but a note telling them that I planned to use the email they provided me for a marketing list. That was how I handled it, but each company operates differently. I'm sure you all market to your customers in various ways, and we do the same. We are also a vendor member of WISPA. Vendor membership offers a lot of nice relaxations of the normal posting policies. I am not accusing you of such a thing, but wanted to clarify that vendor membership does not provide a license to harvest... (I know you didn't harvest list addresses...) 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
There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient, cost effective and unified systems for outdoor wireless broadband. Do you think mixing several unrelated technologies into he same band is a good idea? I believe that we need to be using ONE platform in 3.65 and we need to all support it. Fragmentation of support, vendors, operators, etc. does not help our collective efforts. We need to decide on a platform and all of us need to use it if we are ever going to make headway as a group. The rest of the world is building WiMax in 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz. I just cannot see why we have to reinvent the wheel here. I assure you that if we all built on this platform that we could get the regulations changed to allow for WiMax use across the entire 50 MHz of this band. With GPS sync and 6 non-overlapping channels we could certainly avoid interference and deliver quality wireless broadband in 3.65 GHz. How does our industry standardizing on a platform like WiMax in 3.65 GHz stifle innovation? I think it does the opposite. I think it provides focus and clarity and economies of scale for a platform designed to provide outdoor wireless broadband. It is our best shot at building interconnected networks with scale and an exit strategy for operators, many having been running wireless broadband networks for over a decade. We are not getting any younger and someday we need to have something that someone will want to buy. I have given much thought to this. I am sure some will doubt what I am saying but I feel very strongly that we need to be setting a standard and supporting it as a group. If we cannot mass our buying power collectively toward a common platform VERY soon then we will not have to worry about it much longer because deeper pockets will do it for us. By most all accounts Telecoms with DSL and CableCos with DOCSIS have flourished by choosing industry standards for their broadband platforms and using it. They all support these same standards. I remember the early days of cable modems when there were 50 proprietary standards. Innovation came when the cable companies and their vendors banded together and built the DOCSIS standard and they all agreed to support it. That is innovation, focus, and efficiency. Why can't we do the same thing and learn from others who have succeeded? How can we achieve economies of scale with several different incompatible systems? I think we better wise up in 3.65 before we end up with an
[WISPA] People just don't want broadband
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/07/02/broadband.study.ap/index.html -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] People just don't want broadband
You can download the Pew Report here; http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_2008.pdf Frank Muto www.SecureEmailPlus.com - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 9:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] People just don't want broadband http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/07/02/broadband.study.ap/index.html -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I know it's done all the time, but I don't believe in wrecking a company just to sell it (not that I plan on selling my operation). From a buyer's perspective, I would rather the company hadn't converted operations lately just so that I could convert to what I wanted without having just bought new gear not long ago. From someone that couldn't care less about Canopy, it pleases me to see people skipping over non-Canopy operations. Now that I'm near a point where I can look at purchasing other operations, it means they have an artificially low price. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient, cost effective and unified systems for outdoor wireless broadband. Do you think mixing several unrelated technologies into he same band is a good idea? I believe that we need to be using ONE platform in 3.65 and we need to all support it. Fragmentation of support, vendors, operators, etc. does not help our collective efforts. We need to decide on a platform and all of us need to use it if we are ever going to make headway as a group. The rest of the world is building WiMax in 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz. I just cannot see why we have to reinvent the wheel here. I assure you that if we all built on this platform that we could get the regulations changed to allow for WiMax use across the entire 50 MHz of this band. With GPS sync and 6 non-overlapping channels we could certainly avoid interference and deliver quality wireless broadband in 3.65 GHz. How does our industry standardizing on a platform like WiMax in 3.65 GHz stifle innovation? I think it does the opposite. I think it provides focus and clarity and economies of scale for a platform designed to provide outdoor wireless broadband. It is our best shot at building interconnected networks with scale and an exit strategy for operators, many having been running wireless broadband networks for over a decade. We are not getting any younger and someday we need to have something that someone will want to buy. I have given much thought to this. I am sure some will doubt what I am saying but I feel very strongly that we need to be setting a standard and supporting it as a group.
[WISPA] Looking to buy - SU-A-5.3-xx-VL's
I am looking for a couple of Alvarion Subscriber units P/N SU-A-5.3-6-BD-VL or SU-A-5.3-54-BD-VL. If you have any, new or USED, please send asking price and qty off-line. Cliff LeBoeuf 985-879-3219 www.cssla.com www.triparish.net This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. 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
Its irrelevent how long the equipment will last, if the company that deploys it does not last. Its all about cash flow and healthy financials, not spec sheets. 10k-15k a sector is Huge. I hope these manufacturers, make it affordable, before the market is over. how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Good point, no dispute on resale value. But, its interesting to note that Cisco has a huge secondary (used) resale market. I wonder why that is? I can't remember the last time I saw a used Mikrotik for sale. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient, cost effective and unified systems for outdoor wireless broadband. Do you think mixing several unrelated technologies into he same band is a good idea? I believe that we need to be using ONE platform in 3.65 and we need to all support it. Fragmentation of support, vendors, operators, etc. does not help our collective efforts. We need to decide on a platform and all of us need to use it if we are ever going to make headway as a group. The rest of the world is building WiMax in 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz. I just cannot see why we have to reinvent the wheel here. I assure you that if we all built on this platform that we could get the regulations changed to allow for WiMax use across the entire 50 MHz of this band. With GPS sync and 6 non-overlapping channels we could certainly avoid interference and deliver quality wireless broadband in 3.65 GHz. How does our industry standardizing on a platform like WiMax in 3.65 GHz stifle innovation? I think it does the opposite. I think it provides focus and clarity and economies of scale for a platform designed to provide outdoor wireless broadband. It is our best shot at building interconnected networks with scale and an exit strategy for operators, many having been running wireless broadband networks for over a decade. We are not getting any younger and someday we need to have something that someone will want to buy. I have given much thought to this. I am sure some will doubt what I am saying but I feel very strongly that we need to be setting a standard and supporting it as a group. If we cannot
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I think it's very important to remember the cost of the CPE in this equation. The CPE will be the primary driver in your ROI. If you can spread the fixed cost of the AP over a large number of subs, obviously the cost to add a user declines each time you add another sub. However, if the CPE cost is overly burdensome, costs to add subs can greatly inhibit your growth from a cash management perspective. chris 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 WiMAX vendors are focused on the cost of the CPE; not the sector. CPE can be had for anywhere between $200 and $500 currently depending on vendor and volume. Vendors are working to get that price down with a 12 month target of being under $100. The oversubscription you can do on a WiMAX sector is simply beyond anything else currently available on the market. We are used to operating a fixed wireless business with no oversubscription, which allowed us to successfully target high revenue dedicated voice and data customers. Keeping the same business model we have found it possible to put as many as 30 CPE on a single 7Mhz sector. This allows us to save upwards of 37% on CAPEX and drop our installation intervals by 50%. -Matt On Jul 3, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Its irrelevent how long the equipment will last, if the company that deploys it does not last. Its all about cash flow and healthy financials, not spec sheets. 10k-15k a sector is Huge. I hope these manufacturers, make it affordable, before the market is over. how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Good point, no dispute on resale value. But, its interesting to note that Cisco has a huge secondary (used) resale market. I wonder why that is? I can't remember the last time I saw a used Mikrotik for sale. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient, cost effective and unified systems for outdoor wireless broadband. Do you think mixing several unrelated technologies into he same band is a good idea? I believe that we need to be using ONE platform in 3.65 and we need to all support it. Fragmentation of support, vendors, operators, etc. does not help our collective efforts. We need to decide on a platform and all of us need to use it if we are ever going to make headway as a group. The rest of the world is building WiMax in 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz. I just cannot see why we have to reinvent the wheel here. I assure you that if we all built on this platform that we could get the regulations changed to allow for WiMax use
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
The economics is simple with WiMAX. Either high revenue customers or lots of customers. If you don't have the volume or the revenue there are plenty of other cost effective solutions. -Matt On Jul 3, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: I've been seeing WiMAX CPE for $500 - $1000 in lower quantities. I currently spend $150 per CPE. I could see going up to $200 or $250, but not any higher in 5 or less quantities. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP The WiMAX vendors are focused on the cost of the CPE; not the sector. CPE can be had for anywhere between $200 and $500 currently depending on vendor and volume. Vendors are working to get that price down with a 12 month target of being under $100. The oversubscription you can do on a WiMAX sector is simply beyond anything else currently available on the market. We are used to operating a fixed wireless business with no oversubscription, which allowed us to successfully target high revenue dedicated voice and data customers. Keeping the same business model we have found it possible to put as many as 30 CPE on a single 7Mhz sector. This allows us to save upwards of 37% on CAPEX and drop our installation intervals by 50%. -Matt On Jul 3, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Its irrelevent how long the equipment will last, if the company that deploys it does not last. Its all about cash flow and healthy financials, not spec sheets. 10k-15k a sector is Huge. I hope these manufacturers, make it affordable, before the market is over. how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Good point, no dispute on resale value. But, its interesting to note that Cisco has a huge secondary (used) resale market. I wonder why that is? I can't remember the last time I saw a used Mikrotik for sale. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient,
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I agree with what John is saying in most part. The reluctance to fully support 3.65Ghz may be the cost for some, I know it is me. It is hard to justify spending 3x to Nx for a 3.65Ghz AP or SM. Another problem I have with 3.65Ghz is the NLOS problems. Where I operate we have hills, and lots of them with 60 - 80 foot trees. We mostly use 900Mhz here, and I would have loved to had some of the 700Mhz spectrum. Luckily, we are not having to compete with massive speeds where I am. The top-of-the-line DSL package here is 3 meg, 2 meg for cable. In the sparsly populated cities, we do some 2.4 and 5.8...but those cities are far and few in between. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM To: WISPA General List Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will see which platforms dominate over the next 5 years in wireless broadband. We are going to see some movement away from 802.11 based systems as a platform for delivery of outdoor broadband in all bands in my opinion. I think we will see a move toward licensed WiMax and LTE systems used predominantly for wireless broadband delivery as the next few years progress. I have little doubt that other platforms will be put to use but innovation will not occur from multiple platform distractions away from the goal of building efficient, cost effective and unified systems for outdoor wireless broadband. Do you think mixing several unrelated technologies into he same band is a good idea? I believe that we need to be using ONE platform in 3.65 and we need to all support it. Fragmentation of support, vendors, operators, etc. does not help our collective efforts. We need to decide on a platform and all of us need to use it if we are ever going to make headway as a group. The rest of the world is building WiMax in 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz. I just cannot see why we have to reinvent the wheel here. I assure you that if we all built on this platform that we could get the regulations changed to allow for WiMax use across the entire 50 MHz of this band. With GPS sync and 6 non-overlapping channels we could certainly avoid interference and deliver quality wireless broadband in 3.65 GHz. How does our industry standardizing on a platform like WiMax in 3.65 GHz stifle innovation? I think it does the opposite. I think it provides focus and clarity and economies of scale for a platform designed to provide outdoor wireless broadband. It is our best shot at building interconnected networks with scale and an exit strategy for operators, many having been running wireless broadband networks for over a decade. We are not getting any younger and someday we need to have something that someone will want to buy. I have given much thought to this. I am sure some will doubt what I am saying but I feel very strongly that we need to be setting a standard and supporting it as a group. If we cannot mass our buying power collectively toward a common platform VERY soon then we will not have to worry about it much longer because deeper pockets will do it for us. By most all accounts Telecoms with DSL and CableCos with DOCSIS have flourished by choosing industry standards for their broadband platforms and using it. They all support these same standards. I remember the early days of cable modems when there were 50 proprietary standards. Innovation came when the cable companies and their vendors banded together and built the DOCSIS standard and they all agreed to support it. That is innovation, focus, and efficiency. Why can't we do the same thing and learn from others who have succeeded? How can we achieve economies of scale with several different incompatible systems? I think we better wise up in 3.65 before we end up with an inefficiently used band with little chance of reuse (no GPS sync in 802.11x). All of us need to choose a platform which is designed to provide outdoor broadband efficiently and effectively. WiMax was built to fill this need and we need to start supporting it or face diminishing returns as the billions of dollars from others globally build over us. It is time for us to wake up and smell the coffee. The change is in the air and you need to be aware of it. The rest of the world is building WiMax networks to deliver wireless broadband. How long do we need to wait to see that this is not a fad? This is not just another option. It is how wireless broadband is going to be delivered in the 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz bands globally. Indeed it is how it is being done already. We are just late to the party. Do you think several non-cooperative systems (some of which are not even designed
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
Low CPE cost Excellent Point. However, its also important to be realistic about how many subs will occur on a sector. Our network has an average ratio of CPEs per AP of about 7. CPE cost has little effect on ROI in that condition. But yes agreed, if you can get the sub count up per sector high enough, AP cost starts to disappear. A lot of this also starts to depend on the geography and whether the super cell star design, is appropriate. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: chris cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I think it's very important to remember the cost of the CPE in this equation. The CPE will be the primary driver in your ROI. If you can spread the fixed cost of the AP over a large number of subs, obviously the cost to add a user declines each time you add another sub. However, if the CPE cost is overly burdensome, costs to add subs can greatly inhibit your growth from a cash management perspective. chris 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
Matt, Are you finding that the low noise floor (free spectrum) enabling high modulations are getting you the more CPE per sector, or are you finding that the WiMax protocol is delivering better results than other proprietary TDD based systems of equivellent modulations? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:32 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP The economics is simple with WiMAX. Either high revenue customers or lots of customers. If you don't have the volume or the revenue there are plenty of other cost effective solutions. -Matt On Jul 3, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: I've been seeing WiMAX CPE for $500 - $1000 in lower quantities. I currently spend $150 per CPE. I could see going up to $200 or $250, but not any higher in 5 or less quantities. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP The WiMAX vendors are focused on the cost of the CPE; not the sector. CPE can be had for anywhere between $200 and $500 currently depending on vendor and volume. Vendors are working to get that price down with a 12 month target of being under $100. The oversubscription you can do on a WiMAX sector is simply beyond anything else currently available on the market. We are used to operating a fixed wireless business with no oversubscription, which allowed us to successfully target high revenue dedicated voice and data customers. Keeping the same business model we have found it possible to put as many as 30 CPE on a single 7Mhz sector. This allows us to save upwards of 37% on CAPEX and drop our installation intervals by 50%. -Matt On Jul 3, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Its irrelevent how long the equipment will last, if the company that deploys it does not last. Its all about cash flow and healthy financials, not spec sheets. 10k-15k a sector is Huge. I hope these manufacturers, make it affordable, before the market is over. how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Good point, no dispute on resale value. But, its interesting to note that Cisco has a huge secondary (used) resale market. I wonder why that is? I can't remember the last time I saw a used Mikrotik for sale. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP There are cheaper options than 10k per sector but you are correct that's about the going rate between 10 and 15k per sector. However, this equipment is not anywhere near the same as the tinker toys as Scriv puts it. This equipment will last you much longer than the commodity equipment. It's easily twice as spectrally efficient and allows for a much easier deployment. A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. David Peterson WirelessGuys Inc. 805-578-8590 On 7/2/08 5:33 PM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $10k for a single AP is why. I can outfit two whole towers with MTI sector antennas for the price of 1 WiMAX radio. Gross throughput. My Mikrotik can do 35 megs of throughput vs. 20 (albeit a larger channel). I want to use WiMAX as it is more spectrally efficient (most important advantage in my eyes), but will not do so until vendors go after the masses and not early adopters. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I hope all of you will read this post. I have spent a long time writing it and I think it is very important for us to all think about the issues involved. How about if we tie the 3.65 GHz band to one technology with our wallets instead of making Uncle Sam do it with regulation? We will
Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. 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
Our network has an average ratio of CPEs per AP of about 7. CPE cost has little effect on ROI in that condition. Not so sure I understand this statement. If I currently pay $175/ CPE and a Wimax CPE is $500 That greatly affects my ROI. If your saying from an earlier thread that once a CPE is down to $200 that the ROI is only affected from the AP side I agree with that. It is that $5-10K Tower cost that will keep me out of that standard. The idea of WISPs all standardizing is great and would give us some interesting buying power. But I agree with an earlier post that the affordability of 802.11 did not come because a few of us got together and though it would be a good standard. It came more from the public acceptance of the standard and chipsets. Steve Barnes Executive Manager RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 1:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Low CPE cost Excellent Point. However, its also important to be realistic about how many subs will occur on a sector. Our network has an average ratio of CPEs per AP of about 7. CPE cost has little effect on ROI in that condition. But yes agreed, if you can get the sub count up per sector high enough, AP cost starts to disappear. A lot of this also starts to depend on the geography and whether the super cell star design, is appropriate. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: chris cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I think it's very important to remember the cost of the CPE in this equation. The CPE will be the primary driver in your ROI. If you can spread the fixed cost of the AP over a large number of subs, obviously the cost to add a user declines each time you add another sub. However, if the CPE cost is overly burdensome, costs to add subs can greatly inhibit your growth from a cash management perspective. chris 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
Hmmm, didn't realize flipping houses was an ethical gray area... (gosh, buy a distressed property, gut and redo the kitchen and bathroom, give it some landscaping- and make some dough. That is unethical? You know some of the original colonies of the new world had rules against charging interest and making a profit. They were not too successful. Adam Smith had some things to say about the subject.) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. 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] Trango 900 SU
Does anybody have any pricing on Trango 900 SU 10 pk? Thanks Chris Cooper Intelliwave LLC 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
Id have to say that the current landscape makes the oil investors look pretty sharp as well. I know the roughnecks around here poured some serious money into those holes they punched in the ground. I think they are pumping plenty of dollars back out now. chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 5:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Hmmm, didn't realize flipping houses was an ethical gray area... (gosh, buy a distressed property, gut and redo the kitchen and bathroom, give it some landscaping- and make some dough. That is unethical? You know some of the original colonies of the new world had rules against charging interest and making a profit. They were not too successful. Adam Smith had some things to say about the subject.) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. 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
Yeah, I got no problem with drilling for oil or any mineral. Actually even trading in options and derivatives is fine with me. Sub prime predatory lending is on the other side of the fence along with payday lenders, but we all have a line that we will not cross. Not my day to judge. - Original Message - From: chris cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Id have to say that the current landscape makes the oil investors look pretty sharp as well. I know the roughnecks around here poured some serious money into those holes they punched in the ground. I think they are pumping plenty of dollars back out now. chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 5:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Hmmm, didn't realize flipping houses was an ethical gray area... (gosh, buy a distressed property, gut and redo the kitchen and bathroom, give it some landscaping- and make some dough. That is unethical? You know some of the original colonies of the new world had rules against charging interest and making a profit. They were not too successful. Adam Smith had some things to say about the subject.) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless
[WISPA] Opinion - Licensed P2P Link
I am considering upgrading a P2P link that is 18 miles to a licensed link. It appears that Trango has attractive pricing on their Gigalink solution. We have used Trango equipment and have experienced the good and bad. However, I am overall pleased with the company and their products. I would like to know the good and bad of their Gigalink products from those that have implemented their solution, as-well-as any comparable/competitive solutions. Also, it appears that I can get 99.997 reliability out of an 11Ghz solution with 4ft dishes, and 99.8 from 6Ghz with the 6ft dishes. Do both of these numbers seem correct in my area of Louisiana? I do plan on keepong my current Orthogon 5.8Ghz link as a fail-over. Reply on or off-list. Thanks, Cliff LeBoeuf 985-879-3219 www.cssla.com www.triparish.net This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. 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] Opinion - Licensed P2P Link
I would suggest the 11ghz with 4ft dishes, just because of the smaller dish size. Especially if you have a backup link in place. Travis Microserv Cliff LeBoeuf wrote: I am considering upgrading a P2P link that is 18 miles to a licensed link. It appears that Trango has attractive pricing on their Gigalink solution. We have used Trango equipment and have experienced the good and bad. However, I am overall pleased with the company and their products. I would like to know the good and bad of their Gigalink products from those that have implemented their solution, as-well-as any comparable/competitive solutions. Also, it appears that I can get 99.997 reliability out of an 11Ghz solution with 4ft dishes, and 99.8 from 6Ghz with the 6ft dishes. Do both of these numbers seem correct in my area of Louisiana? I do plan on keepong my current Orthogon 5.8Ghz link as a fail-over. Reply on or off-list. Thanks, Cliff LeBoeuf 985-879-3219 www.cssla.com www.triparish.net This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. 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] RB333 heat
Hi, With temps now hitting 95F in the late afternoon, we are seeing several RB333 boards shut down and/or reboot. Once it cools down they go back to running fine. We have seen 5 boards out of 50 we have installed fail. They are all in DCE cases. Just wanted to share with everyone in case they are seeing strange problems with these boards. Travis Microserv 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] RB333 heat
Ow, definitely don't want to install those here in St. George. It gets down to 95 around midnight... Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, With temps now hitting 95F in the late afternoon, we are seeing several RB333 boards shut down and/or reboot. Once it cools down they go back to running fine. We have seen 5 boards out of 50 we have installed fail. They are all in DCE cases. Just wanted to share with everyone in case they are seeing strange problems with these boards. Travis Microserv 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/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc office: 435-773-6071 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] RB333 heat
I'm sure it's the sun hitting the DCE case with the temp being 95F... ;) Travis Randy Cosby wrote: Ow, definitely don't want to install those here in St. George. It gets down to 95 around midnight... Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, With temps now hitting 95F in the late afternoon, we are seeing several RB333 boards shut down and/or reboot. Once it cools down they go back to running fine. We have seen 5 boards out of 50 we have installed fail. They are all in DCE cases. Just wanted to share with everyone in case they are seeing strange problems with these boards. Travis Microserv 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] RB333 heat
Once upon a time, a man said that hell was full so they sent him to St. Geo. - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 4:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] RB333 heat Ow, definitely don't want to install those here in St. George. It gets down to 95 around midnight... Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, With temps now hitting 95F in the late afternoon, we are seeing several RB333 boards shut down and/or reboot. Once it cools down they go back to running fine. We have seen 5 boards out of 50 we have installed fail. They are all in DCE cases. Just wanted to share with everyone in case they are seeing strange problems with these boards. Travis Microserv 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/ -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc office: 435-773-6071 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
Yeahbut, recognizing an arbitrage opportunity does not trigger my ethical shutdown circuit. - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 5:33 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A lot of times, flipping a house is nothing more than putting on a fresh coat of paint. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 4:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP Hmmm, didn't realize flipping houses was an ethical gray area... (gosh, buy a distressed property, gut and redo the kitchen and bathroom, give it some landscaping- and make some dough. That is unethical? You know some of the original colonies of the new world had rules against charging interest and making a profit. They were not too successful. Adam Smith had some things to say about the subject.) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Inscape Data
Does anyone have any experience with Inscape Data? What is the AB54 2.1 like? What about support? Anything would be much appreciated Rudy 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 do not think we should build our networks for the sole purpose of suckering, err, selling to someone else. I do believe that I want anything I build to have value in the event I do sell. That is not suckering anyone. Why not build something that holds value or appreciates in value? I know a future plan for WISPs to build WiMax networks in 3.65 would result in better networks, better valuations for WISPs and better economies of scale. Leaning on 802.11 further is just not the plan we should be using for new bands and new opportunities like we have in 3650. We have a chance to build something greater than we have now. WiMax is what the rest of the world is already using in the 3.4 thru 3.8 GHz band. Do any of you think it is smarter for us to abandon the global scale afforded to us if we adopt WiMax in 3.65? I am surprised more of you are not speaking up and saying you agree with this philosophy. Dividing the camp on this will not help us as an industry. I would like to see this group, for once, accept that we need to do something together, as a group, for the common good. I think this is that opportunity. I see little reason for us to take any other course of action in 3.65 GHz. WISPs need to do something as a group to help our industry. WiMax in 3.65 is that logical step for us to work together and reach some scale and some value. This is not about suckering anyone or being stuck in a rut. This is a chance for us to move to the next level. It is almost embarrassing to me that we are actually behind the rest of the world here in the US when it comes to this band. WiMax is a serious platform with many advantages over anything else we have built and used. The light licensed opportunities in 3.65 are an incredible experiment that we need to show success in. If we choose WiMax and adopt this as the platform for 3.65 I believe we will advance our entire industry to a higher level of funding opportunities, operational reliability, more service offerings, etc. Scriv On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that a certain number of us ARE going to build a network for the sole purpose of suckering...errr, selling it to someone else. Now, I have severe ethical disagreements with this notion. It reminds me of flipping houses or speculative oil investing, perhaps? Now, to build a business SOLELY for the purpose of selling for a huge chunk of money to someone larger, of planned consolidation seems self-defeating. yes, you might profit, but wha have you really done productively? Still, there are many of us who are NOT intending to build to sell. We're not in the business of flipping customers to someone else. In that case, overspending for the return on your dollar makes little sense. I'm not sure if ANY hardware platform makes sense in this industry. If we run the numbers, does it actually havea positive return? I suspect not. Still, for those of us who aer NOT in the business of polishing up a turd to sell to someone else ( You have no idea how long I've waited to use that term, since I read it a few years ago!), the investment and prices don't make any real sense... insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP A number of WISPS are moving to this platform as they find that the higher end equipment is worth more on a buyout. Lets put it this way. If you have a network to sell, how much more do you think you will get if you have Cisco instead of Mikrotik? Nothing against them, but the quality of your infrastructure is heavily weighed during a buyout. If you don't agree, check the many spam's on this and other lists from the guys buying networks. Some won't even look at you if you don't have Canopy or better equipment. 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/
