Re: [WISPA] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
What I'd LOVE to figure out how to set up is a spoke and hub cache system. Squid (and probably other caches) support something similar, in the form of parent and child caches. It sorta works backwards from what you described, but the net benefit would be similar. Basically, you set up caches at your POP locations, each of which is configured to use a bigger cache in your NOC as their parent cache. (Of course, you have to set up suitable firewalling at every tower, to redirect traffic from that POP's customers to the local cache.) Customer types in ebay.com, goes to their local cache. If the information they want isn't there, that cache checks with the big cache in your NOC. If it also doesn't have that page, it fetches it from the public Internet, and passes it on down. It's not a push system, but that's probably alright. I'm not sure how well a push system would work anyway. Anything like, say, the monthly crop of Windows Update downloads, they'd get spread out to the individual caches quickly enough anyway. David Smith MVN.net 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] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
You can do this as well with Mikrotik. MT is very, very simple. We have seen avg savings of between 20-40%. With 25-30% being avg. Also, you can specify what sites you want to cache, typically done by IP, but you could also say that you only want to cache sites that are on different areas etc if you got the IP ranges that you wanted to use. Something else, is that you can specify a bit for the cache hit data. This means, you can throttle data that comes from your cache differently than the customers standard package! So, data that comes from your cache, maybe goes at full wireless speed etc. We usually drop in either a 80 gig or 250 gig SATA2 drive into our PoweRouter 732s. If they have a large customer base, we drop in 2 gig of ram just to be on the safe side. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* David E. Smith wrote: What I'd LOVE to figure out how to set up is a spoke and hub cache system. Squid (and probably other caches) support something similar, in the form of parent and child caches. It sorta works backwards from what you described, but the net benefit would be similar. Basically, you set up caches at your POP locations, each of which is configured to use a bigger cache in your NOC as their parent cache. (Of course, you have to set up suitable firewalling at every tower, to redirect traffic from that POP's customers to the local cache.) Customer types in ebay.com, goes to their local cache. If the information they want isn't there, that cache checks with the big cache in your NOC. If it also doesn't have that page, it fetches it from the public Internet, and passes it on down. It's not a push system, but that's probably alright. I'm not sure how well a push system would work anyway. Anything like, say, the monthly crop of Windows Update downloads, they'd get spread out to the individual caches quickly enough anyway. David Smith MVN.net 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] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
Hi, Are you somehow redirecting traffic to the MT box, or having all the traffic go through the box? Cache hit rates are going to depend on the size of the network... a 250GB drive would only cache about 4 hours of http traffic on my network... hit rates would be less than 5% I would guess. I've also heard MT doesn't work very well doing caching. Has this changed since v3 was released? Travis Microserv Dennis Burgess wrote: You can do this as well with Mikrotik. MT is very, very simple. We have seen avg savings of between 20-40%. With 25-30% being avg. Also, you can specify what sites you want to cache, typically done by IP, but you could also say that you only want to cache sites that are on different areas etc if you got the IP ranges that you wanted to use. Something else, is that you can specify a bit for the cache hit data. This means, you can throttle data that comes from your cache differently than the customers standard package! So, data that comes from your cache, maybe goes at full wireless speed etc. We usually drop in either a 80 gig or 250 gig SATA2 drive into our PoweRouter 732s. If they have a large customer base, we drop in 2 gig of ram just to be on the safe side. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* David E. Smith wrote: What I'd LOVE to figure out how to set up is a spoke and hub cache system. Squid (and probably other caches) support something similar, in the form of parent and child caches. It sorta works backwards from what you described, but the net benefit would be similar. Basically, you set up caches at your POP locations, each of which is configured to use a bigger cache in your NOC as their "parent" cache. (Of course, you have to set up suitable firewalling at every tower, to redirect traffic from that POP's customers to the "local" cache.) Customer types in ebay.com, goes to their "local" cache. If the information they want isn't there, that cache checks with the big cache in your NOC. If it also doesn't have that page, it fetches it from the public Internet, and passes it on down. It's not a push system, but that's probably alright. I'm not sure how well a push system would work anyway. Anything like, say, the monthly crop of Windows Update downloads, they'd get spread out to the individual caches quickly enough anyway. David Smith MVN.net 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] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
Keep in mind that if you move 250 gig, that does not mean that it will cache that. CNN is an exaxmple that has a cache time of 0 seconds, so it never caches it.That type of thing.I have never had a major issue with MT caching services. Works VERY good. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Are you somehow redirecting traffic to the MT box, or having all the traffic go through the box? Cache hit rates are going to depend on the size of the network... a 250GB drive would only cache about 4 hours of http traffic on my network... hit rates would be less than 5% I would guess. I've also heard MT doesn't work very well doing caching. Has this changed since v3 was released? Travis Microserv Dennis Burgess wrote: You can do this as well with Mikrotik. MT is very, very simple. We have seen avg savings of between 20-40%. With 25-30% being avg. Also, you can specify what sites you want to cache, typically done by IP, but you could also say that you only want to cache sites that are on different areas etc if you got the IP ranges that you wanted to use. Something else, is that you can specify a bit for the cache hit data. This means, you can throttle data that comes from your cache differently than the customers standard package! So, data that comes from your cache, maybe goes at full wireless speed etc. We usually drop in either a 80 gig or 250 gig SATA2 drive into our PoweRouter 732s. If they have a large customer base, we drop in 2 gig of ram just to be on the safe side. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* David E. Smith wrote: What I'd LOVE to figure out how to set up is a spoke and hub cache system. Squid (and probably other caches) support something similar, in the form of parent and child caches. It sorta works backwards from what you described, but the net benefit would be similar. Basically, you set up caches at your POP locations, each of which is configured to use a bigger cache in your NOC as their parent cache. (Of course, you have to set up suitable firewalling at every tower, to redirect traffic from that POP's customers to the local cache.) Customer types in ebay.com, goes to their local cache. If the information they want isn't there, that cache checks with the big cache in your NOC. If it also doesn't have that page, it fetches it from the public Internet, and passes it on down. It's not a push system, but that's probably alright. I'm not sure how well a push system would work anyway. Anything like, say, the monthly crop of Windows Update downloads, they'd get spread out to the individual caches quickly enough anyway. David Smith MVN.net 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/
Re: [WISPA] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
The people that we had the most problems with were web designers who's sites were cached and they couldn't easily see their changes. We always told then to add no cache to their sites. Thats an easy one to fix. Tell them to press [CTRL] F5. Thats all it takes on virtually any standards compliant cache. The real pain is when shopping carts or the like do not work. We have had far better success having Mikrotik redirect/DST-NAT too Squid then using the Mikrotik cache. Far fewer websites with issues. Running the cache on Mikrotik really shot the CPU load up on the Mikrotik as well. Strange the CPU load on the box running Squid is barely anything. In the process of upgrading our network and bandwidth. Gonna try the Mikrotik cache again to see if its improved any. Its so much simpler doing it with an inline Mikrotik box. Matt 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] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking
Looks like the FCC make take some action in enforcing its Net Neutrality Policies See: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2325396,00.asp Depending on the scope of their ruling, this could have a significant impact on how WISPs can control traffic on their own networks. Larry Yunker Network Consultant [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] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
You can build a good squid box with lots of memory and fast hard drives and get good results. The squid setup is also nearly infinitely tunable, as opposed to the ones in Mikrotik and StarOS which have a pretty vanilla configuration. Being able to tune the cache parameters helps a lot, along with putting the cache directories on a separate hard drive and/or multiple ethernet cards to maximize the traffic flow. I have also used caching servers during heavy bandwidth demand or outage times to offload some of my browsing traffic to cable or dsl connections at the edges of the network. From a deployment perspective, I have gotten the best results by letting any questionable customers bypass the caches. 95% of my customers are on 192.168.0.0/16 addresses, so we had a rule that directed the /16 network to the cache. Customers with public IP addresses do not go through the cache. That way, someone with a problem going through the cache would have to upgrade to a static IP so that they could bypass it.Relatively simple, and effective. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Matt wrote: The people that we had the most problems with were web designers who's sites were cached and they couldn't easily see their changes. We always told then to add no cache to their sites. Thats an easy one to fix. Tell them to press [CTRL] F5. Thats all it takes on virtually any standards compliant cache. The real pain is when shopping carts or the like do not work. We have had far better success having Mikrotik redirect/DST-NAT too Squid then using the Mikrotik cache. Far fewer websites with issues. Running the cache on Mikrotik really shot the CPU load up on the Mikrotik as well. Strange the CPU load on the box running Squid is barely anything. In the process of upgrading our network and bandwidth. Gonna try the Mikrotik cache again to see if its improved any. Its so much simpler doing it with an inline Mikrotik box. Matt 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] Any thoughts on a decent cache server
I've been watching the internet tv for the past 9 months. CNN, FOX, NBC, etc all have their news online. It would be great if those were cachable. Just like on tv a lot of the news bits are over and over again and why should we have to keep paying each view. The content providers like akamai, etc are valuable at this point. Dennis Burgess wrote: MTs implementation is very simple. Not a whole lot to configure, but thats what is great about it. Also, if your network is moving 250 gig every 4 hours, that don't mean everything will be cached. ie. CNN has a cache time of 0, so it won't be cached anyways. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Are you somehow redirecting traffic to the MT box, or having all the traffic go through the box? Cache hit rates are going to depend on the size of the network... a 250GB drive would only cache about 4 hours of http traffic on my network... hit rates would be less than 5% I would guess. I've also heard MT doesn't work very well doing caching. Has this changed since v3 was released? Travis Microserv Dennis Burgess wrote: You can do this as well with Mikrotik. MT is very, very simple. We have seen avg savings of between 20-40%. With 25-30% being avg. Also, you can specify what sites you want to cache, typically done by IP, but you could also say that you only want to cache sites that are on different areas etc if you got the IP ranges that you wanted to use. Something else, is that you can specify a bit for the cache hit data. This means, you can throttle data that comes from your cache differently than the customers standard package! So, data that comes from your cache, maybe goes at full wireless speed etc. We usually drop in either a 80 gig or 250 gig SATA2 drive into our PoweRouter 732s. If they have a large customer base, we drop in 2 gig of ram just to be on the safe side. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* David E. Smith wrote: What I'd LOVE to figure out how to set up is a spoke and hub cache system. Squid (and probably other caches) support something similar, in the form of parent and child caches. It sorta works backwards from what you described, but the net benefit would be similar. Basically, you set up caches at your POP locations, each of which is configured to use a bigger cache in your NOC as their parent cache. (Of course, you have to set up suitable firewalling at every tower, to redirect traffic from that POP's customers to the local cache.) Customer types in ebay.com, goes to their local cache. If the information they want isn't there, that cache checks with the big cache in your NOC. If it also doesn't have that page, it fetches it from the public Internet, and passes it on down. It's not a push system, but that's probably alright. I'm not sure how well a push system would work anyway. Anything like, say, the monthly crop of Windows Update downloads, they'd get spread out to the individual caches quickly enough anyway. David Smith MVN.net 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] Service Need
If anyone has service in: 22512 Glade Rd. Brookfield, MO Contact: Jim at 660-963-2442 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] Good 24vdc to 48vdc up converter
Anyone have a good DC-DC converter they like to buy. We've got 24v batteries, powering 24v canopy gear and 48v redline and Imagestream gear. Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] using fping to check for wifi roaming glitches
I was just showing this to one of my partners, and I thought I'd share it with the group Sometimes, one quick and dirty thing I do when checking roaming connectivity is to ping lots of things in parallel with fping (d/l here: http://www.brothersoft.com/fping-download-72435.html, then drop that in your c:\windows\system32\ folder) e.g. fping 192.168.100 192.168.101 192.168.102 -c -D -L c:\path\to\file.txt You'll see it pinging your devices continuously, and when you're done, you can simply control-c to end the parallel pings and have the file.txt as material for later review. 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] Good 24vdc to 48vdc up converter
http://www.solarconverters.com/equal2.htm I use their 12/24 volt converter and it works great. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John McDowell Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 1:52 PM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] Good 24vdc to 48vdc up converter Anyone have a good DC-DC converter they like to buy. We've got 24v batteries, powering 24v canopy gear and 48v redline and Imagestream gear. Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking
Without traffic management standards and support, our roads would be a bloodbath. Without the FCC you wouldn't have an open frequency for anything. As a Ham Radio operator for over 50 years, I appreciate the regulations that protected the nursery for some of our greatest electronic developments. With the FCC bending to some political shenanigans we do have some less-than-fair bias toward (ahem) a segment of the telecommunications industry. Granted. And, on the whole...I'm not sure I agree with the remainder of W.C. Fields' gravestone (although, they seem to be learning). But, we have a new and fertile environment for exploitation and interference. If a major broadband provider made the sources of media downloads (iTunes, etc.) either pay or suffer intolerable sluggishness (as opposed to the provider's own fast-as-hell pay-for-songs/movies site) then the provider is using their pipe to an unfair advantage. That's Net Neutrality as being presented to the FCC and Congress. Broadband providers, WISPA members included, are becoming a necessary utility. Here in San Antonio, the rumor was that (ex-pres.)Ed Whitacre not only didn't use computers but thought of e-mail as stupid. He was reportedly the source of the philosophy that ATT owned the transport and that GOOGLE was making BILLIONS off the connection and ATT wasn't participating. That's a perfectly natural perspective for an old timer with the pre-CarterPhone mentality. As a side note, however, I don't know where he was during the 1-900 fiasco in the '90s. However, we need to work together to present the positive benefits that we bring to the population, like the TVA. You can't argue with motherhood and virtue and that's what the message is. Flailing at boogiemen isn't a help. The fact that WISPA helps bring the bottom-of-the-list USA to the top of broadband users' survey is! . . . J o n a t h a n -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking Hyperbole is not helpful to discourse. If you want no FCC go to some other country. Are you really the anarchist you come across as? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 5:06 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Frank Muto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking Does the FCC have jurisdiction over all the bit-content passing on the Internet network or control of a providers management of network resources? Didn't you know the FCC was holy, and that objecting to anything they want is political and must be never spoken of here? /extreme sarcasm We, as an industry, should have been screaming at the top of our lungs, writing objections to EVERYTHING the FCC has tried to demand from us or take from us from the day WISPA was a legal entity, till now. And I mean EVERY mandate of any kind. But no, that's playing politics. When they issue decrees that turn your balance sheet negative and bankrupt you, will it still be political to object? -- -- 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] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking
Amen (Carterphone, had not thought bout that for a while) - Original Message - From: Jonathan Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 6:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking Without traffic management standards and support, our roads would be a bloodbath. Without the FCC you wouldn't have an open frequency for anything. As a Ham Radio operator for over 50 years, I appreciate the regulations that protected the nursery for some of our greatest electronic developments. With the FCC bending to some political shenanigans we do have some less-than-fair bias toward (ahem) a segment of the telecommunications industry. Granted. And, on the whole...I'm not sure I agree with the remainder of W.C. Fields' gravestone (although, they seem to be learning). But, we have a new and fertile environment for exploitation and interference. If a major broadband provider made the sources of media downloads (iTunes, etc.) either pay or suffer intolerable sluggishness (as opposed to the provider's own fast-as-hell pay-for-songs/movies site) then the provider is using their pipe to an unfair advantage. That's Net Neutrality as being presented to the FCC and Congress. Broadband providers, WISPA members included, are becoming a necessary utility. Here in San Antonio, the rumor was that (ex-pres.)Ed Whitacre not only didn't use computers but thought of e-mail as stupid. He was reportedly the source of the philosophy that ATT owned the transport and that GOOGLE was making BILLIONS off the connection and ATT wasn't participating. That's a perfectly natural perspective for an old timer with the pre-CarterPhone mentality. As a side note, however, I don't know where he was during the 1-900 fiasco in the '90s. However, we need to work together to present the positive benefits that we bring to the population, like the TVA. You can't argue with motherhood and virtue and that's what the message is. Flailing at boogiemen isn't a help. The fact that WISPA helps bring the bottom-of-the-list USA to the top of broadband users' survey is! . . . J o n a t h a n -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking Hyperbole is not helpful to discourse. If you want no FCC go to some other country. Are you really the anarchist you come across as? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 5:06 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Frank Muto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: FCC to Punish Comcast Over Web Blocking Does the FCC have jurisdiction over all the bit-content passing on the Internet network or control of a providers management of network resources? Didn't you know the FCC was holy, and that objecting to anything they want is political and must be never spoken of here? /extreme sarcasm We, as an industry, should have been screaming at the top of our lungs, writing objections to EVERYTHING the FCC has tried to demand from us or take from us from the day WISPA was a legal entity, till now. And I mean EVERY mandate of any kind. But no, that's playing politics. When they issue decrees that turn your balance sheet negative and bankrupt you, will it still be political to object? -- -- 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/
