Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents
What about Trango? Charles Wu wrote: So, what down converted 802.11a systems are there for 900? Mini-PCI: Ubiquiti Zcomax Vendor Solutions: Tranzeo Alvarion Vecima/WaveRider Wu-Wu Special* *We are doing some exploratory investigation =) -Charles - Original Message - From: "Charles Wu" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents Even thought this thread is a bit old, couldn't help but add my 2 cents (as there seems to be a resurgence of "puff" in this space) DISCLAIMER: I am also a vendor of various WiMAX 802.16d systems - so feel free to apply your necessary 'BS' filter Benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz 1. Spectral efficiency ( 4.85 gross bp/hz ) On a six sector configuration with only 25mhz of spectrum, you can effectively deliver approx 20mb per sector or 120 mb / per pop, 240 mb when all 50 mhz is supported. Support for thousands of subscribers is possible off the same BSU. This isn't all too exciting, IMO - there are plenty of systems out there that have similar (if not better) spectral efficiency characteristics as to what the WiMAX 802.16d standard offers...also, with the uncertainties of 3650 licensing, which is, from an interference protection perspective, not that much different that Part-15, higher order modulation schemes don't do much in the presence of noise Case in point: Why does everyone keep using Canopy 900 MHz systems when you can get an 802.11a OFDM-based down-converted system that delivers 3-4x the throughput? Well, it's a matter of what's actually going to work in the crowded 900 MHz band. 2. multiple vendor support ( currently you have Redline, Aperto, Airspan, Alvarion, all with FCC approved equipment ) The "concept" of interoperability is one of the most "oversold" features of WiMAX which needs to be explained... Fictitious Scenario: Say I had deployed Brand A system for my business users, and in order to enable VoIP services, I enable a variety of the more advanced MAC features (rTP for my VoIP)...I set up a variety of service flows that are customized to each user...blah blah blah Problem is, Brand A system, for whatever reason, didn't support UGS and a few esoteric service flow / packet filtering features, but at the time, I'm really not too concerned because (a) my customers don't demand UGS from me right now and (b) the concept of "WiMAX interoperability" story gives me the conclusion that if I really need UGS, I could just buy / upgrade to Brand X system and retain all of my Brand A CPEs that I've deployed. Now, 6 months later, I've deployed 50 CPE in the field, and business is doing good...so good in fact that 2 customers want to upgrade to a "premium" service that requires features not currently supported on Brand A AP. Luckily, I have a "WiMAX" system so I go upgrade Brand A AP with Brand X. Common sense would lead me to believe that Brand X would support all of my CPE's features, plus supporting the enhanced feature of UGS that I need Sorry, isn't going to work As things turn out, the only "interoperability" testing done between Brand A CPEs and Brand X APs were done at the Best Effort feature set (basic Ethernet connectivity)...additionally, Rf interoperability was done at a 3.5 MHz channel size, and I've been running Brand A at 10 MHz to maximize my throughput (oh, and Brand X only supports 3.5 MHz, 5 MHz 7 MHz channel sizes)...so to get this interoperability, I lose all of my rTP / VoIP prioritization for my entire network, or I have to go out and replace my 20 Brand A CPEs that are running VoIP with Brand X CPEs Oops What's the moral of the story? Ultimately, unless you're willing to run your network at the lowest common denominator, you're basically buying into a proprietary system. 3. Better RF performance ( even with siso systems ) Better RF performance as compared to what? And in what vein? I can easily "slant" the argument the other way by bringing up an example where a proprietary system outperforms WiMAX Noise Immunity: Are you saying that WiMAX has better noise immunity that Canopy (OFDM vs. FSK...yeah right) NLOS: Are you saying that WiMAX can do better NLoS than 900 MHz? Urban Reflective NLOS: Are you saying that WiMAX can do better Urban NLoS than a MIMO-based 1024-FFT OFDM system? 4. NLOS performance ( OFDM+OFDMA = More difficult shots obtain link ) See above 5. Better QOS support, and service flows ( UGS, NRTPS, ETC can be ) There can be an argument made that the WiMAX MAC is much more sophisticated than the Canopy / Alvarion VL / Trango / Tranzeo / CSMA-CA systems on the market today...that said, don't forget that there is a $$$COST$$$ for this sophistication...namely, you effectively lock yourself into a "proprietary" implementation of your WiMAX system 6. Greater scalablity ( Single sector can
Re: [WISPA] Fwd: Dateline NBC Special on TowerDogs
In a twist on all the dangerous-job programs viewers have already seen, Tower Dogs follows an unusual subcontract crew boss: a woman named X XXX, a single mom, former cheerleader, and the person keeping her tough-guy charges in one piece. Ha, I wonder if she is an ex-Marine too ... ;-) On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: according to figures cited by OSHA, these so-called tower dogs have the highest death rate per capita of any occupation in the country OUCH!!! I can just feel the impact on worker's compensation classification ratings already! 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/ -- Victoria Proffer CEO St. Louis Broadband Visit us @ www.StLBroadband.com 314-974-5600 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] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents
Paging Patrick Leary! This would be a great place for some insight. :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:20 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents Great post.Charles. What I find funny is The primary WiMax vendors, (Alvarion, redline, airspan, Aperto, etc) were always the Vendors that tried to sell their Non-Wimax grear for $10,000 an AP before WImax came to play. (For example: Alvarion still trying to sell unlicensed VL AUs for $6k and 54mb SUs for $1.5k ) The question I pose is... What is the driving force to price? Is Wimax expensive? Or is it the system manufactures that impose the expensive? Is WiMax just a buzzward excuse, to help justify why they can try to get the price they want? I argue that there is not anything functional about WiMax that makes it more costly to product. Any arguement to justify why it is expensive, is a load of Crxp. It doesn't have to be. (Actually, it does take significantly more processing power, so those 386-100Mhz SBCs are a thing of the past, but proportionally the SBCs and Chips with fast enough processing power, are inexpensive today.). I thought it rather interesting to see the N/MIMO mpci cards comming out (Ubiquitit SR71). It won't be long before the OEM 4 array antenna N class APs are on the Towers streets and into Mikrotik and other OEM products, doing to Wimax, what they did to proprietary unlicensed, driving price down. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents Even thought this thread is a bit old, couldn't help but add my 2 cents (as there seems to be a resurgence of puff in this space) DISCLAIMER: I am also a vendor of various WiMAX 802.16d systems - so feel free to apply your necessary 'BS' filter Benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz 1. Spectral efficiency ( 4.85 gross bp/hz ) On a six sector configuration with only 25mhz of spectrum, you can effectively deliver approx 20mb per sector or 120 mb / per pop, 240 mb when all 50 mhz is supported. Support for thousands of subscribers is possible off the same BSU. This isn't all too exciting, IMO - there are plenty of systems out there that have similar (if not better) spectral efficiency characteristics as to what the WiMAX 802.16d standard offers...also, with the uncertainties of 3650 licensing, which is, from an interference protection perspective, not that much different that Part-15, higher order modulation schemes don't do much in the presence of noise Case in point: Why does everyone keep using Canopy 900 MHz systems when you can get an 802.11a OFDM-based down-converted system that delivers 3-4x the throughput? Well, it's a matter of what's actually going to work in the crowded 900 MHz band. 2. multiple vendor support ( currently you have Redline, Aperto, Airspan, Alvarion, all with FCC approved equipment ) The concept of interoperability is one of the most oversold features of WiMAX which needs to be explained... Fictitious Scenario: Say I had deployed Brand A system for my business users, and in order to enable VoIP services, I enable a variety of the more advanced MAC features (rTP for my VoIP)...I set up a variety of service flows that are customized to each user...blah blah blah Problem is, Brand A system, for whatever reason, didn't support UGS and a few esoteric service flow / packet filtering features, but at the time, I'm really not too concerned because (a) my customers don't demand UGS from me right now and (b) the concept of WiMAX interoperability story gives me the conclusion that if I really need UGS, I could just buy / upgrade to Brand X system and retain all of my Brand A CPEs that I've deployed. Now, 6 months later, I've deployed 50 CPE in the field, and business is doing good...so good in fact that 2 customers want to upgrade to a premium service that requires features not currently supported on Brand A AP. Luckily, I have a WiMAX system so I go upgrade Brand A AP with Brand X. Common sense would lead me to believe that Brand X would support all of my CPE's features, plus supporting the enhanced feature of UGS that I need Sorry, isn't going to work As things turn out, the only interoperability testing done between Brand A CPEs and Brand X APs were done at the Best Effort feature set (basic Ethernet connectivity)...additionally, Rf interoperability was done at a 3.5 MHz channel size, and I've been running Brand A at 10 MHz to maximize my throughput (oh, and Brand X only supports 3.5 MHz, 5 MHz 7 MHz channel sizes)...so to get this interoperability, I
Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents
They dont have any ofdm 900 product gino -Original Message- From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 2:09 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents What about Trango? Charles Wu wrote: So, what down converted 802.11a systems are there for 900? Mini-PCI: Ubiquiti Zcomax Vendor Solutions: Tranzeo Alvarion Vecima/WaveRider Wu-Wu Special* *We are doing some exploratory investigation =) -Charles - Original Message - From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents Even thought this thread is a bit old, couldn't help but add my 2 cents (as there seems to be a resurgence of puff in this space) DISCLAIMER: I am also a vendor of various WiMAX 802.16d systems - so feel free to apply your necessary 'BS' filter Benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz 1. Spectral efficiency ( 4.85 gross bp/hz ) On a six sector configuration with only 25mhz of spectrum, you can effectively deliver approx 20mb per sector or 120 mb / per pop, 240 mb when all 50 mhz is supported. Support for thousands of subscribers is possible off the same BSU. This isn't all too exciting, IMO - there are plenty of systems out there that have similar (if not better) spectral efficiency characteristics as to what the WiMAX 802.16d standard offers...also, with the uncertainties of 3650 licensing, which is, from an interference protection perspective, not that much different that Part-15, higher order modulation schemes don't do much in the presence of noise Case in point: Why does everyone keep using Canopy 900 MHz systems when you can get an 802.11a OFDM-based down-converted system that delivers 3-4x the throughput? Well, it's a matter of what's actually going to work in the crowded 900 MHz band. 2. multiple vendor support ( currently you have Redline, Aperto, Airspan, Alvarion, all with FCC approved equipment ) The concept of interoperability is one of the most oversold features of WiMAX which needs to be explained... Fictitious Scenario: Say I had deployed Brand A system for my business users, and in order to enable VoIP services, I enable a variety of the more advanced MAC features (rTP for my VoIP)...I set up a variety of service flows that are customized to each user...blah blah blah Problem is, Brand A system, for whatever reason, didn't support UGS and a few esoteric service flow / packet filtering features, but at the time, I'm really not too concerned because (a) my customers don't demand UGS from me right now and (b) the concept of WiMAX interoperability story gives me the conclusion that if I really need UGS, I could just buy / upgrade to Brand X system and retain all of my Brand A CPEs that I've deployed. Now, 6 months later, I've deployed 50 CPE in the field, and business is doing good...so good in fact that 2 customers want to upgrade to a premium service that requires features not currently supported on Brand A AP. Luckily, I have a WiMAX system so I go upgrade Brand A AP with Brand X. Common sense would lead me to believe that Brand X would support all of my CPE's features, plus supporting the enhanced feature of UGS that
Re: [WISPA] Fwd: Dateline NBC Special on TowerDogs
Can't be any worse than it is right now.like $104 per $100 of salary in NY -B- On 7/18/08 12:19 AM, Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: according to figures cited by OSHA, these so-called tower dogs have the highest death rate per capita of any occupation in the country OUCH!!! I can just feel the impact on worker's compensation classification ratings already! -- -- 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] Just what we need.
Chuck McCown wrote: Time to speak up. Anyone care to translate this for those among us who don't speak lawyerese, and who don't live/work in Indiana? 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] Just what we need.
The power company wants to take rate payer money and build a broadband network that will contact each meter for the purpose of managing energy. It will also supply broadband to the homeowner if they want. This should not be allowed. - Original Message - From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Just what we need. Chuck McCown wrote: Time to speak up. Anyone care to translate this for those among us who don't speak lawyerese, and who don't live/work in Indiana? 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] Trango Fox 5300
If you anybody has some and are interested in selling 3 or 4, please e-mail me off list. Thank You, Cameron Kilton Broadband Department Assistant Systems Administrator Midcoast Internet Solutions http://www.midcoast.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (207)594-8277 ext. 108 -- -- This e-mail message may contain material that is confidential or proprietary to Midcoast Internet Solutions. If you are not the intended recipient(s) or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender, destroy all copies of this message, and delete this message from your computer. -- --- 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] Just what we need.
Chuck McCown wrote: The power company wants to take rate payer money and build a broadband network that will contact each meter for the purpose of managing energy. It will also supply broadband to the homeowner if they want. This should not be allowed. I'll bite. Why not? (The following may not represent the views of my boss, my company, WISPA for whom I occasionally do work, or even myself.) Power utilities have invested tens of millions of dollars into their infrastructure. As a publicly-regulated utility, they're required to continue to spend money on a regular basis to maintain and upgrade the infrastructure. Why shouldn't they be permitted to try to recoup some of that cost through non-traditional means? Are you arguing that they shouldn't be allowed to start using automated-meter-reading technology, or that they shouldn't be allowed to sell Internet connectivity using that same system? There's a very fine line between the two. David Smith 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] Just what we need.
No no, I am saying that the power rates represent a cost of doing business plus their regulated rate of return. They are asking that the expense of building a broadband network to be allowed to be added to their rate base. Thus keeping rates up and earning a rate or return on the broadband network. I don't care if they want to use below the line money to build and operate a network. But in the world of utility regulation, above the line expense is sacred. This would mean the little old lady that does not even have a computer would be paying for the broadband network as part of rates. That is not right. Power should be as low as possible and power rates should never support non regulated activities. This is called cross subsidization. I know a telco manager that was thrown against the wall and handcuffed in front of his board of directors by the state AG financial crimes unit because a disgruntled employee told them that he had directed above the line revenue to be used to pay for unregulated broadband equipment. This is a very touchy subject. - Original Message - From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Just what we need. Chuck McCown wrote: The power company wants to take rate payer money and build a broadband network that will contact each meter for the purpose of managing energy. It will also supply broadband to the homeowner if they want. This should not be allowed. I'll bite. Why not? (The following may not represent the views of my boss, my company, WISPA for whom I occasionally do work, or even myself.) Power utilities have invested tens of millions of dollars into their infrastructure. As a publicly-regulated utility, they're required to continue to spend money on a regular basis to maintain and upgrade the infrastructure. Why shouldn't they be permitted to try to recoup some of that cost through non-traditional means? Are you arguing that they shouldn't be allowed to start using automated-meter-reading technology, or that they shouldn't be allowed to sell Internet connectivity using that same system? There's a very fine line between the two. David Smith 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] top 10 benefits of Wimax in 3.65ghz - my 2 cents
Charles Wu wrote: Even thought this thread is a bit old, couldn't help but add my 2 cents (as there seems to be a resurgence of puff in this space) DISCLAIMER: I am also a vendor of various WiMAX 802.16d systems - so feel free to apply your necessary 'BS' filter What I find most interesting in the wireless space is the fact that the most wireless savvy people I know roll their eyes when WiMAX is mentioned. I'm not sure the reasons for this, but it seems to do with the over hyped expectations, as well as the fact that WiMAX really works only for those people who (a) have already bought spectrum rights, (b) are willing to buy a bunch of other equipment, (c) or have situations where the unlicensed spectrum is already too crowded. I'd love to know more about WiMAX, but I seem to get one extreme or the other from those I talk to -- it either solves world hunger, or it's a giant piece of crap. Obviously there has got to be a happy medium (a giant piece of crap that solves world hunger, perhaps?) 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/
