Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
I use the Trendnet TEW423-BRP (I think that is the right number) Mike Hammett wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.109/2384 - Release Date: 09/20/09 06:22:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 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] Router suggestions
It's got a similar reset process to a Linksys, hold reset button while cycling power. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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/ -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle 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
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
Hot glue in the reset hole and a bit of black tape over it hides it enough to discourage the resets. :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:05 AM To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions It's got a similar reset process to a Linksys, hold reset button while cycling power. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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/ -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today!
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
Probably the 432. I don't believe you can disable the routing feature to make it bridge. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 5:46 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I use the Trendnet TEW423-BRP (I think that is the right number) Mike Hammett wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.109/2384 - Release Date: 09/20/09 06:22:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 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] Router suggestions
I have used these without problems. http://www.encore-usa.com/product_item.php?region=usbid=2pgid=82_10pid=428 They have an option to do bridging, but I have never used it. They are not a big name brand, but for less than $40 wholesale, I can't complain. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:35:42 -0500 I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Router suggestions
Who do you use as a distributor? We used to go with Ma-Labs but their prices crept up too high on most of the things we purchased. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:19 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I have used these without problems. http://www.encore-usa.com/product_item.php?region=usbid=2pgid=82_10pid=42 8 They have an option to do bridging, but I have never used it. They are not a big name brand, but for less than $40 wholesale, I can't complain. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:35:42 -0500 I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Router suggestions
Why not instead load a default script onto the router so if the customer use the reset button it reset to a working default mode. /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:24:11 To: 'WISPA General List'wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Hot glue in the reset hole and a bit of black tape over it hides it enough to discourage the resets. :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:05 AM To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions It's got a similar reset process to a Linksys, hold reset button while cycling power. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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/ -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
Mikrotik's don't get reset so you're solving a problem that isn't one. Also Mikrotik RBs are too expensive for this application. If the 750 had WiFi... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:27 AM, e...@wisp-router.com wrote: Why not instead load a default script onto the router so if the customer use the reset button it reset to a working default mode. /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:24:11 To: 'WISPA General List'wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Hot glue in the reset hole and a bit of black tape over it hides it enough to discourage the resets. :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:05 AM To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions It's got a similar reset process to a Linksys, hold reset button while cycling power. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
Not sure if Linksys has fixed it, but we determined a while back the lockup problem with them was the lack of robustness in their power supply. They work fine in the city where the electricity doesn't sag or spike, but in the country they are always locking up. Wind blows trees against lines, farmer turns on huge corn dryer ... At 11:13 PM 9/20/2009, you wrote: We're a Linksys dealer but the new routers suck, in my opinion. Better than the belkin or netgear though so for home use, they are fine. We keep stock firmware on the home users and the new ones don't support DD-WRT for the most part anyhow. And yeah, it's easy to walk them through things over the phone with the Linksys, the netgears are a nightmare with their auto-config crap. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 11:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions WRT54G post Cisco buyout, yes, major major problems. One of the things I tell our customers when we sell them the WRT54GL is: We've been in this business and been through a lot of different routers and these WRT54GL's have the best proven track record in our experience. There may be other products from all kinds of vendors that may work just as well, but we have experience with these and KNOW they work well. These are routers we purchase and keep in stock on all of our trucks and at our office to sell, we don't load any custom firmware on them, and rarely do we have to walk someone through upgrading the firmware. I have had a few problems with customers having FTP issues though, the quick fix is to update the firmware in the router, if that fails we always have DD-WRT or Tomato. -Kevin On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: Something like 80% of the time I've been to a network had Linksys, it's been broken. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:08 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Not with multiple lan and at 50 bucks. Why not Linksys? You can always put third party firmware on it if you want. I use DD-WRT on them when I have use one. I've even taken a few of them out of the factory case and put them in other boxes with the CPE. At 55 bucks, they are certainly cheap and with the DD-WRT, they are much more configurable. Robert West Just Micro digital Services Inc. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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:
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
The old power supplies were decent and I still have them around here but the new ones are small and pop easily. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:30 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Not sure if Linksys has fixed it, but we determined a while back the lockup problem with them was the lack of robustness in their power supply. They work fine in the city where the electricity doesn't sag or spike, but in the country they are always locking up. Wind blows trees against lines, farmer turns on huge corn dryer ... At 11:13 PM 9/20/2009, you wrote: We're a Linksys dealer but the new routers suck, in my opinion. Better than the belkin or netgear though so for home use, they are fine. We keep stock firmware on the home users and the new ones don't support DD-WRT for the most part anyhow. And yeah, it's easy to walk them through things over the phone with the Linksys, the netgears are a nightmare with their auto-config crap. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 11:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions WRT54G post Cisco buyout, yes, major major problems. One of the things I tell our customers when we sell them the WRT54GL is: We've been in this business and been through a lot of different routers and these WRT54GL's have the best proven track record in our experience. There may be other products from all kinds of vendors that may work just as well, but we have experience with these and KNOW they work well. These are routers we purchase and keep in stock on all of our trucks and at our office to sell, we don't load any custom firmware on them, and rarely do we have to walk someone through upgrading the firmware. I have had a few problems with customers having FTP issues though, the quick fix is to update the firmware in the router, if that fails we always have DD-WRT or Tomato. -Kevin On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: Something like 80% of the time I've been to a network had Linksys, it's been broken. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:08 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Not with multiple lan and at 50 bucks. Why not Linksys? You can always put third party firmware on it if you want. I use DD-WRT on them when I have use one. I've even taken a few of them out of the factory case and put them in other boxes with the CPE. At 55 bucks, they are certainly cheap and with the DD-WRT, they are much more configurable. Robert West Just Micro digital Services Inc. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ --- - 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:
[WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Last I looked, 3 sectors and 2 2' backhauls would be $1800/mo+. For a single sector and one backhaul it was still over $1000/mo. -Kevin On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] FW: RAD/Radwin x Wi-Fi
Answer to Rubens' post on September 18th. Please let us know if you have any further questions regarding the Winlink1000 or Radwin2000. Matt Musial Radwin, Director of Sales Cell- 562-659-1358 Radwin's radios consists of 802.11a or 802.11n modem chipset wrapped up with proprietary radio technology, powerful processor and software based signal processing algorithm. Every single radio goes thru comprehensive testing including burn in to validate compliance to the specification across temperature range. The result is robust high performance carrier class radio: - Low constant latency regardless of distance (important for WISPs who plan to offer voice and other real time services) - High PPS (packet per second) capability - Very low packet error rate (PER) and bit error rate (BER) even under interference. - And much more All that is offered at unmatched unbeatable price! Yes there are some vendors that brag about their proprietary technology. However proprietary technology does not guarantee performance and reliability. But it is defiantly ensures high cost as they cannot leverage on the economy of scale that off the shelf modem offers. Ilan Moshe, EE President Radwin Inc. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 9:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] RAD/Radwin x Wi-Fi I'm trying to figure out what's under the hood of Radwin Winlink-1000 / RAD AirMux-200 and the MIMO model Radwin-2000 / RAD AirMux-400, in order to better understand what traffic patterns may or may not be suited to these radios. Although costly backhaul vendors (Redline, Motorola) keep telling me that RAD/Radwin are Wi-Fi based, my testing of them insist on telling me otherwise... for instance, AirMux-200 pass with flying colors thru RFC-2544 performance testing with maximum performance (18 Mbps) even for 64 byte frames (27 kpps), which is a very good pps rate compared to the 2kpps of a Ubiquiti Nanostation (non-M). Data rates are indeed similar comparing AirMux-200 to 802.11a, although Radwin tops at 48 Mbps air rate, not 54 Mbps; the MIMO model have data rates that look very much like the MCS8-15 802.11n data rates, suggesting that there are indeed some Wi-Fi heritage in the product, no matter what the tests say. Any ideas on what is going down to the bit level ? Rubens 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] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
Charles Wu wrote: Hi David, While I applaud your efforts in being involved with the broadband stimulus, it is my understanding that MVN.net is/was applying for stimulus funds for Round 1 -- maybe I'm missing something, but I can't figure out how you'd be able to over-come the conflict of interest clauses? If we're applying, the boss never told me about it. Also, it is, according to the little PowerPoint presentation they made reviewers watch, permissible to work for a company that's applying for a grant, and also to be a grant reviewer. You can't be personally involved in the grant application, of course, and you're expected to conflict-of-interest yourself out of anything that's even close to your current or proposed coverage area. 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
That's just crazy money. I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here. I decided to just look for some land. With that kind of money it just makes sense to own and not lease around here. I have 3 towers in storage but have been hesitant to do much with them. Thanks for the response. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Last I looked, 3 sectors and 2 2' backhauls would be $1800/mo+. For a single sector and one backhaul it was still over $1000/mo. -Kevin On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
I have found the leasing relatively cheap. The expensive parts are the engineering studies, application fees, and the almost-impossible-to-afford insurance you'll need before putting anything on the tower. FWIW, Crown Castle is offering a Wispa discount. They are waiving the site application fees for WISPA members (around $1000 per site IIRC). Wispa sent out an ad 8/21 about it. I'd copy it here, but it was all included in a bunch of awful image files. Randy Robert West wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
I need to hang a pac grid and a MT 411 board and run a cat5 line up to it. Seems like an engineering study is way overkill! :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I have found the leasing relatively cheap. The expensive parts are the engineering studies, application fees, and the almost-impossible-to-afford insurance you'll need before putting anything on the tower. FWIW, Crown Castle is offering a Wispa discount. They are waiving the site application fees for WISPA members (around $1000 per site IIRC). Wispa sent out an ad 8/21 about it. I'd copy it here, but it was all included in a bunch of awful image files. Randy Robert West wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
411, with an atheros card, won't pick up non-atheros noise. Canopy SMs on the other hand will. AWESOME spectrum analyzer tools. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: I need to hang a pac grid and a MT 411 board and run a cat5 line up to it. Seems like an engineering study is way overkill! :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I have found the leasing relatively cheap. The expensive parts are the engineering studies, application fees, and the almost-impossible-to-afford insurance you'll need before putting anything on the tower. FWIW, Crown Castle is offering a Wispa discount. They are waiving the site application fees for WISPA members (around $1000 per site IIRC). Wispa sent out an ad 8/21 about it. I'd copy it here, but it was all included in a bunch of awful image files. Randy Robert West wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
Ouch. Ouch. Ouch. I see a potential conflict of interest issue here. An employee of a large telecom company could be a volunteer who reviews applications received from WISPs and rejects them. As long as the reviewer wasn't "involved" in the large telecom company's application and the WISP applications that they rejected weren't in the same or nearby coverage areas as the large telecom company's applications then all is OK? I think NOT. The BTOP/BIP protections against anti-competitive behavior seem far too weak. Maybe my prejudices are showing here but all along I've felt that the government should have planned to do its own application review work instead of delegating this task to "volunteers". I see this "volunteer" process as being a wide-open door for corruption. jack David E. Smith wrote: Charles Wu wrote: Hi David, While I applaud your efforts in being involved with the broadband stimulus, it is my understanding that MVN.net is/was applying for stimulus funds for Round 1 -- maybe I'm missing something, but I can't figure out how you'd be able to over-come the conflict of interest clauses? If we're applying, the boss never told me about it. Also, it is, according to the little PowerPoint presentation they made reviewers watch, permissible to work for a company that's applying for a grant, and also to be a grant reviewer. You can't be personally involved in the grant application, of course, and you're expected to conflict-of-interest yourself out of anything that's even close to your current or proposed coverage area. 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Hah... Just wait. They will need to know exactly what brand of antenna, case, and even cat5e you are using. Randy Robert West wrote: I need to hang a pac grid and a MT 411 board and run a cat5 line up to it. Seems like an engineering study is way overkill! :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I have found the leasing relatively cheap. The expensive parts are the engineering studies, application fees, and the almost-impossible-to-afford insurance you'll need before putting anything on the tower. FWIW, Crown Castle is offering a Wispa discount. They are waiving the site application fees for WISPA members (around $1000 per site IIRC). Wispa sent out an ad 8/21 about it. I'd copy it here, but it was all included in a bunch of awful image files. Randy Robert West wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Add to that installation and maintenance. Crown requires you use approved contractors Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:21:24 To: 'WISPA General List'wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I need to hang a pac grid and a MT 411 board and run a cat5 line up to it. Seems like an engineering study is way overkill! :) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I have found the leasing relatively cheap. The expensive parts are the engineering studies, application fees, and the almost-impossible-to-afford insurance you'll need before putting anything on the tower. FWIW, Crown Castle is offering a Wispa discount. They are waiving the site application fees for WISPA members (around $1000 per site IIRC). Wispa sent out an ad 8/21 about it. I'd copy it here, but it was all included in a bunch of awful image files. Randy Robert West wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
I wonder how many large companies have paid their employees to be volunteers??? From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:26 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects Ouch. Ouch. Ouch. I see a potential conflict of interest issue here. An employee of a large telecom company could be a volunteer who reviews applications received from WISPs and rejects them. As long as the reviewer wasn't involved in the large telecom company's application and the WISP applications that they rejected weren't in the same or nearby coverage areas as the large telecom company's applications then all is OK? I think NOT. The BTOP/BIP protections against anti-competitive behavior seem far too weak. Maybe my prejudices are showing here but all along I've felt that the government should have planned to do its own application review work instead of delegating this task to volunteers. I see this volunteer process as being a wide-open door for corruption. jack David E. Smith wrote: Charles Wu wrote: Hi David, While I applaud your efforts in being involved with the broadband stimulus, it is my understanding that MVN.net is/was applying for stimulus funds for Round 1 -- maybe I'm missing something, but I can't figure out how you'd be able to over-come the conflict of interest clauses? If we're applying, the boss never told me about it. Also, it is, according to the little PowerPoint presentation they made reviewers watch, permissible to work for a company that's applying for a grant, and also to be a grant reviewer. You can't be personally involved in the grant application, of course, and you're expected to conflict-of-interest yourself out of anything that's even close to your current or proposed coverage area. 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Not too mention the fee for this and the fee for that and the feet dragging and the fee they tell you about while you are installing and the fact that your climbers have to certified by them and... Never again will I lease from Crown. Robert West wrote: That's just crazy money. I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here. I decided to just look for some land. With that kind of money it just makes sense to own and not lease around here. I have 3 towers in storage but have been hesitant to do much with them. Thanks for the response. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Last I looked, 3 sectors and 2 2' backhauls would be $1800/mo+. For a single sector and one backhaul it was still over $1000/mo. -Kevin On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.111/2386 - Release Date: 09/21/09 05:51:00 -- Scott Reed Sr. Systems Engineer GAB Midwest 1-800-363-1544 x4000 Cell: 260-273-7239 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] Net Neutrality
Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of "free speech". 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to "free speech". 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of "free speech". All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example "Service and Content Provider A" is blocking the services of "Content Provider B". To me, this is a "Restraint of Trade" issue rather than a political "Free Speech" issue but it still falls under the heading of "Content" and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of "Content"?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I contract for 256k of bandwidth do I have a right to ask my ISP to stream HDTV movies to me without delay? No, I do NOT because I am asking to consume more bandwidth then I have contracted to pay for and the ISP must slow my stream down to be able to manage their total bandwidth so they can deliver the contracted amount of bandwidth to all their customers. This is "reasonable network management" and it's perfectly proper. Sorry for the long-winded explanation but I felt that it was necessary to distinguish between the political "Free Speech" Content issue and the "Commercial" Content issue. Because I don't claim to be an expert on Net Neutrality, I'm open to hearing constructive and thoughtful comments from others who can help me further refine my current opinions. Again, thanks for your post. jack John Vogel wrote: Jack, I do agree that you have been fairly clear, and I wasn't so much addressing you as being the one conflating the two issues. I think you have a good understanding of the two issues, and are reasonable in how you are addressing them. I am somewhat concerned that free speech was at the forefront of your endorsement of the FCC's upcoming proposal re Net Neutrality. As I said before, I don't think free speech is really the issue, either from the standpoint of the ISPs, nor of those who have been arguing for Net Neutrality, although some argue for NN primarily on the basis of free speech, which is where I think the issues have been conflated. The most visible cases I can recall that caught the attention of the News Media as well as the FCC were trade issues, rather than free speech issues. A phone company disallowing VoIP on their data networks, Cable companies disallowing IPTV on from possibly competing TV companies, etc. are trade issues. P2P is harder to portray as a trade issue. (Are there any ISPs who would block P2P to protect their own music business?) But.. P2P is still not really a free speech issue, although it is sometimes presented as such. The FCC proposes to regulate ISPs to ensure that they do not inhibit/impair the "*free flow of information AND CERTAIN APPLICATIONS" (quoted from the AP story, emphasis mine). We do have constitutional guarantees regarding free speech, and the Federal government is charged with regulating Interstate commerce, but there is no constitutional right to pass IP
[WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Crown Castle is one of the worst companies (think ATT) I have ever dealt with. They dont know their right hand from the left. Dont expect anything to get done, especially billing. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
That's the one I have issue with. That would cause me to think I need a 1 to 1 ratio on bandwidth or at least close to it. This one item brings the cause for metered bandwidth to the top of my list of things to push for. Honestly, I'd rather not meter the bandwidth just for the sake of image but if this goes through, what other choice would there be? Would certainly take away a lot of headaches. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:33 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Isn't the 28th amendment the right to keep and bear firewalls? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
For everyone's info I have had a terrible experience with CrowneCastle as well. However, you need to be aware that CrowneCastle is Now a Vendor Member Of WISPA as of a few weeks ago. They were giving WISPA discounts at many levels. Look into this if you are interested in dealing with them. They have an account manager For WISPA Members. This is another Benefit of being a WISPA member. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved. - Helen Keller -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:34 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Crown Castle is one of the worst companies (think ATT) I have ever dealt with. They dont know their right hand from the left. Dont expect anything to get done, especially billing. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Well, early on it was a pain to deal with them, but after working with them now we've been able to get things moving a little faster but cost can suck. The engineering fee is BS but they won't budge on it; that will set you back about $1800. Plus you need $10 Mil in liability insurance if you install yourself (barring you have a certified tower climber). We just hire a tower climbing company instead, but that's not cheap either, usually $2000 for the day to have two climbers (which they require). Expect up to 90 days before anything substantial happens through in terms of paper work...they are extremely before approving a site! As for monthly rental fee that is reasonable, we pay anywhere from $500 to $800 depending on the location. On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 12:33 -0400, RickG wrote: Crown Castle is one of the worst companies (think ATT) I have ever dealt with. They dont know their right hand from the left. Dont expect anything to get done, especially billing. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
What about spam? Even though there are laws against spam would we be breaking the law by blocking it if this law is passed? Would we have to pass all content and allow all spam? Then if we accidentally block something our system thought was spam but was not we might really be in trouble. LaRoy McCann Data Technology David E. Smith wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by the Data Technology MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
LOL! Can we get that through congress :) What is so sad is that the government claims thery want transparency yet they do the opposite. What I want to know from anyone here is what and how do you block specific content. Thats for the hosting companies, not the access providers. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Isn't the 28th amendment the right to keep and bear firewalls? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Net Neutrality
I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I contract for 256k of bandwidth do I have a right to ask my ISP to stream HDTV movies to me without delay? No, I do NOT because I am asking to consume more bandwidth then I have contracted to pay for and the ISP must slow my stream down to be able to manage their total bandwidth so they can deliver the contracted amount of bandwidth to all their customers. This is reasonable network management and it's perfectly proper. Sorry for the long-winded explanation but I felt that it was necessary to distinguish between the political Free Speech Content issue and the Commercial Content issue. Because I don't claim to be an expert on Net Neutrality, I'm open to hearing constructive and thoughtful comments from others who can help me further refine my current opinions. Again, thanks for your post. jack John Vogel wrote: Jack, I do agree that you have been fairly clear, and I wasn't so much addressing you as being the one conflating the two issues. I think you have a good understanding of the two issues, and are reasonable in how you are addressing them. I am somewhat concerned that free speech was at the forefront of your endorsement of the FCC's upcoming proposal re Net Neutrality. As I said before, I don't think free speech is really the issue, either from the standpoint of
Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Router suggestions
Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its not easy to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a linksys. Its a double edge sword. But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply because the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as a wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes. But had a question Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things like PPTP and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works right out of the box with a click of a checkbox. Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the neck, because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or atleast some helper modules that load at boot time. So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with Mikrotik OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie techs can configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a Linksys? Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config? Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time? Or are those things fixed by default? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - 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/ 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
Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
The FCC has said that you cannot de-prioritize any type of traffic. You have to do it by prioritizing other types of traffic. Jeff ImageStream -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
With the possible exception of Australia, I don't think anyone has a true transparent internet. All governments, including the US, have their blacklist. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for LOL! Can we get that through congress :) What is so sad is that the government claims thery want transparency yet they do the opposite. What I want to know from anyone here is what and how do you block specific content. Thats for the hosting companies, not the access providers. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Isn't the 28th amendment the right to keep and bear firewalls? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
If you're rate limiting in a neutral way, why would it bring your network to its knees? Doesn't matter who the packets are coming from or going to if you rate limit the total number of packets a user can generate/receive, right? Chuck On Sep 21, 2009, at 12:33 PM, David E. Smith wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ -- Chuck Bartosch Clarity Connect, Inc. 200 Pleasant Grove Road Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 257-8268 When the stars threw down their spears, and water'd heaven with their tears, Did He smile, His work to see? Did He who made the Lamb make thee? From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger! 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Limiting the number of packets would indeed be the neutral way, in my opinion. But what problems would that cause with Voip and video? You certainly have to give priority to Voip. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Bartosch Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:12 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for If you're rate limiting in a neutral way, why would it bring your network to its knees? Doesn't matter who the packets are coming from or going to if you rate limit the total number of packets a user can generate/receive, right? Chuck On Sep 21, 2009, at 12:33 PM, David E. Smith wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ -- Chuck Bartosch Clarity Connect, Inc. 200 Pleasant Grove Road Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 257-8268 When the stars threw down their spears, and water'd heaven with their tears, Did He smile, His work to see? Did He who made the Lamb make thee? From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger! 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here Depend on the location. In my town, it will cost $17,000 minimum just for the first phase of a special exception process with County Zoning. Then what if you need to get up 300-400ft? 300-400ft towers are way more expensive to build, and to get permission to build. And in this county a lot large enough to qualify for a tower cant be had for anything less than about $500k. The county property tax alone for the site would easilly be $8000/year. Sure if you live in remote rural America, where a lot can be had for $4-5K, and 150ft tower will do, where there is no one that can see the tower except for the people that NEED your service, (so no one to protest), sure building your own may be the way to go. But if you live in that type area, you can use that arguement to negotiate a lower price for colocation. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing That's just crazy money. I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here. I decided to just look for some land. With that kind of money it just makes sense to own and not lease around here. I have 3 towers in storage but have been hesitant to do much with them. Thanks for the response. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Last I looked, 3 sectors and 2 2' backhauls would be $1800/mo+. For a single sector and one backhaul it was still over $1000/mo. -Kevin On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] Router suggestions
To this day I have never seen a MT default excluding reinstallation. Excluding having the customer do work, the MT options. If you have MT as your wireless CPE - you're screwed if it is defaulted. Default config will not set wlan1 so it must be manually done. If you have another device as wireless (Canopy) and then your customer router is a MT. You have layer 2 connectivity to it...have at it. If it was misconfigured then we're looking at a business strategy problem rather then a technical problem... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote: Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its not easy to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a linksys. Its a double edge sword. But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply because the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as a wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes. But had a question Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things like PPTP and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works right out of the box with a click of a checkbox. Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the neck, because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or atleast some helper modules that load at boot time. So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with Mikrotik OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie techs can configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a Linksys? Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config? Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time? Or are those things fixed by default? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the TrendNet TEW-452BRP, but it's EOL and the TEW-633GR is too expensive ($100). I'm looking for something in the $30 - $45 area. No Linksys, I don't want to tarnish my name. :-p - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List:
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
You can setup a default script to be used during Netinstall. This will default it back to YOUR original settings. No matter how many times they default/reset it, it will go back to the way you set it up using a script during Netinstall. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:40 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions To this day I have never seen a MT default excluding reinstallation. Excluding having the customer do work, the MT options. If you have MT as your wireless CPE - you're screwed if it is defaulted. Default config will not set wlan1 so it must be manually done. If you have another device as wireless (Canopy) and then your customer router is a MT. You have layer 2 connectivity to it...have at it. If it was misconfigured then we're looking at a business strategy problem rather then a technical problem... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote: Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its not easy to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a linksys. Its a double edge sword. But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply because the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as a wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes. But had a question Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things like PPTP and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works right out of the box with a click of a checkbox. Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the neck, because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or atleast some helper modules that load at boot time. So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with Mikrotik OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie techs can configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a Linksys? Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config? Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time? Or are those things fixed by default? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions Mikrotik? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Router suggestions I'm looking for suggestions on an 802.11 router with multiple LAN ports where I can disable the NAT capability... making it a bridge. I used to use the
Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Wow you are my hero. Best quote I have ever seen. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Isn't the 28th amendment the right to keep and bear firewalls? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Router suggestions
Chuck - tried this with a wireless card?
As of v3 they starting doing
int wireless
set 0 name=blah ssid=blah
so it may be possible now...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote:
You can setup a default script to be used during Netinstall. This will
default it back to YOUR original settings. No matter how many times
they default/reset it, it will go back to the way you set it up using a
script during Netinstall.
Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com
http://www.shelbybb.com
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
To this day I have never seen a MT default excluding reinstallation.
Excluding having the customer do work, the MT options.
If you have MT as your wireless CPE - you're screwed if it is defaulted.
Default config will not set wlan1 so it must be manually done.
If you have another device as wireless (Canopy) and then your customer
router is a MT. You have layer 2 connectivity to it...have at it.
If it was misconfigured then we're looking at a business strategy
problem
rather then a technical problem...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom DeReggi
wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote:
Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its
not
easy
to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a
linksys.
Its a double edge sword.
But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply
because
the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as a
wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes.
But had a question
Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things like
PPTP
and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works
right
out of the box with a click of a checkbox.
Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the
neck,
because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires
addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or
atleast
some helper modules that load at boot time.
So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with
Mikrotik
OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie
techs can
configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a
Linksys?
Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load
everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config?
Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time?
Or are those things fixed by default?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its
versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than
dlink,
netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical
user
pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets
hit
reset
button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the
additional
built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have
thrown
away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps
out.
I
have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from
normal use
through the years.
Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102
Original Message
From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of
awesomeness.
On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:
Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere
else,
though.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 4:57 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re:
Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
David, I'm grateful for your post because it provides new information that I did not know. After reading it, and hearing that you can only review applications in states where your employer does NOT do business and that several reviewers read each application, I feel somewhat more comfortable with the volunteer reviewing process. Thanks for adding to my understanding. jack David E. Smith wrote: Jack Unger wrote: Ouch. Ouch. Ouch. Let's say I work for ATT, and I'm volunteering to review BTOP/BIP applications. I'm not allowed to review any application where any part of the coverage area is in any state where ATT offers service. What possible reason would I have to give applications low scores just because of the technology they use? That aside, the reviewers aren't the final step. A committee of several reviewers reads an application, and each scores it independently, and then the government itself looks over the applications some more. The reviewers are basically a nonsense-filter, and don't have the authority to single-handedly do much of anything. I can't go into too much detail because of confidentiality agreements, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't crush an application even if I wanted to (which means neither can anyone else). 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
What's the difference between prioritizing all traditional services above other and deprioritizing the bad ones below other? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for The FCC has said that you cannot de-prioritize any type of traffic. You have to do it by prioritizing other types of traffic. Jeff ImageStream -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
Yeah, here it's just a 500 buck inspection fee for a communications tower. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:40 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here Depend on the location. In my town, it will cost $17,000 minimum just for the first phase of a special exception process with County Zoning. Then what if you need to get up 300-400ft? 300-400ft towers are way more expensive to build, and to get permission to build. And in this county a lot large enough to qualify for a tower cant be had for anything less than about $500k. The county property tax alone for the site would easilly be $8000/year. Sure if you live in remote rural America, where a lot can be had for $4-5K, and 150ft tower will do, where there is no one that can see the tower except for the people that NEED your service, (so no one to protest), sure building your own may be the way to go. But if you live in that type area, you can use that arguement to negotiate a lower price for colocation. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing That's just crazy money. I can put up a used 160' tower for 2 grand plus a 500 buck permit here. I decided to just look for some land. With that kind of money it just makes sense to own and not lease around here. I have 3 towers in storage but have been hesitant to do much with them. Thanks for the response. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Neal Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Last I looked, 3 sectors and 2 2' backhauls would be $1800/mo+. For a single sector and one backhaul it was still over $1000/mo. -Kevin On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
You'd have to ask the FCC. Seems like it's the opposite side of the same coin. Jeff -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:51 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for What's the difference between prioritizing all traditional services above other and deprioritizing the bad ones below other? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for The FCC has said that you cannot de-prioritize any type of traffic. You have to do it by prioritizing other types of traffic. Jeff ImageStream -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ 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] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
Many government grant programs are reviewed by three people and then scores averaged in round 1. A number are tossed out during that round based on their scores. The ones tossed are then looked at by a government reviewer for concurrence with the first three pairs of eyes. Just my past experiences with federal grants. Dave Hulsebus David E. Smith wrote: Jack Unger wrote: Ouch. Ouch. Ouch. Let's say I work for ATT, and I'm volunteering to review BTOP/BIP applications. I'm not allowed to review any application where any part of the coverage area is in any state where ATT offers service. What possible reason would I have to give applications low scores just because of the technology they use? That aside, the reviewers aren't the final step. A committee of several reviewers reads an application, and each scores it independently, and then the government itself looks over the applications some more. The reviewers are basically a nonsense-filter, and don't have the authority to single-handedly do much of anything. I can't go into too much detail because of confidentiality agreements, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't crush an application even if I wanted to (which means neither can anyone else). 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Lets go ahead and let all the viruses and spam through too. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:33:26 -0500 http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Facebook fan page
I'm thinking there should be a list on the WISPA page for it's member's Facebook fan pages (assuming you're in on the social marketing train)? Thoughts? Apparently if you have more than 100 fans you can get a custom URL from Facebook. We are just over 60 fans. Can I get some help from our WISPA community? Dylan PowerOne/airPowered http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tavares-FL/airPowered/168580151456?ref=nf 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
OH GOOD POINT!!! How could we dare discriminate against the poor troublemakers and doo doo gooders, phishers and thieves? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for Lets go ahead and let all the viruses and spam through too. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:33:26 -0500 http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Net Neutrality
I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I contract for 256k of bandwidth do I have a right to ask my ISP to stream HDTV movies to me without delay? No, I do NOT because I am asking to consume more bandwidth then I have contracted to pay for and the ISP must slow my stream down to be able to manage their total bandwidth so they can deliver the contracted amount of bandwidth to all their customers. This is reasonable network management and it's perfectly proper. Sorry for the long-winded explanation but I felt that it was necessary to distinguish between the political Free Speech Content issue and the Commercial Content
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I
Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
I said this in another post, but they're talking about keeping Time-Warner Cable from prioritizing Time-Warner entertainment's content over NBC, or myspace over facebook or youtube over hulu not whether or not you can block outgoing smtp traffic from a bot-netted machine or illegal uploads of copyrighted material. BTW, how do tell if someone's uploading the latest copyrighted hollywood movie illegally over bittorrent as opposed to uploading GNU copyrighted open source stuff such as a linux distribution? I don't think anyone is going to fault you for throttling outgoing content. chances are, http servers are not going to be on your network except in those special business cases that require a web host. Even then, its probably to provide web access to their exchange server. And if your policy is to prioritize VOIP traffic over everything else, I don't think they're going to come after for that, especially if its in your network management policy announcement. I just don't think its as bad as you all make it out to be. --Curtis Josh Luthman wrote: Wow you are my hero. Best quote I have ever seen. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Isn't the 28th amendment the right to keep and bear firewalls? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for They can pry my firewall from my cold, dead hands. -RickG On 9/21/09, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote: http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ 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] OT: Rouge antispyware
Does anyone have a complete list of URL's that these rouge antispyware programs use to deposit their payload? I am talking Personal Antivirus, Windows Police Pro, Antivirus 2009, etc... I found this site that list URL's for each separately: http://www.spywarevoid.com/ . My idea is to block all these URL's at my border router(while I still can...another topic). I am going to try to block them with Mikrotik, so I guess I will need all the IP's too? Scottie Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Net Neutrality
Curtis Maurand wrote: I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. That may be what they mean, but that sure isn't what they're saying (or at least that's not what it sounds like from way up here in the peanut gallery). Can anyone comment on whether WISPA plans to adopt any official position on this? I'm not saying net neutrality is bad, because I adore the principles. I just want to be sure the FCC doesn't pass some overly-broad rulemaking, slanted towards bigger operators, that makes it difficult or impossible for smaller outfits (like mine!) to keep things running smoothly. 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] Net Neutrality
Excactly. --C Josh Luthman wrote: Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
Would we REALLY want the gov micromanaging our networks THAT close? At 02:26 PM 9/21/2009, you wrote: Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every
[WISPA] Authentication Methods
Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Net Neutrality
David, Regarding WISPA plans to adopt any official position on Network Neutrality...that process is always active but it does have a number of steps. 1. We've got to see what rules the FCC actually proposes. 2. We need to get general agreement (probably a majority view since getting complete agreement between all independent-thinking WISPA members is a darn near impossibility) on what WISPA's official position should be. 3. We need to either a) wait for the FCC to ask for opinions or (if our beliefs are compelling enough) b) go to the FCC and make an Ex Parte presentation to selected FCC employees to explain our position and what we recommend the FCC do. 4. Wait and see what the FCC does after we express our opinion or make our presenation and then decide if further action on our part is needed. Steps 1 and 2 (above) are already in play. Watching the FCC's proposals and listening to WISPA member opinions and ideas is happening as we participate in this discussion. Additional work will be done by WISPA's FCC Committee to refine WISPA's position and either write it up (Step 3) or prepare an Ex Parte presentation. Funding to prepare either a written or an in-person FCC presentation comes from the dues of WISPA members therefore it would be beneficial if those participating in this discussion who are not WISPA members would choose to do the right thing and become WISPA members. As the Chair of WISPA's FCC Committee, I will be participating in the preparation of any FCC Comments that WISPA officially makes. While I appreciate all input, I'm obligated to give more weight to the views of WISPA members compared to the views of those who are not yet WISPA members. jack David E. Smith wrote: Curtis Maurand wrote: I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. That may be what they mean, but that sure isn't what they're saying (or at least that's not what it sounds like from way up here in the peanut gallery). Can anyone comment on whether WISPA plans to adopt any official position on this? I'm not saying "net neutrality is bad," because I adore the principles. I just want to be sure the FCC doesn't pass some overly-broad rulemaking, slanted towards bigger operators, that makes it difficult or impossible for smaller outfits (like mine!) to keep things running smoothly. 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.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] Authentication Methods
Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Right, which is why I phrased it that way. You can't deprioritize anything, but you can prioritize anything (based upon what I've read on this list). They accomplish the same thing, but at face value, one is permissible the other is not. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for You'd have to ask the FCC. Seems like it's the opposite side of the same coin. Jeff -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:51 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for What's the difference between prioritizing all traditional services above other and deprioritizing the bad ones below other? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for The FCC has said that you cannot de-prioritize any type of traffic. You have to do it by prioritizing other types of traffic. Jeff ImageStream -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ 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] Router suggestions
I have MT CPE, but the only time I've had to touch them is if I upgraded the firmware to something I shouldn't have and it crapped out. Some people have their internal AP built on a bigger RB, but that's more of a pain than I care to deal with. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:40 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions To this day I have never seen a MT default excluding reinstallation. Excluding having the customer do work, the MT options. If you have MT as your wireless CPE - you're screwed if it is defaulted. Default config will not set wlan1 so it must be manually done. If you have another device as wireless (Canopy) and then your customer router is a MT. You have layer 2 connectivity to it...have at it. If it was misconfigured then we're looking at a business strategy problem rather then a technical problem... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote: Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its not easy to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a linksys. Its a double edge sword. But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply because the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as a wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes. But had a question Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things like PPTP and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works right out of the box with a click of a checkbox. Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the neck, because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or atleast some helper modules that load at boot time. So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with Mikrotik OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie techs can configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a Linksys? Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config? Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time? Or are those things fixed by default? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to its versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than dlink, netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical user pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets hit reset button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the additional built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have thrown away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or craps out. I have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from normal use through the years. Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of awesomeness. On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere else, though. 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] Authentication Methods
The best suggestion I can offer you is that you should look into the folks who are doing this type of setup in the DSL world. Centrally authenticating / servicing 1000 to 100,000 subs is not un-common in the wireline world. Redback SMS500 or SMS1000/SMS1800 would easily terminate 1000 subs. You could use L2TP Tunnels across the network for the Edge Routers to the Core/Central PPPoE Server to accomplish what you are looking to do. Redundancy is normally achieved with the use a combination dynamic routing (BGP / OSPF) and using L2TP. Faisal Imtiaz Computer Office Solutions Inc. /SnappyDSL.net Ph: (305) 663-5518 x 232 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nick Huanca Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:49 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Authentication Methods
We use a Redback SMS1 to terminate our DSL/Wireless/Fiber/T1 customers via PPPoE/Bridges and Vlan's. Our wireless/DSL are all pppoe. I use the redback's tcp policing on the wireless clients, any radius server that's capable of using standard dictionary files will do. I use a cistron based server, which I've added my own patches to, I think freeradius is all the rage right now as well. If you are only looking to terminate 1000 sessions, a SMS500/1000 would probably do the job, you can pick them up for practically nothing on ebay these days. Cisco/Imagestream/Finepoint and a linux box can all terminate the clients, well Cisco/Finepoint for sure, I think Imagestream probably has the ability to terminate pppoe over ethernet at the time I was dealing with them they were just implementing the ability to terminate atm pvc's dynamically and relay to a radius server. Regards Michael Baird Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Authentication Methods
We're doing this with Cisco 65xx switches. Each tower comes in as a separate vlan, we do the PPPOE at the switch. We restrict all traffic from the towers (except to/from private IP management interfaces) to PPPOE. We use Radiator Radius with MySQL as a database backend. ~1500 PPPOE connections currently. We do all rate limiting on the switch as well. We have not done anything with IPv6 yet. Randy Nick Huanca wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Net Neutrality
I'm pretty safe with my opinion. Get the hell out of my business, government. BTW: Hulu is owned by ABC, NBC, Fox, and the tech company that came up with it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:23 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I contract for 256k of bandwidth do I have a right to ask my ISP to stream HDTV movies to me without delay? No, I do NOT because I am asking
Re: [WISPA] OT: Rouge antispyware
2009/9/21 Scottie Arnett sarn...@info-ed.com: Does anyone have a complete list of URL's that these rouge antispyware programs use to deposit their payload? I am talking Personal Antivirus, Windows Police Pro, Antivirus 2009, etc... I found this site that list URL's for each separately: http://www.spywarevoid.com/ . My idea is to block all these URL's at my border router(while I still can...another topic). I am going to try to block them with Mikrotik, so I guess I will need all the IP's too? Just run OpenDNS 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] Router suggestions
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 13:01 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote: So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with Mikrotik OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie techs can configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a Linksys? How easy is it... is a question that is impossible to answer. It is easy for some and not so easy for others. It isn't hard for anyone, IMO. Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just load everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config? http://blog.butchevans.com/2008/06/how-to-configure-a-mikrotik-router-to-replace-cpe-router/ How about a tutorial that teaches you how to build your own? Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time? For MOST items? The answer to your question is yes. Or are those things fixed by default? Not sure I understand which things would need to be fixed. It seems to me that training and procedure are the answer to fixing the things you need fixed. Also, as Eje suggestions, changing the default values will help. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * 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] Authentication Methods
I think first off, why the concern over Mikrotik longevity? Do you not think the company will be around, or do you just not see it scaling (for whatever reason) to the level that you want / need? Personally, I'm not sure what you're looking for that's not already out there. Build a mikrotik concentrator with a good spec server (or two), dropin Freeradius Oas someone else already mentioned) and you should be good for a long time. Sent from Windows mobile device... -Original Message- From: Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:48 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Well, you know some of those virus's may be important to the person who is downloading them. Who am I to judge? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Profito Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:01 PM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for OH GOOD POINT!!! How could we dare discriminate against the poor troublemakers and doo doo gooders, phishers and thieves? -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for Lets go ahead and let all the viruses and spam through too. Scottie -- Original Message -- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:33:26 -0500 http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] Net Neutrality
I know, I know. But in reality, this is how things are stretched and twisted to where it's fact. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Curtis Maurand Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or unfairly delay the services of another Content provider who is using their network?? No, I don't think so. Every service provider should be required to carry the content of every other content or service provider equally, without restriction AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTED BANDWIDTH LIMITS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. If I contract for 256k of bandwidth do I have a right to ask my ISP to stream HDTV movies to me without delay? No, I do NOT because I am asking to consume more bandwidth then I have contracted to pay for and the ISP must slow my stream down to be able to manage their total bandwidth so they can deliver the contracted amount of bandwidth to all their customers.
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
Why do you put superhotstuffhere.com as 8? Some of us count on that every morning. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:26 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care less about protecting the political side of free speech. All they focus on is the commercial side of Content - for example Service and Content Provider A is blocking the services of Content Provider B. To me, this is a Restraint of Trade issue rather than a political Free Speech issue but it still falls under the heading of Content and is therefore addressed by NN. Should NN address the commercial side of Content?? Yes, I think it's appropriate that it does. Should one Content and Service provider be allowed to prohibit or
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
Some of us don't need porn every morning and those that do won't admit nor complain about it. Saves us bandwidth. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Why do you put superhotstuffhere.com as 8? Some of us count on that every morning. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:26 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network Neutrality they could care
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
For those that have not yet read it, the relevent site to read is http://www.openinternet.gov/read-speech.html We need to realize and seperate two things... 1) that the intent of NetNeutrality expressed at this site, is an idealalistic view, to keep the Internet open and free, which is hard to combat based on the ideals, and we should recognize that the goal of an open Internet is not specifically what we are fighting. 2) The reality that idealistic views dont translate to how the Internet Industry really works. And the site's proposed methodology to attempt preservation of an open network, infact may be harmful to consumers and delivery of most common Internet services from competitive Access providers. What we need to fight are mechanisms and ideas that harm access providers, or that prioritize content provider's needs over that of access providers. There is an important thing to realize. One of NetNeutrality's biggest advocates is now I think Chief of Staff. (Bruce somebody). NetNeutrality will be directly addressed in the new FCC, we can count on that. More so than in past commissions. Over the next 3 months I believe WISPA will need to get actively engaged in Netneutrality lobbying. It will need to be a combined effort between legislative and FCC committees. The Legislative committee will need to fight bills being plannedd to be introducted to congress, and FCC committee will need to fight for WISP rights in soon to come FCC rulemaking. It is my belief that government policy makers are timming their efforts so legislation and FCC rules will come to effect togeather, as legislation is pointing to the FCC to make rules. We can start to lobby legislators now, while bills are government working groups. And possibly there could be public hearings, where we might be able to request participation in them? For FCC, we most likely would need to wait for the Notice of PRoposed Rule making. Allthough ideally, its technically possible to lobby for proposed rules to never get to rule making stage. (although I dont think its likely for that to occur). We are going to need to decide whether we want to fight the core concept all togeather, or fight for details and wording that make the idealisitic views realistic in a way not to harm ISP. I believe we will likely have a better chance of winning our view, if we all togeather fight netneutrality in its entirely, jsut because we'd ahve cable TV and RBOCs endorsement in addition to our WISP view. But the risk there is that we do not protect ourselve from predator practices of monopoly like providers, and we risk loosing altogeather, if consumers gain more support than providers do. The risk is that protecting the majority of consumers (cable and RBOC subscribers with 80%+ market share) has greater benefit than protecting the few vulnerable providers (less than 20% market share by small ISPs and WISPs). We need to remind the government that the open Internet originally was a network paid for by the government. In Today's Internet, providers are required to pay for building access for consumers Internet access. Its a beautiful thing to have a consolidated Internet deliverd by teh combination efforts of all providers. What we want to prevent is segregation of the Internet, where providers are forced to make two networks, their Internet network, and then their private network, where they would invest more heavily in their own private networks for ROI reasons, and because policy took away the viabilty of fair ROI for them. Let me pose a hypothetical situation... What would occur if Comcast, Timewarner, and RBOCs announced tommorrow, that they would no longer offer Internet Access as of Dec 2010, and planned to cancel all peers to the Internet, but would create a peer between each other, and announced their hosting solutions (for a price) which allowed some content provider the option to access their private networks. Would they legally be allowed not to offer Internet access, and go 100% private? And if it were legal, would they keep their market share, considering togeather they owned 90% of the eyeballs and last mile connections to consumer's homes, many of which were the single only source of connection? I'd argue they'd keep 99% of their customer base, and instead users that had choice of provider would subscribe to two services, the Public Internet provider, and the Private network provider, because there would be benefit to buying access to both. Either that, or private network providers would create a gateway to teh Internet service that was an add-on to their existing privat network service. Those that wanted access to the Internet would pay additional for the gateway service, and eventually the gateway Internet service would perform so much worse than to hosts on the private direct network, so most Hosts would start to migrate to hosting platforms on the private network. I believe it is very
Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing
There was a time when that was the case... But Crown has evolved in recent years, and their staff as well are learning more about the value of the WISP market, and what costs our market will bear. For me Crown has been a pleasure to work with. Just like any relationship, to get good terms, it requires an established ongoing relationship, and committment from both parties to create value for the other party. In my opinion, the secret is putting yourself in their shoes and understanding their position for each transaction. By understanding teh dynamics of the site, it helps determine what things can be asked for or not successfully. Admitted, the process is very slow, (and there fore sometimes frustrating), but from our experience the process with all tower companies has been slow, so that is an irrelevent factor. And if you are in teh wholesale business, you WANT the process to be slow, and you dont want a leasor that gives everyone else as good of terms as they give you, since you have the ongoing relationship. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: RickG rgunder...@gmail.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Crown Castle Tower Space Leasing Crown Castle is one of the worst companies (think ATT) I have ever dealt with. They dont know their right hand from the left. Dont expect anything to get done, especially billing. -RickG On 9/21/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote: Does anyone here lease space from Crown Castle? I have a cell tower in an area I've been trying to find access in and this tower is in a good spot for us and our tier 1 provider has fiber running right across the road from it. Any idea what they charge and issues with them? Looks to be a big company so I doubt they will lease cheaply. Thanks! Bob- 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] Net Neutrality
Worldwide, the US ISPs don't have that much power. See Comcast tell DT, PCCW, NTT, etc. to fly a kite and Comcast will be the odd man out. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:04 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality For those that have not yet read it, the relevent site to read is http://www.openinternet.gov/read-speech.html We need to realize and seperate two things... 1) that the intent of NetNeutrality expressed at this site, is an idealalistic view, to keep the Internet open and free, which is hard to combat based on the ideals, and we should recognize that the goal of an open Internet is not specifically what we are fighting. 2) The reality that idealistic views dont translate to how the Internet Industry really works. And the site's proposed methodology to attempt preservation of an open network, infact may be harmful to consumers and delivery of most common Internet services from competitive Access providers. What we need to fight are mechanisms and ideas that harm access providers, or that prioritize content provider's needs over that of access providers. There is an important thing to realize. One of NetNeutrality's biggest advocates is now I think Chief of Staff. (Bruce somebody). NetNeutrality will be directly addressed in the new FCC, we can count on that. More so than in past commissions. Over the next 3 months I believe WISPA will need to get actively engaged in Netneutrality lobbying. It will need to be a combined effort between legislative and FCC committees. The Legislative committee will need to fight bills being plannedd to be introducted to congress, and FCC committee will need to fight for WISP rights in soon to come FCC rulemaking. It is my belief that government policy makers are timming their efforts so legislation and FCC rules will come to effect togeather, as legislation is pointing to the FCC to make rules. We can start to lobby legislators now, while bills are government working groups. And possibly there could be public hearings, where we might be able to request participation in them? For FCC, we most likely would need to wait for the Notice of PRoposed Rule making. Allthough ideally, its technically possible to lobby for proposed rules to never get to rule making stage. (although I dont think its likely for that to occur). We are going to need to decide whether we want to fight the core concept all togeather, or fight for details and wording that make the idealisitic views realistic in a way not to harm ISP. I believe we will likely have a better chance of winning our view, if we all togeather fight netneutrality in its entirely, jsut because we'd ahve cable TV and RBOCs endorsement in addition to our WISP view. But the risk there is that we do not protect ourselve from predator practices of monopoly like providers, and we risk loosing altogeather, if consumers gain more support than providers do. The risk is that protecting the majority of consumers (cable and RBOC subscribers with 80%+ market share) has greater benefit than protecting the few vulnerable providers (less than 20% market share by small ISPs and WISPs). We need to remind the government that the open Internet originally was a network paid for by the government. In Today's Internet, providers are required to pay for building access for consumers Internet access. Its a beautiful thing to have a consolidated Internet deliverd by teh combination efforts of all providers. What we want to prevent is segregation of the Internet, where providers are forced to make two networks, their Internet network, and then their private network, where they would invest more heavily in their own private networks for ROI reasons, and because policy took away the viabilty of fair ROI for them. Let me pose a hypothetical situation... What would occur if Comcast, Timewarner, and RBOCs announced tommorrow, that they would no longer offer Internet Access as of Dec 2010, and planned to cancel all peers to the Internet, but would create a peer between each other, and announced their hosting solutions (for a price) which allowed some content provider the option to access their private networks. Would they legally be allowed not to offer Internet access, and go 100% private? And if it were legal, would they keep their market share, considering togeather they owned 90% of the eyeballs and last mile connections to consumer's homes, many of which were the single only source of connection? I'd argue they'd keep 99% of their customer base, and instead users that had choice of provider would subscribe to two services, the Public Internet provider, and the Private network provider, because there would be benefit to buying access
Re: [WISPA] OT: Rouge antispyware
Okay, there is no list of sites. We are also a retail computer repair shop and we have been dealing with this program for over a year now. The story is, it's first job is to see if you design websites. If you do and you use something like FrontPage, it will steal your login info, go to your site then infect your index with a script redirecting the visitor to the picture that tells them they are infected and will deposit the infection into their temporary folder and adds a run command in the registry. I've also seen the files in the Java folder and the temp and prefetch folders as well as the software distribution folders. If you do use a webhost, most if not all hosting services have forced the change of passwords as well as taken away support for FrontPage extensions, even though Microsoft did away with them as well awhile back. The United States post office was infected, Kroger was infected, the YMCA, and thousands of others. Google now pre-checks for the infection and will actually block entry into the site until the host or domain holder contacts Google to request a review. Anyhow, the program itself changes every couple of weeks or so in order to get past Norton and the rest. The goal is to have the infected persons click and pay cash which is just extortion because the program they think they are buying does nothing. And eventually the PC cannot be used because it keeps taking away functions. 6 months ago it was estimated that this group has amassed over 5 million dollars this way. Last week it hit hard yet again. We have talks with little old ladies daily about having their bank reverse the charges but they seem too confused to do that so the crooks keep the cash. So the answer is no. there is no list and can't be. No one is safe from these people unless we all lock down our passwords and not auto save them in the web design software. Also be aware that a lot of the Personal Anti-Virus removal tools on the internet are also from the same people trying to get payment on both ends. Beware. I used to tell people that if it popped up to not click on anything, unplug the pc totally and not to go to that site for a few days. Clicking the X to close was a fake, the thing was actually a picture and clicking anything installed it. Now it auto-installs and you're screwed. The one from the past 2 weeks has been easier. It's been going just to the Program Files in an PAV folder. You have to go to safe mode, delete the folder then go to regedit, HKLM\software\Microsoft\windows\currentversion\run and delete anything saying PAV or Personal Anti-Virus. Do the same in HKCU\software\microsoft\windows\currentversion\run AND the other step is to go to control panel and internet options and reset internet explorer including deleting all user settings or else the danger is that the infection also changed your browser and will redirect you to the infection yet again. Been there, done that. This thing sucks but we've made lots of cash with it even though I hate making it from other peoples misfortune. If you have any questions, ask cause I've been everywhere with this little gem. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:51 PM To: wireless@wispa.org; motor...@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] OT: Rouge antispyware Does anyone have a complete list of URL's that these rouge antispyware programs use to deposit their payload? I am talking Personal Antivirus, Windows Police Pro, Antivirus 2009, etc... I found this site that list URL's for each separately: http://www.spywarevoid.com/ . My idea is to block all these URL's at my border router(while I still can...another topic). I am going to try to block them with Mikrotik, so I guess I will need all the IP's too? Scottie Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information. 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] OT: Rouge antispyware
OpenDNS won't block it. I run OpenDNS and still come across it because it infects the sites you are trying to open. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Parr Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:20 PM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Rouge antispyware 2009/9/21 Scottie Arnett sarn...@info-ed.com: Does anyone have a complete list of URL's that these rouge antispyware programs use to deposit their payload? I am talking Personal Antivirus, Windows Police Pro, Antivirus 2009, etc... I found this site that list URL's for each separately: http://www.spywarevoid.com/ . My idea is to block all these URL's at my border router(while I still can...another topic). I am going to try to block them with Mikrotik, so I guess I will need all the IP's too? Just run OpenDNS 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] Net Neutrality
I think that's an excellent idea! At least for the wireless side of things where we have to run things tight. We are a bit of a different animal from Comcast and Time Warner. Hell, some of us use them as the upstream provider! -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:31 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Curtis Maurand wrote: I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. That may be what they mean, but that sure isn't what they're saying (or at least that's not what it sounds like from way up here in the peanut gallery). Can anyone comment on whether WISPA plans to adopt any official position on this? I'm not saying net neutrality is bad, because I adore the principles. I just want to be sure the FCC doesn't pass some overly-broad rulemaking, slanted towards bigger operators, that makes it difficult or impossible for smaller outfits (like mine!) to keep things running smoothly. 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] Net Neutrality
I really think the market should dictate how it's ran. That's the American way, at least it's supposed to be. If my customers are having all sorts of issues that this is to address, I think I'd hear about it. For the most part, it's all My utorrent isn't fast!. Hardly ever that the video is buffering to much unless it's because they are buying a 512k connection and trying to do Hulu HD. That's just a marketing opportunity, not a need for the government to step in. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:34 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Would we REALLY want the gov micromanaging our networks THAT close? At 02:26 PM 9/21/2009, you wrote: Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either of them to have the right to keep independent voices from organizing or using the Internet to discuss independent ideas. This is what I mean by protecting and preserving the right to free speech. 2. THE COMMERCIAL SIDE - Currently, we live in a commercialized (possibly an over-commercialized) world. When many journalists write about Network
Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality
But why wait for the FCC? Why not be pro-active? We already know our concerns and we could at least list the ways we would like to see this type of thing designed. To just react to something isn't being the leader. We should be at the front of this thing. At least that's what I feel I should do myself. The entire idea had to be started by someone, why not jump in and be part of it? From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality David, Regarding WISPA plans to adopt any official position on Network Neutrality...that process is always active but it does have a number of steps. 1. We've got to see what rules the FCC actually proposes. 2. We need to get general agreement (probably a majority view since getting complete agreement between all independent-thinking WISPA members is a darn near impossibility) on what WISPA's official position should be. 3. We need to either a) wait for the FCC to ask for opinions or (if our beliefs are compelling enough) b) go to the FCC and make an Ex Parte presentation to selected FCC employees to explain our position and what we recommend the FCC do. 4. Wait and see what the FCC does after we express our opinion or make our presenation and then decide if further action on our part is needed. Steps 1 and 2 (above) are already in play. Watching the FCC's proposals and listening to WISPA member opinions and ideas is happening as we participate in this discussion. Additional work will be done by WISPA's FCC Committee to refine WISPA's position and either write it up (Step 3) or prepare an Ex Parte presentation. Funding to prepare either a written or an in-person FCC presentation comes from the dues of WISPA members therefore it would be beneficial if those participating in this discussion who are not WISPA members would choose to do the right thing and become WISPA members. As the Chair of WISPA's FCC Committee, I will be participating in the preparation of any FCC Comments that WISPA officially makes. While I appreciate all input, I'm obligated to give more weight to the views of WISPA members compared to the views of those who are not yet WISPA members. jack David E. Smith wrote: Curtis Maurand wrote: I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. That may be what they mean, but that sure isn't what they're saying (or at least that's not what it sounds like from way up here in the peanut gallery). Can anyone comment on whether WISPA plans to adopt any official position on this? I'm not saying net neutrality is bad, because I adore the principles. I just want to be sure the FCC doesn't pass some overly-broad rulemaking, slanted towards bigger operators, that makes it difficult or impossible for smaller outfits (like mine!) to keep things running smoothly. 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.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] Authentication Methods
I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for
Uh.. That seems to be double speak. Isn't putting priority on something de-prioritizing the things under it? That's government for you. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:02 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for Right, which is why I phrased it that way. You can't deprioritize anything, but you can prioritize anything (based upon what I've read on this list). They accomplish the same thing, but at face value, one is permissible the other is not. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for You'd have to ask the FCC. Seems like it's the opposite side of the same coin. Jeff -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:51 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for What's the difference between prioritizing all traditional services above other and deprioritizing the bad ones below other? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for The FCC has said that you cannot de-prioritize any type of traffic. You have to do it by prioritizing other types of traffic. Jeff ImageStream -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for I read the Fifth as I cannot discriminate - meaning block this but not that. It says nothing about shaping. Jerry -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:33 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] The Net Neutrality speech we've all been waiting for http://openinternet.gov/read-speech.html In addition to the four classic Network neutrality principles, the FCC plans to pursue two more. Quotes from the speech: * The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications. * The sixth principle is a transparency principle -- stating that providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices. I love the sixth one, but number five gives me the willies. Nope, doesn't matter that BitTorrent users bring your network to its knees, you're not allowed to do anything about it. Please tell me I'm missing something. 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] Authentication Methods
I do not personally, no. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Authentication Methods
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 17:36 -0400, Robert West wrote: I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. I have been using it for almost 10 years and its one of my favorite Radius servers to work with, both paid and open source. -- Jeremy Davis jere...@maximumtech.us 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] Net Neutrality
Was a joke. But some who need porn in the morning.. that's just weird. But again, who am I to judge?! (Is there really a superhotstoffhere.com) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Some of us don't need porn every morning and those that do won't admit nor complain about it. Saves us bandwidth. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote: Why do you put superhotstuffhere.com as 8? Some of us count on that every morning. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:26 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Just needed to be worded based on service or type of traffic not destination. All TOS byte 184 traffic priority 1 All DNS priority 2 All HTTP priority 4 etc... WE DO NOT want cnn.com, twcbc.com, abc.com priority 1 google.com yahoo.com priority 2 whitehouse.com superhotstuffhere.com priority 8 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Curtis Maurand cmaur...@xyonet.com wrote: I think you're all jumping to conclusions. There will be modifications. You will probably find that you'll be able to limit outgoing bittorrent and block spam from botnetted machines, block illegal activity, etc. How do you determine illegal bittorrent (uploading of copyrighted content, etc.) from legal (uploading of GNU licensed open source)? There lies the big question. I think they're saying things like Time-Warner can't prioritize CNN (which is owned by Time, Inc.) over MSNBC or Youtube over hulu, etc. I still say they should allow you to prioritize VOIP over everything else. IMHO --Curtis Jerry Richardson wrote: I can't agree more. Blocking (0 bits passed) is constitutionally wrong IMO. Since I can no longer distinguish legal traffic from illegal traffic I have to allow it all. Shaping/Throttling/Caps is not only 100% within my rights, but as an ISP is prudent and a critical part of my business model and I would win that fight in court every time. We stopped selling residential service two years ago - they use more, pay less, and need the most support - however it's clear that this has hampered growth. I am planning to implement metered billing on our network. The plan is to determine the traffic utilization of 95% of our customers in each service tier and set that as the baseline. Moving forward light users will pay less and heavy users will pay more. It's the only way I can think of to survive and be fair. Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality Hi John, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and I believe that I understand the ISP concerns that new regulations may force ISPs to pass large or unlimited amounts of traffic to the detriment of 1) other ISP customers and 2) the financial well-being of the ISP. Again the two main Network Neutrality (NN) issues are 1) Bandwidth and 2) Content. Bandwidth should already be managed by all ISPs and no one (not the Government and not a competitor) should be able to force an ISP to deliver more bandwidth to a customer than the amount that the customer contracted for. If I want to stream an HDTV presentation but I only contracted for 256 k of bandwidth then I have no right to complain if the HDTV movie doesn't stream smoothly. Content is where I believe that the free speech issue is relevant. There area two (or perhaps more) sides of free speech. 1. THE POLITICAL SIDE - There is the political side and this is the side that I am concerned with when I say that protecting free speech is vital. When Democrats are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Republicans from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Democrats. When Republicans are in power, I don't want them to have the right to keep Democrats from using the Internet to discuss ideas that oppose the Republicans. When either Democrats or Republicans are in power, I don't want either
Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
No I haven't.
Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com
http://www.shelbybb.com
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
Chuck - tried this with a wireless card?
As of v3 they starting doing
int wireless
set 0 name=blah ssid=blah
so it may be possible now...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote:
You can setup a default script to be used during Netinstall. This
will
default it back to YOUR original settings. No matter how many times
they default/reset it, it will go back to the way you set it up using
a
script during Netinstall.
Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com
http://www.shelbybb.com
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 1:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
To this day I have never seen a MT default excluding reinstallation.
Excluding having the customer do work, the MT options.
If you have MT as your wireless CPE - you're screwed if it is
defaulted.
Default config will not set wlan1 so it must be manually done.
If you have another device as wireless (Canopy) and then your customer
router is a MT. You have layer 2 connectivity to it...have at it.
If it was misconfigured then we're looking at a business strategy
problem
rather then a technical problem...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Tom DeReggi
wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote:
Yeah... But when the MT config gets accidentally misconfigured, its
not
easy
to walk the customer through reprogramming it, as it is with a
linksys.
Its a double edge sword.
But, we've been thinking about using the MT as a home gateway simply
because
the Linksys's crap out so often, and because the MT can double up as
a
wireless repeater, for the neighbor homes.
But had a question
Using Linksys type SOHOs doing NAT is really easy, because things
like
PPTP
and IPSEC passthrus, FTP compatibilty, and XBOX LIVE security, works
right
out of the box with a click of a checkbox.
Historically, with Linux, NAT (or IP MAsqerading) is a pain in the
neck,
because Active FTP and PPTP dont simply work by default. It requires
addition of some syntax complicated IPTables configs to allow it. Or
atleast
some helper modules that load at boot time.
So my questions is How easy is it to solve those problems with
Mikrotik
OS, to support the above common compatibilty things? So a rookie
techs can
configure the MT in just minutes during install, equivellent to a
Linksys?
Does someone have a common default config to sahre that they just
load
everytime by default, before modifying end user specific config?
Or is it easy enough, to do it from scratch each time?
Or are those things fixed by default?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
I view the money for Mikrotik gear as a sound investment, due to
its
versatility. I don't mind paying a bit more for it rather than
dlink,
netgear, trend etc... Also - the RB750 can't be reset by typical
user
pushing the reset button - I hate that. Oh, it doesn't work lets
hit
reset
button then they say they didn't touch it. Further more, the
additional
built in tools and flexibility make it an easy buy for me. I have
thrown
away loads of linksys, dlink etc gear that starts acting up or
craps
out.
I
have never thrown away a MT for acting up or crapping out from
normal use
through the years.
Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102
Original Message
From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:51 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Router suggestions
If that new router had wireless it would be a 40 dollar piece of
awesomeness.
On 9/20/09, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:
Too expensive for a home router. I do use them most everywhere
Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods
I have deployed FreeRADIUS for large ISPs terminating PPPoE on Cisco (14,000 subs) and RedBack gear (200K subs). Works great. Tim Disclaimer: By day I am a FreeRADIUS consultant. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert West Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:36 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca --- - 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] Authentication Methods
Ah, an unbiased opinion! An honest man I see. I'll install the thing someday. I'm only 2 years behind in my to-do list. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tim Sylvester Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 5:59 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I have deployed FreeRADIUS for large ISPs terminating PPPoE on Cisco (14,000 subs) and RedBack gear (200K subs). Works great. Tim Disclaimer: By day I am a FreeRADIUS consultant. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert West Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:36 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca --- - 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 Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods
We have PowerRouter 732s (under 1500 MSRP) doing over 2500 PPPoE sessions without issues, and PowerRouter 2282s with over 5k currently. Just a FYI. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hensley Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I think first off, why the concern over Mikrotik longevity? Do you not think the company will be around, or do you just not see it scaling (for whatever reason) to the level that you want / need? Personally, I'm not sure what you're looking for that's not already out there. Build a mikrotik concentrator with a good spec server (or two), dropin Freeradius Oas someone else already mentioned) and you should be good for a long time. Sent from Windows mobile device... -Original Message- From: Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:48 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Used Tropos Mesh Equipment
This is from the Tower Pro list. I have nothing to do with the equipment. It is posted for information only. If you buy any tell Zack to mail the 10% check to WISPA. -B- Hey all I recently got the opportunity to buy a lot of refurbished Tropos Wifi units that go on top of light poles. Ive been able to use a few on some local projects but am looking to unload the remainder of them. If anyone has a lead that produces a sale I'd give that person a 10% commission on it. I'm looking to move either the whole lot or lots of 100 at a minimum. No small lots. Ive got 600 refurbished Tropos 5210-3000 units. New they go for about $3k each but I'm asking $450 each on these units. They all come with new antennas (critical) and the original photovoltaic power cords and sun shields. As I indicated they are used/refurbished but in good working order. Terms would be as is where is. Given that some of you might be doing the ATT WiFi installations I figured I would throw it out here and see if someone wants to make some easy money and get these off my hands. Thanks for the help, stay safe. Zach Morley 925-493-0571 * Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, NY 11741 800-479-9195 631-286-8873 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell 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] Used Tropos Mesh Equipment
We have 200 new in the box 5210-3000 units at 159.00 each. Buy 1 or all. Jack Weinberg 69 Public Square, 14th Floor Wilkes-Barre, PA 18701 570-823-9804 1-866-943-4737 ja...@wirelessunits.com www.wirelessunits.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Lakeland Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 8:22 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Used Tropos Mesh Equipment This is from the Tower Pro list. I have nothing to do with the equipment. It is posted for information only. If you buy any tell Zack to mail the 10% check to WISPA. -B- Hey all I recently got the opportunity to buy a lot of refurbished Tropos Wifi units that go on top of light poles. Ive been able to use a few on some local projects but am looking to unload the remainder of them. If anyone has a lead that produces a sale I'd give that person a 10% commission on it. I'm looking to move either the whole lot or lots of 100 at a minimum. No small lots. Ive got 600 refurbished Tropos 5210-3000 units. New they go for about $3k each but I'm asking $450 each on these units. They all come with new antennas (critical) and the original photovoltaic power cords and sun shields. As I indicated they are used/refurbished but in good working order. Terms would be as is where is. Given that some of you might be doing the ATT WiFi installations I figured I would throw it out here and see if someone wants to make some easy money and get these off my hands. Thanks for the help, stay safe. Zach Morley 925-493-0571 * Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, NY 11741 800-479-9195 631-286-8873 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell 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] Facebook fan page
That would be great. However, I read that it's 1000 fans to get your own URL. I am hoping I was wrong! I am only in the teens : ( Martha Huizenga DC Access, LLC 202-546-5898 */Friendly, Local, Affordable, Internet!/**/ Connecting the Capitol Hill Community Join us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Washington-DC/DC-Access-LLC/64096486706?ref=tsor follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/dcaccess /* Dylan Bouterse wrote: I'm thinking there should be a list on the WISPA page for it's member's Facebook fan pages (assuming you're in on the social marketing train)? Thoughts? Apparently if you have more than 100 fans you can get a custom URL from Facebook. We are just over 60 fans. Can I get some help from our WISPA community? Dylan PowerOne/airPowered http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tavares-FL/airPowered/168580151456?ref=nf 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] Maxrad adjustable sector antennas
Tessco On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:45 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: Where are you buying them? Jayson Baker wrote: 2GHz or 5GHz? We used the 5GHz adjustable's years ago, and their performance was awesome. Just bought some of the 2GHz version to do some testing with. Not sure on those yet. Jayson On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Randy Cosby dco...@infowest.com dco...@infowest.com wrote: Anyone have any experience with these? I have a pretty narrow area I have to hit, and the 45 degree, 18dbi gain would be ideal - if they really work well. Randy -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc work: 435-773-6071 email: rco...@infowest.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/randycosby 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] Authentication Methods
Dennis, You have a very interesting product line. I appreciate your feed back on the options that are available today with MikroTik. Looks like something worth investigating. --Nick Huanca On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Dennis Burgess dmburg...@linktechs.netwrote: We have PowerRouter 732s (under 1500 MSRP) doing over 2500 PPPoE sessions without issues, and PowerRouter 2282s with over 5k currently. Just a FYI. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of Learn RouterOS -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hensley Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I think first off, why the concern over Mikrotik longevity? Do you not think the company will be around, or do you just not see it scaling (for whatever reason) to the level that you want / need? Personally, I'm not sure what you're looking for that's not already out there. Build a mikrotik concentrator with a good spec server (or two), dropin Freeradius Oas someone else already mentioned) and you should be good for a long time. Sent from Windows mobile device... -Original Message- From: Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:48 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca 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] Authentication Methods
Hi Tim, Do you know if the Cisco products or the Redback products support bursting based on RADIUS attributes? Thanks, --Nick Huanca On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote: I have deployed FreeRADIUS for large ISPs terminating PPPoE on Cisco (14,000 subs) and RedBack gear (200K subs). Works great. Tim Disclaimer: By day I am a FreeRADIUS consultant. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert West Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:36 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca --- - 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 Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods
I would like to thank all those who responded for their insight and experience. I had not seen if anyone had any experience with IPv6 implementations and PPPoE. Anyone out there running v6 networks? Thanks, On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca -- Nick Huanca Inside Plant Manager GAW High-Speed Internet 1300 Putney Rd Brattleboro, VT 05301 [offices] (877) 220-2873 [direct] (802) 246-1192 x214 [mobile] (413) 570-0120 www.gaw.com --- PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and/or legally privileged or protected information. If you believe you have received this communication in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this message. Any use, disclosure, retransmission, distribution, copying, or taking of any action based on this information by any person or entity other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Because e-mail can be altered electronically, the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed. 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/
