Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

Forgot to mention...the MUM presentations are usually online.  Both
historically and live (forget the link, just look at the
Facebook/Twitter when the even comes around).

http://tiktube.com/?video=354

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Butch Evans  wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 00:29 -0500, Cameron Crum wrote:
>> While not really a training event, I've been to every US MUM in the
>> last 4 years and always found it productive and informative.
>
> 100% agreement from me.
>
>> I'd personally put it on par with last weeks Wispa Regional in
>> StLouis.
>
> I agree from the perspective of quality.  In terms of usefulness,
> however, keep in mind that it has a much narrower focus (as you point
> out).
>
>> I guess if you are not a MT user/fan then you are wasting your time,
>> but otherwise, it is a good thing.
>
> While the MUM is pretty Mikrotik specific, there are often topics that
> would be of general interest, too.  For the most part, you are right,
> though...
>
> --
> 
> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Mikrotik User Meeting

[Butch Evans]

On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 00:29 -0500, Cameron Crum wrote:
> While not really a training event, I've been to every US MUM in the
> last 4 years and always found it productive and informative.

100% agreement from me.

> I'd personally put it on par with last weeks Wispa Regional in
> StLouis. 

I agree from the perspective of quality.  In terms of usefulness,
however, keep in mind that it has a much narrower focus (as you point
out).

> I guess if you are not a MT user/fan then you are wasting your time,
> but otherwise, it is a good thing.

While the MUM is pretty Mikrotik specific, there are often topics that
would be of general interest, too.  For the most part, you are right,
though...

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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] Water Tower grounding

[Cameron Crum]

I've only ever had one problem on a water tower and that was a direct strike
to MY antenna, not the tower. I found the antenna on the ground, and all my
radios were toast. That was before shielded cable made its way into my
network.

Cameron

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Patrick Wheeland  wrote:

> Also, if you want to know proper grounding practices, try to get your hands
> on the Motorola R56 manual.  I would imagine you can find the pdf floating
> on the web somewhere.
>
> 
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Patrick Wheeland
> Sent: Thu 7/29/2010 1:07 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: RE: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding
>
>
> If you've put in your own ground rod and not bonded it to the electrical
> ground, then you're doing more harm than good.  That will create a ground
> potential difference and smoke your equipment.  You absolutely must have all
> the grounds tied together.  I would make sure the water tower, your
> grounding and the utility ground are all bonded together.
>
> -Patrick
>
>
> 
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Bobby Burrow
> Sent: Thu 7/29/2010 8:56 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding
>
>
>
> Ok, since we have been talking grounding, what would be the proper
> grounding method for a 'typical' water tower (bowl with maintenance rail
> and ladder up the leg). I have a Canopy 900 AP with a vertical antenna
> mounted at the top using shielded CAT5 routed down the bowl and ladder.
> There is a NEMA at the bottom where the CMM-3 is located with a #10 wire
> to the ground rod at the bottom of the NEMA.
>
> I am 'feeding' this tower APs during the spring/summer stormy months.
> Are there any better methods to grounding this setup?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Bobby
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] Mikrotik User Meeting

[Cameron Crum]

While not really a training event, I've been to every US MUM in the last 4
years and always found it productive and informative. I'd personally put it
on par with last weeks Wispa Regional in StLouis. The ones I've been to were
about the same in size and while the topics were not as diverse, I certainly
learned quite a bit. I guess if you are not a MT user/fan then you are
wasting your time, but otherwise, it is a good thing.

Cameron

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Jim Patient  wrote:

>  Paul,
>
> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
> www.linktechs.net is a vendor member and provides Mikrotik certification
> training.
>
> WISPA vendor members help in providing financial support for WISPA and
> it's efforts in promoting our industry.  You can find a list of other
> WISPA vendor members at
> http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=131
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 7/28/2010 11:41 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 09:24 -0700, Paul Gerstenberger wrote:
> >> Has anyone attended the MUM's? What were your impressions?
> >> I'm thinking of going this year, curious what to expect. I've
> >> integrated mikrotik into our production network and so far
> >> it's working well, be nice to have a little official training
> >> though.
> > I have a training class scheduled for next week (see
> > http://store.wispgear.net/ for details).  Mikrotik's "official" training
> > (from the reviews I've seen) don't get very good reviews, due to the
> > difficulty people have in understanding what they are saying...
> >
> > As for the MUM, they are generally pretty good shows.  I've never heard
> > anyone say they were disappointed for having attended.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Butch Evans]

On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 00:36 -0400, Jerry Richardson wrote: 
> I was under the assumption that in order to advertise services 
> on the lists one needed to be a paying vendor member.

FIRST: I did not "advertise" my services.  I simply answered a question
that was asked.  Anyone who reads the original question and my answer
will see that my answer was much more than an "advertisement".  

SECOND: I agree with the presumption that "advertisements" should be
paid for.  The fact is, though, that is has LONG been an accepted
practice to answer questions and offer solutions.  I had a solution to
the question, which I posted.  In context, the alleged "advertisement"
was a small portion of the answer.  My record of offering free advice on
this (and MANY other lists) will support my contention that I do NOT use
every opportunity to "advertise".  I provide good advice (for free),
complete answers where possible and occasionally (VERY RARE) I post a
solution that will require a payment. 

THIRD: Can we please just drop this?  I inadvertently posted this
response on the list and it was meant to be offlist (see the subject).
It should be clear to all who read my message (whether you are a "Butch
fan" or a "Dennis and Jim fan") that the current discussion was not
intended to be a public discussion.

FINALLY: This thread has seriously deteriorated into something that is
of no help to Paul, who posted a reasonable question.  I will no longer
participate in this thread.  

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

It has little to do with Butch specifically.  It's the fact we have an
entire thread dedicated to this, what I consider, tiny little issue.

I will stand alone in this.  I was only imagining that I wasn't alone,
I apologize for speaking for others.  I ask that everyone think for
themselves.  What you (Forbes and Dennis in this particular thread,
I'm assuming others are part of this group) are stating is that no one
can say "I can help".

We can either

A) learn to work together
B) clearly define the rules; I believe this is impossible
C) separate WISPA from the public; members only are in
memb...@wispa.org; close down every other mailing list

I have always been of a GNU mind set.  I help people for free.  People
help me for free.  Obviously there has to be a line drawn.  Maybe
another way we can look at this is Butch is helping the WISP community
and by proxy the WISPA entity.  I think helping starving people is
more important then worrying about who has the bigger slice of pizza.

I understand completely what you're saying.  It isn't fair one is
paying for what the other isn't and getting the same results.  Neither
is life.  We can pout or cooperate.  Not sure if you were around for
this but look up "I QUIT".

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Forbes Mercy
 wrote:
> Josh,
>
> Sorry but that email was out of line, why would you take the "we'll take
> our Butch fans and leave" attitude?  it's totally against what we have
> all worked for in improving conditions for WISP's and access to our paid
> vendors.  The first thing Dennis did was go on the Board list and
> announce it was his opinion and not as the board member and he would
> abstain from any board action if any was taken.  I'm always irritated
> when people make grand stands over something when they know it's not
> really right.  Yes I'm a fan of Butch's, I don't doubt for one second
> his qualifications, I'm also a fan of the rules that apply to everyone
> and if someone was a board member years ago but didn't support WISPA in
> the capacity they were representing now that is as violating to me as
> someone saying something bad about Butch.  We have numerous camps in
> this group because people contribute a lot on here, I even say that you
> have been active enough to have a "Josh" camp of supporters.  It shows a
> lack of that leadership expected of your followers to say "if this group
> wants to play by the rules we all signed up for, we're outta here.  If
> Butch has made at least $1000 in revenue while promoting his business on
> here, which I'm sure he has, shouldn't you be asking "why do I have to
> pay my share and he doesn't?"  I'm just asking.
>
> The Regional Meeting provided great unity so when someone just
> willy-nilly says "I speak for many of us" blah blah lets fly this
> rules following group if they disagree with me at all! I ask do you even
> get WISPA?  It's just sad because this group has made me plenty mad on
> occasion but I can easily see how WISPA has assisted my business and the
> entire industry.  How many customers have said "I'm leaving you and
> taking my friends with me", I lose maybe one or two people because of
> them but eventually they come back because my service is far better than
> my satellite competition, see the correlation.
>
> Forbes
>
> On 7/29/2010 8:49 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
>> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>>
>> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
>> something in this matter.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>>   wrote:
>>
>>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik&  WISP Support Services
>>> 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 Butch Evans
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>>>
 I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.

>>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught o

Re: [WISPA] Monitor / Notify App

[Cameron Crum]

How long is temporary?

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Josh Luthman
wrote:

> If it's a Mikrotik link you can do it right in the radio.
>
> What equipment are you using?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:30 PM, KosiNet Wireless 
> wrote:
> > I need a cheap / easy app to monitor a temporary link setup. Must be able
> to
> > monitor and Email / Txt me if there are any outages...
> >
> > Preferably Windows based, as I don't have time to do this one myself.
> >
> > What are you guys running?
> >
> > Thanks, Gary.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.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] choosing a consultant -was- Re: OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Cameron Crum]

Gotta love the free ads...but hey, when you're good you're good. More power
to you Butch.

Cameron

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:

> roflol
>
> I'm glad I'm not the only one that does silly things from time to time!
>
> Having said that let me drift this conversation a little bit.
>
> What are the reasons to use a consultant?
>
> For me it's mainly two fold.
>
> 1:  I can hire the best in the field.  I'm not stuck with what talents I've
> got.  I'm also not stuck with someone that needs to know a lot about a lot
> of things.  A consultant will often be a specialist in a fairly narrow
> field.  ex:  I can't tell you how to handle routing, but if you want to
> take
> radios, routers, servers etc. and combine those with some hard work and a
> potential customer base I can help you turn that into cashflow and,
> usually,
> profit.
>
> 2:  Having access to more than one expert.  If I had taken the time to
> learn
> servers, routers etc. or if I'd have hired a guy who's main, or even only,
> job it is to take care of those devices I'd be beholden to that one person.
> If they quit, got fired, died or whatever I'd be stuck for however long it
> took to find a replacement and train the new guy.  With a consultant it's
> not much more complicated than picking up the phone and calling another
> consultant.
>
> Having said that I use Butch a lot.  He's busy so the rest of you guys go
> find your own expert!  grin  Personally I don't know anyone that does as
> good of a job of working on the devices and has the patience to deal with
> my
> ignorance of that part of my business.
>
> The great part of it is that I *can* pick up the phone and call any of 3 or
> 4 others that also know how to do what Butch does for me.  My choice today
> is to use Butch, but it's certainly nice to know I have options.  It's up
> to
> Butch to make sure I never feel the need to develop a relationship with
> anyone else.
>
> How do others look at in-house vs. consultant workers?
> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Brad Belton" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
>
> >I agree with Josh's comment.  Butch has been the first and last MikroTik
> > consultant we've needed.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> > Brad
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Alan Bryant
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:16 PM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
> >
> > I second Butch as a personal recommendation. We haven't had to use him
> > much, but he has always had great recommendations for questions I have
> > asked on the list as well as questions I wanted to ask and someone
> > else beat me to it.
> >
> > Also, his QOS script for RouterOS is pretty good as well!
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Josh Luthman
> >  wrote:
> >> I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.
> >>
> >> My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
> >> consultant I have needed.
> >>
> >> On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
> >>
> >> Oooo!
> >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Butch Evans 
> >> Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> > 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>
> >
> 
> > 
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alan Bryant | Systems Administrator
> > Gtek Computers & Wireless, LLC.
> > a...@gtekcommunications.com | www.gtek.biz
> > O 361-777-1400 | F 361-777-1405
> >
> >
> >
> 
> > 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.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] [WISPA Members] Health Insurance

[Cameron Crum]

That is called taxes...and we are about to see what it really costs. Just
wait until next year.

Cameron

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Robert West wrote:

> Health Insurance?
>
>
>
> Hey, George!  (In Canada)
>
>
>
> What kind of budget to you have for health insurance?
>
>
>
> Me-
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Bret Clark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:56 PM
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Cc:* memb...@wispa.org; motor...@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Health Insurance
>
>
>
> We went through an independent broker who essentially had created a small
> business group plan of area businesses that help keep cost down verses us
> going to the insurer ourselves. Another thing to consider is Health Savings
> Accounts (HSA) which are a lot less then regular health insurance but at
> least affords some piece of mind for employees in the event they are faced
> with a serious medical or health issue.
>
> Bret
>
> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 19:07 -0400, David Weddell wrote:
>
> I know that we are constantly battling pricing in health insurance. We
> would be interested in how we could participate in a “WISPA” group plan and
> with 60+ employees and families that we cover, you can imagine our monthly
> premium. I would assume that in an association plan, the more that
> participate, the better rates could be negotiated. We would be interested in
> helping with negotiations if needed. I believe this is a great idea and
> could benefit WISPA as a whole and encourage membership as well.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> David Weddell
>
> VP Business Development &
>
> Corporate Partnerships
>
> Omnicity, Inc.
>
>
>
> www.omnicity.net
>
> OTCMarkets: OMCY
>
>
>
> 866 586 1518 Corporate Office
>
> 765 499 7310 Cell
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Rick Harnish
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:40 PM
> *To:* 'WISPA General List'; memb...@wispa.org; motor...@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [WISPA Members] Health Insurance
>
>
>
> I am curious about all the small operators out there.  What are you doing
> for Health Insurance?  Do you have individual policies?  Are you on your
> wife’s policy?  Is there a need for a WISPA Group Health Insurance Plan?
>
>
>
> I will be investigating this topic over the next few weeks.  I will most
> likely send out a survey in a week or two once I get together with an
> underwriter and see what the feasibility is.  Between now and then, I would
> like to encourage discussion to see whether it is worth our effort.
>
>
>
> My goal is to offer a group plan that will assist those who do not have
> enough employees to justify an in-house group plan for their employees or
> themselves.  Hopefully, we can reduce your cost and improve your coverage.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> *Rick Harnish*
>
> President
>
> WISPA
>
> 260-307-4000 cell
>
> 866-317-2851 WISPA Office
>
> Skype: rick.harnish.
>
> rharn...@wispa.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>
> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Scottie Arnett]

Exactly Patrick.

The rural telco's in my coverage area are getting those  per telephone
served. They are not going to give it up without a fight. The only
recourse would be to distribute USF funds across the providers providing
Internet access and Land line access. That will not happen.

Scottie

> You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
> Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
> against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
> only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
> re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
> exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
> second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.
>
>
> Patrick Leary
> Aperto Networks
> 813.426.4230 mobile
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Brian Webster
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:02 AM
> To: 'Fred Goldstein'; 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most
> compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever
>
> Fred,
>   That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby
> to have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that
> delivers the defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to
> meet the 75% requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there
> are opportunities to change this although I don't expect that one to go
> through without a fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves
> with the cable industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose
> their USF subsidies in markets that are served by cable.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
> To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
> reason to document and map your network coverage ever
>
> At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.
>
> As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers (i.e.,
> cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.
>
> The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to
> hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.
>
>
>
>>Brian
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of RickG
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
> reason
>>to document and map your network coverage ever
>>
>>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>>cant even try to figure it out.
>>
>>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
>> wrote:
>> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
> list.
>>I
>> > took particular note to the following statement:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
> at
>> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
> competitive
>> > provider that does not receive support
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75%
> of a
>> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be
> eligibility
>>to
>> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have
> access
>>to
>> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage
> and
>> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be
> a
> huge
>> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
> cannot
>> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
> this.
>> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from
> coming
> in
>>to
>> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
>> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as
> a
>> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no
> artificial
>> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service.
> We
> all
>> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
> density
>> > markets.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First
> and
>> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required.
> Next
> one
>> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you
> would
>> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including
> paying
> me
>> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be
> participating
> in
>> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those
> state
> maps
>> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the
> 75

Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Forbes Mercy]

Josh,

Sorry but that email was out of line, why would you take the "we'll take 
our Butch fans and leave" attitude?  it's totally against what we have 
all worked for in improving conditions for WISP's and access to our paid 
vendors.  The first thing Dennis did was go on the Board list and 
announce it was his opinion and not as the board member and he would 
abstain from any board action if any was taken.  I'm always irritated 
when people make grand stands over something when they know it's not 
really right.  Yes I'm a fan of Butch's, I don't doubt for one second 
his qualifications, I'm also a fan of the rules that apply to everyone 
and if someone was a board member years ago but didn't support WISPA in 
the capacity they were representing now that is as violating to me as 
someone saying something bad about Butch.  We have numerous camps in 
this group because people contribute a lot on here, I even say that you 
have been active enough to have a "Josh" camp of supporters.  It shows a 
lack of that leadership expected of your followers to say "if this group 
wants to play by the rules we all signed up for, we're outta here.  If 
Butch has made at least $1000 in revenue while promoting his business on 
here, which I'm sure he has, shouldn't you be asking "why do I have to 
pay my share and he doesn't?"  I'm just asking.

The Regional Meeting provided great unity so when someone just 
willy-nilly says "I speak for many of us" blah blah lets fly this 
rules following group if they disagree with me at all! I ask do you even 
get WISPA?  It's just sad because this group has made me plenty mad on 
occasion but I can easily see how WISPA has assisted my business and the 
entire industry.  How many customers have said "I'm leaving you and 
taking my friends with me", I lose maybe one or two people because of 
them but eventually they come back because my service is far better than 
my satellite competition, see the correlation.

Forbes

On 7/29/2010 8:49 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>
> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
> something in this matter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>   wrote:
>
>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>
>> ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik&  WISP Support Services
>> 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 Butch Evans
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>>  
>>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>>>
>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
>> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
>> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
>> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
>> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
>> does it?
>>
>> --
>> 
>> * Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
>> * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
>> * http://store.wispgear.net/* 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/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@

[WISPA] RocketM with AirMax 2G-15-120 sectors

[RickG]

OK, so I finally got around to "upgrading" one of my oldest towers. It
had 3 WRAP/StarOS boards with CM9 cards on 15DB Superpass 120 degree
sectors. I added the first RocketM unit with the 15DB 120 degree
sectors. The receive signals are low, much lower than the old
equipment. Any ideas?
-RickG



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Jerry Richardson]

I was under the assumption that in order to advertise services on the lists one 
needed to be a paying vendor member.

Doesn't seem fair that if one guy is paying for the right to advertise, that 
another guy can pop in and tout his stuff fwithout paying the fare (nothing 
against Butch, I'm just sayin')

- Jerry


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

Ya, but that person is not paying in the bar, and I am ..  

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
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 Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

My point still remains.  If someone's smoking in a bar and I don't
like it, I leave.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> Yes a few months to fill a vacancy.  He also did work with CALEA committee 
> among other thngs.  Not saying he did not do things for WISPA, but that still 
> does not give him the right to advertise his products.
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Josh Luthman
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:50 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>
> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
> something in this matter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>  wrote:
>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>
>> ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> 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 Butch Evans
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>>
>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
>> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
>> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
>> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
>> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
>> does it?
>>
>> --
>> 
>> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
>> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
>> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Scottie Arnett]

I agree with Fred on this. I have read many of his statements on
cybertelecom's email list. If you are an ISP, I strongly recommend that
you join it off of < http://www.cybertelecom.org/ >

Since around 2002, maybe a little earlier, at the time of The
Tauzin-Dingell Telecom Bill, the Congress, and the FCC pretty much did
away with "line sharing" or the ability for us(ISP's) to use any lines
provided by Ilec's(< http://www.manymedia.com/futures/tauzding.html >).
After this it lead to the "Triennial Review." All this finally leads to
the fact that the ILEC's do not even have to share their fiber.

Fred may not agree with me on this, but as far as I can see it, the FCC
and Congress have been out to do away with the small ISP's since around
2000. They have one agenda, that makes it even more sound is that in the
last few months, the FCC has now classified broadband as 4 meg down/1 meg
up. That not only has DE-classified many of the WISP as providing
broadband, but also the satellite providers, and many DSL systems.

I recently had an awakening, on the 2nd round BIP, that even though my
company had coverage in the same area as a Rural Telco(Twin Lakes
Telephone Cooperative) they could apply for BIP, but I could not because
they already had USDA funding as a Telco. Guess what? They received 16
million in grants and also received 16 million in low cost loans to
provide FTTH in my coverage area.

Call me what you will, but the FCC and everything behind them only want
the duopoly of cable and telco to deal with. We are just pissing in the
wind and it is why I have not joined WISPA yet. I may be missing the boat,
but I am waiting for WISPA to prove me wrong. I have seen beyond and
experienced beyond the norm. Show me something that I can have faith(and
provide financial incentives) in or I will stay exactly where I am at and
look for other income.

Scottie Arnett
Info-Ed, Inc.

> At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.
>
> As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers
> (i.e., cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.
>
> The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to
> hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.
>
>
>
>>Brian
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of RickG
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
>> reason
>>to document and map your network coverage ever
>>
>>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>>cant even try to figure it out.
>>
>>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
>> wrote:
>> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
>> list.
>>I
>> > took particular note to the following statement:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
>> at
>> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
>> competitive
>> > provider that does not receive support
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of
>> a
>> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be
>> eligibility
>>to
>> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have
>> access
>>to
>> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage
>> and
>> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a
>> huge
>> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
>> cannot
>> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
>> this.
>> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming
>> in
>>to
>> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
>> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
>> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
>> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We
>> all
>> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
>> density
>> > markets.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
>> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next
>> one
>> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
>> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including
>> paying me
>> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating
>> in
>> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state
>> maps
>> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
>> > coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another
>> verification
>> > source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
>>someone
>> > to say you don't exist and don't offe

Re: [WISPA] Suggestions Request.

[RickG]

Well, 900Hz is "slower" :)

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Robert West
 wrote:
> They say August.  But that would be the happy announcement email from them.
> Availability, probably October!   :)
>
> Will be "on the boat" for at least a month.
>
> But I'm ready!
>
> Bob-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of RickG
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:03 AM
> To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Suggestions Request.
>
> Speaking of Ubiquiti - any news about 900MHz?
>
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
> wrote:
>> according to Streakwave Website there is such a thing as PicoM 2HP...
>> if it is available and shipping ... don't know...
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>
>> On 7/28/2010 11:31 PM, RickG wrote:
>>> I do like my Picos. Wish they had an PicoM!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[RickG]

He reminds me of Tom!

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Jeff Broadwick  wrote:
> I am so glad you moved over to the Wispa list Fred!  I don't always agree
> with you, but I REALLY appreciate how much thought and detail you put into
> your responses.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ImageStream
> 800-813-5123 x106     (US/Can)
> +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
> to document and map your network coverage ever
>
> At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>>Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers
>>to get other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a
>>more level one should the cable companies try to compete in other
>>markets. We might also get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to
>>support the position although most of their deployments will probably
>>be in areas that would never have qualified for USF to begin with. If
>>the terms wireline are kept in the bill it would appear that wireless
>>services might also be excluded from receiving any USF funds which
>>basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the Telco's as it has
> been.
>>
>>Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
>>reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
>>industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will
>>be spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What
>>we need to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas
>>already served by WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could
>>also be fought and won to allow WISP's access to the funds for
>>broadband deployments then great. When going up against the cable and
>>Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about picking their battles as the
> funding to fight this will be limited.
>
> And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,
>
>>You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>>Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
>>against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
>>only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
>>re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
>>exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
>>second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.
>
> Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal argument
> boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, unless it's a
> flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, since the main issue
> here is simply who gets government handouts, and handing out money (and
> taxing) is sort of the normal role of government.  The problem is that the
> system is so corrupt by now that the handouts appear to be irrational.  In
> practice they're not; they just aren't done for the public good.
>
> Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill this is.
> Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his staff, though they
> know more about it than most congressional staffers.  Boucher's job in
> Washington is, and has always been, to carry Verizon's water.  When he puts
> a bill in the hopper, it comes from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably
> drafted most of the bill.
>
> So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is all
> about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation reform.  Before
> USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high enough to pay the
> subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural carrier gets 50 cents for
> terminating it.  This worked because Long Distance was a huge luxury and
> thus could be milked.  As the cost of delivering LD went down, the amount
> that could be diverted to supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system
> broke down under competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something
> called "reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that forever.
> It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from IXCs to LECs no
> longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes up the difference.  The
> IXCs, however, are the main payers of USF.  They count the cards differently
> but the kitty still goes the same way.
>
> In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on the
> receiving end of IXC switched access charges.  But now the Bells get much
> lower switched access rates, so it's not a big revenue source for them.
> Instead, you have Verizon owning the former MCI and Worldcom assets and
> Southwestern Bell owning the former AT&T Corp.
> assets, so the two mega-Bells are probably net payers, not recipients, of
> subsidies to the rurals, both via USF and access charges.  Spri

Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

Life isn't fair.  My example goes both ways.  No one is forcing you to
drink here.

Maybe we should have a poll with all the paying members and see who
all has a problem with it?  Base rules on the decisions of the group.

Are we really going to make a rule that says non-members can't offer help?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> Ya, but that person is not paying in the bar, and I am ..
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Josh Luthman
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:07 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> My point still remains.  If someone's smoking in a bar and I don't
> like it, I leave.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Dennis Burgess
>  wrote:
>> Yes a few months to fill a vacancy.  He also did work with CALEA committee 
>> among other thngs.  Not saying he did not do things for WISPA, but that 
>> still does not give him the right to advertise his products.
>>
>> ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> 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 Josh Luthman
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:50 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
>> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>>
>> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
>> something in this matter.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>>  wrote:
>>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>> 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 Butch Evans
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
 I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>>>
>>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
>>> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
>>> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
>>> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
>>> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
>>> does it?
>>>
>>> --
>>> 
>>> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
>>> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
>>> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You!

Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Dennis Burgess]

Ya, but that person is not paying in the bar, and I am ..  

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
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 Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

My point still remains.  If someone's smoking in a bar and I don't
like it, I leave.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> Yes a few months to fill a vacancy.  He also did work with CALEA committee 
> among other thngs.  Not saying he did not do things for WISPA, but that still 
> does not give him the right to advertise his products.
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Josh Luthman
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:50 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>
> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
> something in this matter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>  wrote:
>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>
>> ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> 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 Butch Evans
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>>
>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
>> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
>> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
>> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
>> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
>> does it?
>>
>> --
>> 
>> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
>> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
>> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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
>
> Subsc

Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

My point still remains.  If someone's smoking in a bar and I don't
like it, I leave.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> Yes a few months to fill a vacancy.  He also did work with CALEA committee 
> among other thngs.  Not saying he did not do things for WISPA, but that still 
> does not give him the right to advertise his products.
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Josh Luthman
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:50 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
> WISPA if people are going to act like this.
>
> Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
> something in this matter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
>  wrote:
>> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
>> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>>
>> ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> 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 Butch Evans
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>>
>> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
>> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
>> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
>> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
>> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
>> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
>> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
>> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
>> does it?
>>
>> --
>> 
>> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
>> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
>> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Dennis Burgess]

Yes a few months to fill a vacancy.  He also did work with CALEA committee 
among other thngs.  Not saying he did not do things for WISPA, but that still 
does not give him the right to advertise his products.  

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
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 Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:50 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
WISPA if people are going to act like this.

Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
something in this matter.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Butch Evans
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>
> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
> does it?
>
> --
> 
> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] How is your grounding plan?

[Dennis Burgess]

Man, that was on a recent discovery/science channel show about lighting.
Kewl stuff.  They talked about how most of this went "up" vs "down" i.e.
you see the trail starting up from a tower or tree in some cases vs how
most people see it come down.Acutally, once you get done with the
video :: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnIStJ7OY6w&NR=1 

 

 

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
 
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training 
- Author of "Learn RouterOS"   

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:35 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] How is your grounding plan?

 

I'll hang out and be in awe.  Then  again, I am lacking in brain cells.

 

Me-

 

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:45 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] How is your grounding plan?

 

High speed cameras are definitely one of the best inventions of this
century. Really cool looking but I wouldn't want to be anywhere near
there, ever!

On Jul 29, 2010 12:36 AM, "Robert West"
 wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bvmEYxEYiA&feature=topvideos

 

Crazy.







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Monitor / Notify App

[Josh Luthman]

If it's a Mikrotik link you can do it right in the radio.

What equipment are you using?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:30 PM, KosiNet Wireless  wrote:
> I need a cheap / easy app to monitor a temporary link setup. Must be able to
> monitor and Email / Txt me if there are any outages...
>
> Preferably Windows based, as I don't have time to do this one myself.
>
> What are you guys running?
>
> Thanks, Gary.
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

I think I speak for many of us when I say I'm not going to stick with
WISPA if people are going to act like this.

Butch was on the board at one point in time which has to count for
something in this matter.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Dennis Burgess
 wrote:
> It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
> Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.
>
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> 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 Butch Evans
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote:
>> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.
>
> He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
> simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
> week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
> comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
> 40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
> Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
> the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
> This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
> does it?
>
> --
> 
> * Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
> * http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
> * http://store.wispgear.net/    * 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/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] Monitor / Notify App

[Dennis Burgess]

The dude :)  Cheap, FREE! Windows!  E-mails, SMS :) 

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
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 KosiNet Wireless
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Monitor / Notify App

I need a cheap / easy app to monitor a temporary link setup. Must be
able to 
monitor and Email / Txt me if there are any outages...

Preferably Windows based, as I don't have time to do this one myself.

What are you guys running?

Thanks, Gary. 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Monitor / Notify App

[Jerry Richardson]

Use the free version of PRTG

- Jerry


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of KosiNet Wireless
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Monitor / Notify App

I need a cheap / easy app to monitor a temporary link setup. Must be able to 
monitor and Email / Txt me if there are any outages...

Preferably Windows based, as I don't have time to do this one myself.

What are you guys running?

Thanks, Gary. 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Monitor / Notify App

[KosiNet Wireless]

I need a cheap / easy app to monitor a temporary link setup. Must be able to 
monitor and Email / Txt me if there are any outages...

Preferably Windows based, as I don't have time to do this one myself.

What are you guys running?

Thanks, Gary. 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Dennis Burgess]

It does when you are promoting your products and services as a Vendor
Member and you are NOT a WISPA Vendor member.   

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
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 Butch Evans
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 6:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote: 
> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.  

He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
does it?  

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Suggestions Request.

[Robert West]

They say August.  But that would be the happy announcement email from them.
Availability, probably October!   :)

Will be "on the boat" for at least a month.

But I'm ready!

Bob-







-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:03 AM
To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Suggestions Request.

Speaking of Ubiquiti - any news about 900MHz?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
wrote:
> according to Streakwave Website there is such a thing as PicoM 2HP...
> if it is available and shipping ... don't know...
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
> On 7/28/2010 11:31 PM, RickG wrote:
>> I do like my Picos. Wish they had an PicoM!
>>
>>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] How is your grounding plan?

[Robert West]

I'll hang out and be in awe.  Then  again, I am lacking in brain cells.

 

Me-

 

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:45 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] How is your grounding plan?

 

High speed cameras are definitely one of the best inventions of this
century. Really cool looking but I wouldn't want to be anywhere near there,
ever!

On Jul 29, 2010 12:36 AM, "Robert West"  wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bvmEYxEYiA

&feature=topvideos

 

Crazy.






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Suggestions Request.

[Robert West]

Available 2015.

JOKE!

But..  Could be true.  Who knows.  Not me...

Joe-


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Suggestions Request.

according to Streakwave Website there is such a thing as PicoM 2HP...
if it is available and shipping ... don't know...

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom

On 7/28/2010 11:31 PM, RickG wrote:
> I do like my Picos. Wish they had an PicoM!
>
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] choosing a consultant -was- Re: OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

Consultants are significantly cheaper to start with, I think.  I can't
afford someone full time.

If I can't do something then I go to Butch.  Have him train me once
and I go from there.  He is my back up in case I'm stuck at some
point.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Marlon K. Schafer  
wrote:
> roflol
>
> I'm glad I'm not the only one that does silly things from time to time!
>
> Having said that let me drift this conversation a little bit.
>
> What are the reasons to use a consultant?
>
> For me it's mainly two fold.
>
> 1:  I can hire the best in the field.  I'm not stuck with what talents I've
> got.  I'm also not stuck with someone that needs to know a lot about a lot
> of things.  A consultant will often be a specialist in a fairly narrow
> field.  ex:  I can't tell you how to handle routing, but if you want to take
> radios, routers, servers etc. and combine those with some hard work and a
> potential customer base I can help you turn that into cashflow and, usually,
> profit.
>
> 2:  Having access to more than one expert.  If I had taken the time to learn
> servers, routers etc. or if I'd have hired a guy who's main, or even only,
> job it is to take care of those devices I'd be beholden to that one person.
> If they quit, got fired, died or whatever I'd be stuck for however long it
> took to find a replacement and train the new guy.  With a consultant it's
> not much more complicated than picking up the phone and calling another
> consultant.
>
> Having said that I use Butch a lot.  He's busy so the rest of you guys go
> find your own expert!  grin  Personally I don't know anyone that does as
> good of a job of working on the devices and has the patience to deal with my
> ignorance of that part of my business.
>
> The great part of it is that I *can* pick up the phone and call any of 3 or
> 4 others that also know how to do what Butch does for me.  My choice today
> is to use Butch, but it's certainly nice to know I have options.  It's up to
> Butch to make sure I never feel the need to develop a relationship with
> anyone else.
>
> How do others look at in-house vs. consultant workers?
> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Brad Belton" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
>
>>I agree with Josh's comment.  Butch has been the first and last MikroTik
>> consultant we've needed.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Alan Bryant
>> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:16 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>>
>> I second Butch as a personal recommendation. We haven't had to use him
>> much, but he has always had great recommendations for questions I have
>> asked on the list as well as questions I wanted to ask and someone
>> else beat me to it.
>>
>> Also, his QOS script for RouterOS is pretty good as well!
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Josh Luthman
>>  wrote:
>>> I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.
>>>
>>> My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
>>> consultant I have needed.
>>>
>>> On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
>>>
>>> Oooo!
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Butch Evans 
>>> Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alan Bryant | Systems Administrator
>> Gtek Computers & Wireless, LLC.
>> a...@gtekcommunications.com | www.gtek.biz
>> O 361-777-1400 | F 361-777-1405
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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: ht

Re: [WISPA] choosing a consultant -was- Re: OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Butch Evans]

On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
> >>
> >> Oooo!

SIGH!  Sorry, list.

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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/

[WISPA] choosing a consultant -was- Re: OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Marlon K. Schafer]

roflol

I'm glad I'm not the only one that does silly things from time to time!

Having said that let me drift this conversation a little bit.

What are the reasons to use a consultant?

For me it's mainly two fold.

1:  I can hire the best in the field.  I'm not stuck with what talents I've 
got.  I'm also not stuck with someone that needs to know a lot about a lot 
of things.  A consultant will often be a specialist in a fairly narrow 
field.  ex:  I can't tell you how to handle routing, but if you want to take 
radios, routers, servers etc. and combine those with some hard work and a 
potential customer base I can help you turn that into cashflow and, usually, 
profit.

2:  Having access to more than one expert.  If I had taken the time to learn 
servers, routers etc. or if I'd have hired a guy who's main, or even only, 
job it is to take care of those devices I'd be beholden to that one person. 
If they quit, got fired, died or whatever I'd be stuck for however long it 
took to find a replacement and train the new guy.  With a consultant it's 
not much more complicated than picking up the phone and calling another 
consultant.

Having said that I use Butch a lot.  He's busy so the rest of you guys go 
find your own expert!  grin  Personally I don't know anyone that does as 
good of a job of working on the devices and has the patience to deal with my 
ignorance of that part of my business.

The great part of it is that I *can* pick up the phone and call any of 3 or 
4 others that also know how to do what Butch does for me.  My choice today 
is to use Butch, but it's certainly nice to know I have options.  It's up to 
Butch to make sure I never feel the need to develop a relationship with 
anyone else.

How do others look at in-house vs. consultant workers?
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting


>I agree with Josh's comment.  Butch has been the first and last MikroTik
> consultant we've needed.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Brad
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Alan Bryant
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:16 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting
>
> I second Butch as a personal recommendation. We haven't had to use him
> much, but he has always had great recommendations for questions I have
> asked on the list as well as questions I wanted to ask and someone
> else beat me to it.
>
> Also, his QOS script for RouterOS is pretty good as well!
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Josh Luthman
>  wrote:
>> I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.
>>
>> My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
>> consultant I have needed.
>>
>> On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
>>
>> Oooo!
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Butch Evans 
>> Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
> 
> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Alan Bryant | Systems Administrator
> Gtek Computers & Wireless, LLC.
> a...@gtekcommunications.com | www.gtek.biz
> O 361-777-1400 | F 361-777-1405
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Brad Belton]

I agree with Josh's comment.  Butch has been the first and last MikroTik
consultant we've needed.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Alan Bryant
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

I second Butch as a personal recommendation. We haven't had to use him
much, but he has always had great recommendations for questions I have
asked on the list as well as questions I wanted to ask and someone
else beat me to it.

Also, his QOS script for RouterOS is pretty good as well!

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.
>
> My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
> consultant I have needed.
>
> On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
>
> Oooo!
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Butch Evans 
> Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
Alan Bryant | Systems Administrator
Gtek Computers & Wireless, LLC.
a...@gtekcommunications.com | www.gtek.biz
O 361-777-1400 | F 361-777-1405




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Alan Bryant]

I second Butch as a personal recommendation. We haven't had to use him
much, but he has always had great recommendations for questions I have
asked on the list as well as questions I wanted to ask and someone
else beat me to it.

Also, his QOS script for RouterOS is pretty good as well!

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Josh Luthman
 wrote:
> I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.
>
> My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
> consultant I have needed.
>
> On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:
>
> Oooo!
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Butch Evans 
> Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
Alan Bryant | Systems Administrator
Gtek Computers & Wireless, LLC.
a...@gtekcommunications.com | www.gtek.biz
O 361-777-1400 | F 361-777-1405



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Josh Luthman]

I do see Butch's point. Need to relax on the wording.

My personal recommendation is to use Butch as he is the first and last
consultant I have needed.

On Jul 29, 2010 7:49 PM,  wrote:

Oooo!
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry


-Original Message-
From: Butch Evans 
Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa...



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[lakeland]

Oooo!
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-Original Message-
From: Butch Evans 
Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:35:42 
To: WISPA General List
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] OFFLIST: Re:  Mikrotik User Meeting

On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote: 
> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.  

He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
does it?  

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] OFFLIST: Re: Mikrotik User Meeting

[Butch Evans]

On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:44 -0500, Jim Patient wrote: 
> I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.  

He already asked about a WISPA vendor member (Mikrotik specifically).  I
simply offered the information on my training opportunity coming up next
week.  Of the HUNDREDS of students who have taken my training, the
comments have been very positive.  I have (to my knowledge) taught over
40 students who have taken MT training from other sources (including
Mikrotik and linktecks) who have made VERY positive comments regarding
the improved quality of my course over the other one they have taken.
This does not have to be a battle every time someone asks a question,
does it?  

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://store.wispgear.net/* 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] Generators

[Patrick Shoemaker]

Oversize. It's the most practical way to ensure stability when powering 
a load that can have a poor power factor or a leading power factor. 
Datacenter loads being a perfect example. Switching power supplies with 
poor input filtering, UPSes that dump their entire load on the genset 
all at once, variable frequency drives on HVAC equipment, etc. are all 
present in datacenter loads and will all wreak havoc on your generator.

I recommend reading this article:

http://www.cumminspower.com/www/literature/technicalpapers/PT-6001-ImpactofPowerFactorLoads-en.pdf

Any new generator in that size range will have an electronic governor, 
this is a must.

There are lots of small things to consider, like block heaters if you 
are in a cold climate, and using algaecide if you're storing diesel. 
Find a vendor who knows what they're doing.

Finally, monitoring. Make sure the generator has a built-in control 
system that will report errors. Most do this with a simple dry contact 
closure. You can tie this in to your building monitoring system if you 
have one to alert you if there is a problem, or attach to a SNMP capable 
device and monitor it using Nagios or whatever your network monitoring 
system is.

Generators need to be tested frequently. Even the best ones love to die 
at very inopportune times. Mine exercise weekly and I run a load test 
every month after hours.

Patrick Shoemaker
Vector Data Systems LLC
shoemak...@vectordatasystems.com
office: (301) 358-1690 x36
http://www.vectordatasystems.com


Chuck Hogg wrote:
> Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably 
> 30-45kW.  I’ve heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with 
> experience in doing this?   It’s to support our datacenter, a few racks, 
> a few 2200 UPS’s and PDU’s, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different 
> ones on eBay and elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the 
> legwork and figured out everything they needed and can share?
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chuck Hogg
> 
> Shelby Broadband
> 502-722-9292
> ch...@shelbybb.com 
> 
> http://www.shelbybb.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/

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reasonto document and map your network coverage ever

[Tom DeReggi]

Except today based on GAO reports, Rural America had something like 34% 
unserved and Urban America had something like 25% unserved on average. 
I think Brian's data suggested that the USA was something like 24% unserved on 
average. 
My point here is that USF is already going to areas that are suggested to be 
less than 75% served, in the broad scale of things. 

Obviously, this point of view may not be accurate based on how "area" is 
defined.  But most importantly I doubt that most pre-existing USF areas have 
75% of their areas served by competitors, because there is little incintive to 
compete against subsidized entities, so again, it would be likely that most 
monies would go to pre-existing USF recipients.
I dont predict that this requirement will help us. 

But it may depend on what the scoring criteria is to define eligibilty and 
priority in an award. I'm guessing that the law would become law BEFORE the 
scoring criteria was defined, therefore putting industry at risk to a scoring 
criteria that would be disadvantageous to smaller emergining providers.

I just cant stomach the government picking the winners and losers.  I simply 
believe that that is something best picked by consumers and the market.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


  - Original Message - 
  From: St. Louis Broadband 
  To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com ; 'WISPA General List' ; memb...@wispa.org ; 
motor...@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 12:59 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling 
reasonto document and map your network coverage ever


  - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 
75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider 
that does not receive support

   

  Ø  Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a 
current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to 
receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to 
many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype 
come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in 
leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets!

   

  That is the way I see it too!

   

   

  Victoria Proffer

  www.ShowMeBroadband.com

  www.StLouisBroadband.com

  314-974-5600

   

  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
Behalf Of Brian Webster
  Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:37 AM
  To: memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'; motor...@afmug.com
  Subject: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to 
document and map your network coverage ever
  Importance: High

   

  Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list. I 
took particular note to the following statement:

   

  - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 
75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider 
that does not receive support

   

  Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a 
current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to 
receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to 
many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype 
come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in 
leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I cannot see a more 
compelling reason to document and map your networks than this. Not only will it 
prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in to your service area, 
but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who currently receives USF in 
your markets. This would bring wireless as a delivery method to the forefront 
because there are then no artificial revenue streams subsidizing the cost to 
deliver last mile service. We all know that wireless has the least cost per 
household passed in low density markets.

   

  There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and 
foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one 
should map their network with an accurate service area where you would 
confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me to 
do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in your 
state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps will 
become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75% coverage. The 
FCC 477 database will probably become another verification source. If you are 
listed in both of them it would be very hard for someone to say you don't exist 
and don't offer coverage in their areas.

   

  One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be 
required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if WISP

Re: [WISPA] Generators

[Josh Luthman]

How big of a tank is that propane generator? How long does that give you
power?

On Jul 29, 2010 5:25 PM, "Paul Gerstenberger"  wrote:

Ours is a 35kW from Cummins Power Generation. We chose to run ours on
propane so as to require little maintenance and full independence from other
utilities (Natural Gas). We sized our tank so as to have plenty of runtime
and the propane co is just down the road in case we need an emergency fill.

-Paul


On Jul 29, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:

> Stick with Kohler.
>
> There are tons of bra...



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Generators

[Glenn Kelley]

You could also simply use both. 
there are kits to allow either/or for most genset's 


On Jul 29, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Paul Gerstenberger wrote:

> Ours is a 35kW from Cummins Power Generation. We chose to run ours on propane 
> so as to require little maintenance and full independence from other 
> utilities (Natural Gas). We sized our tank so as to have plenty of runtime 
> and the propane co is just down the road in case we need an emergency fill.
> 
> -Paul
> 
> On Jul 29, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> 
>> Stick with Kohler. 
>> 
>> There are tons of brands - however...  The Sine wave that is produced buy 
>> others will absolutely kill your UPS's 
>> Take it from someone that has learned the hard way. 
>> 
>> Cat has some higher end that work very well - as well.   Kohler does much of 
>> what the PMG will do for you naturally. 
>> Also 
>> 
>> OVERSIZE...  
>> 
>> Our needs are 60 - so we went with 130KW. 
>> 
>> Gruber Power will spec everything for you out at no cost.then use that 
>> to shop around :-)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 29, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
>> 
>>> Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably 30-45kW.  
>>> I’ve heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with experience in 
>>> doing this?   It’s to support our datacenter, a few racks, a few 2200 UPS’s 
>>> and PDU’s, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different ones on eBay and 
>>> elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the legwork and figured out 
>>> everything they needed and can share?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Chuck Hogg
>>> Shelby Broadband
>>> 502-722-9292
>>> ch...@shelbybb.com
>>> http://www.shelbybb.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/
>> 
>> _
>> Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
>>  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
>> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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/

_
Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Generators

[Paul Gerstenberger]

Ours is a 35kW from Cummins Power Generation. We chose to run ours on propane 
so as to require little maintenance and full independence from other utilities 
(Natural Gas). We sized our tank so as to have plenty of runtime and the 
propane co is just down the road in case we need an emergency fill.

-Paul

On Jul 29, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:

> Stick with Kohler. 
> 
> There are tons of brands - however...  The Sine wave that is produced buy 
> others will absolutely kill your UPS's 
> Take it from someone that has learned the hard way. 
> 
> Cat has some higher end that work very well - as well.   Kohler does much of 
> what the PMG will do for you naturally. 
> Also 
> 
> OVERSIZE...  
> 
> Our needs are 60 - so we went with 130KW. 
> 
> Gruber Power will spec everything for you out at no cost.then use that to 
> shop around :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 29, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
> 
>> Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably 30-45kW.  
>> I’ve heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with experience in 
>> doing this?   It’s to support our datacenter, a few racks, a few 2200 UPS’s 
>> and PDU’s, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different ones on eBay and 
>> elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the legwork and figured out 
>> everything they needed and can share?
>>  
>> Regards,
>> Chuck Hogg
>> Shelby Broadband
>> 502-722-9292
>> ch...@shelbybb.com
>> http://www.shelbybb.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/
> 
> _
> Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
>   Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/29/2010 04:32 PM, you wrote:
>   Agreed, very much so!

Thanks guys!

And I do appreciate the help I get from you on all of my silly little 
equipment questions.

>-
>Mike Hammett
>Intelligent Computing Solutions
>http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>On 7/29/2010 10:41 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
> > I am so glad you moved over to the Wispa list Fred!  I don't always agree
> > with you, but I REALLY appreciate how much thought and detail you put into
> > your responses.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> > Jeff Broadwick
> > ImageStream
> > 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
> > +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most 
> compelling reason
> > to document and map your network coverage ever
> >
> > At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
> >> Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers
> >> to get other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a
> >> more level one should the cable companies try to compete in other
> >> markets. We might also get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to
> >> support the position although most of their deployments will probably
> >> be in areas that would never have qualified for USF to begin with. If
> >> the terms wireline are kept in the bill it would appear that wireless
> >> services might also be excluded from receiving any USF funds which
> >> basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the Telco's as it has
> > been.
> >> Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
> >> reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
> >> industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will
> >> be spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What
> >> we need to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas
> >> already served by WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could
> >> also be fought and won to allow WISP's access to the funds for
> >> broadband deployments then great. When going up against the cable and
> >> Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about picking their battles as the
> > funding to fight this will be limited.
> >
> > And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,
> >
> >> You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
> >> Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
> >> against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
> >> only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
> >> re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
> >> exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
> >> second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.
> > Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal argument
> > boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, unless it's a
> > flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, since the main issue
> > here is simply who gets government handouts, and handing out money (and
> > taxing) is sort of the normal role of government.  The problem is that the
> > system is so corrupt by now that the handouts appear to be irrational.  In
> > practice they're not; they just aren't done for the public good.
> >
> > Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill this is.
> > Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his staff, 
> though they
> > know more about it than most congressional staffers.  Boucher's job in
> > Washington is, and has always been, to carry Verizon's water.  When he puts
> > a bill in the hopper, it comes from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably
> > drafted most of the bill.
> >
> > So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is all
> > about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation reform.  Before
> > USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high enough to pay the
> > subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural carrier gets 50 cents for
> > terminating it.  This worked because Long Distance was a huge luxury and
> > thus could be milked.  As the cost of delivering LD went down, the amount
> > that could be diverted to supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system
> > broke down under competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something
> > called "reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that forever.
> > It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from IXCs to LECs no
> > longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes up the 
> difference.  The
> > IXCs, however, are the main payers of USF.  They count the cards 
> differently
> > but the kitty still goes the same way.
> >
> > In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on t

Re: [WISPA] Generators

[Justin Wilson]

Don¹t skimp on the transfer switch. THE PMG exciter is a way of
providing good clean power to the voltage regulator. It¹s basically a kick
butt magnet.

Justin

-- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog
Wisp Consulting ­ Tower Climbing ­ Network Support



From: Chuck Hogg 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:02:28 -0400
To: 
Subject: [WISPA] Generators

Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably 30-45kW.
I¹ve heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with experience in
doing this?   It¹s to support our datacenter, a few racks, a few 2200 UPS¹s
and PDU¹s, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different ones on eBay and
elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the legwork and figured out
everything they needed and can share?
 
Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com 
http://www.shelbybb.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/

Re: [WISPA] Lightening protection

[Marlon K. Schafer]

2 out of how many?

We had a NASTY storm last night.  Lost 1 nic card out of hundreds and 
hundreds of them.

We used to loose modems from time to time too.

In my mind, you're just going to loose some once in a while during storms. 
Part of the cost of doing business, just like flat tires out on the farm.

Having said that, I wish more POE units had built in lightning protection.

Polyphaser makes a nice ethernet protector that WILL work with POE 
applications.  Roughly $100 if memory serves me right.

I know, not much help.
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jeremie Chism" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 6:53 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Lightening protection


>I had two cpe's get struck by lightening yesterday that took out the
> cpe, the router behind it and the voip adapter behind that. Along with
> a few Ethernet cards also. What are you using on the customers end to
> try to stop this. The cpe is powered by poe.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Mike Hammett]

  Agreed, very much so!

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 7/29/2010 10:41 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
> I am so glad you moved over to the Wispa list Fred!  I don't always agree
> with you, but I REALLY appreciate how much thought and detail you put into
> your responses.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ImageStream
> 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
> +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
> to document and map your network coverage ever
>
> At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>> Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers
>> to get other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a
>> more level one should the cable companies try to compete in other
>> markets. We might also get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to
>> support the position although most of their deployments will probably
>> be in areas that would never have qualified for USF to begin with. If
>> the terms wireline are kept in the bill it would appear that wireless
>> services might also be excluded from receiving any USF funds which
>> basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the Telco's as it has
> been.
>> Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
>> reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
>> industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will
>> be spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What
>> we need to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas
>> already served by WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could
>> also be fought and won to allow WISP's access to the funds for
>> broadband deployments then great. When going up against the cable and
>> Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about picking their battles as the
> funding to fight this will be limited.
>
> And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,
>
>> You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>> Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
>> against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
>> only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
>> re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
>> exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
>> second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.
> Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal argument
> boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, unless it's a
> flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, since the main issue
> here is simply who gets government handouts, and handing out money (and
> taxing) is sort of the normal role of government.  The problem is that the
> system is so corrupt by now that the handouts appear to be irrational.  In
> practice they're not; they just aren't done for the public good.
>
> Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill this is.
> Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his staff, though they
> know more about it than most congressional staffers.  Boucher's job in
> Washington is, and has always been, to carry Verizon's water.  When he puts
> a bill in the hopper, it comes from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably
> drafted most of the bill.
>
> So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is all
> about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation reform.  Before
> USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high enough to pay the
> subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural carrier gets 50 cents for
> terminating it.  This worked because Long Distance was a huge luxury and
> thus could be milked.  As the cost of delivering LD went down, the amount
> that could be diverted to supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system
> broke down under competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something
> called "reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that forever.
> It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from IXCs to LECs no
> longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes up the difference.  The
> IXCs, however, are the main payers of USF.  They count the cards differently
> but the kitty still goes the same way.
>
> In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on the
> receiving end of IXC switched access charges.  But now the Bells get much
> lower switched access rates, so it's not a big revenue source for them.
> Instead, you have Verizon owning the former MCI and Worldcom assets and
> Southwestern Bell owning the former AT&T Corp.
> assets, so the two mega-Bells are probably net payers

Re: [WISPA] Generators

[Glenn Kelley]

Stick with Kohler. 

There are tons of brands - however...  The Sine wave that is produced buy 
others will absolutely kill your UPS's 
Take it from someone that has learned the hard way. 

Cat has some higher end that work very well - as well.   Kohler does much of 
what the PMG will do for you naturally. 
Also 

OVERSIZE...  

Our needs are 60 - so we went with 130KW. 

Gruber Power will spec everything for you out at no cost.then use that to 
shop around :-)




On Jul 29, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote:

> Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably 30-45kW.  
> I’ve heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with experience in 
> doing this?   It’s to support our datacenter, a few racks, a few 2200 UPS’s 
> and PDU’s, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different ones on eBay and 
> elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the legwork and figured out 
> everything they needed and can share?
>  
> Regards,
> Chuck Hogg
> Shelby Broadband
> 502-722-9292
> ch...@shelbybb.com
> http://www.shelbybb.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/

_
Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Generators

[Chuck Hogg]

Ok, so I am in the market for a Generator.  Looking for probably
30-45kW.  I've heard people say  I need a PMG Exciter??  Anyone with
experience in doing this?   It's to support our datacenter, a few racks,
a few 2200 UPS's and PDU's, and Cooling.  I find all kinds of different
ones on eBay and elsewhere, and am hoping someone already did the
legwork and figured out everything they needed and can share?

 

Regards,

Chuck Hogg

Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com  

http://www.shelbybb.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] Mikrotik User Meeting

[Jim Patient]

  Paul,

I would suggest using a WISPA vendor member for your training needs.  
www.linktechs.net is a vendor member and provides Mikrotik certification 
training.

WISPA vendor members help in providing financial support for WISPA and 
it's efforts in promoting our industry.  You can find a list of other 
WISPA vendor members at
http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=131

Jim


On 7/28/2010 11:41 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 09:24 -0700, Paul Gerstenberger wrote:
>> Has anyone attended the MUM's? What were your impressions?
>> I'm thinking of going this year, curious what to expect. I've
>> integrated mikrotik into our production network and so far
>> it's working well, be nice to have a little official training
>> though.
> I have a training class scheduled for next week (see
> http://store.wispgear.net/ for details).  Mikrotik's "official" training
> (from the reviews I've seen) don't get very good reviews, due to the
> difficulty people have in understanding what they are saying...
>
> As for the MUM, they are generally pretty good shows.  I've never heard
> anyone say they were disappointed for having attended.
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Service in Belfair, WA?

[Forbes Mercy]

Wow that's memories, I used to be the Fire Chief in Belfair in the 
early/mid-90's, but to answer your question no I don't..


Forbes

On 7/29/2010 10:04 AM, Kevin Sullivan wrote:

Anyone cover that town?
Kevin





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Water Tower grounding

[Patrick Wheeland]

Also, if you want to know proper grounding practices, try to get your hands on 
the Motorola R56 manual.  I would imagine you can find the pdf floating on the 
web somewhere.



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Patrick Wheeland
Sent: Thu 7/29/2010 1:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding


If you've put in your own ground rod and not bonded it to the electrical 
ground, then you're doing more harm than good.  That will create a ground 
potential difference and smoke your equipment.  You absolutely must have all 
the grounds tied together.  I would make sure the water tower, your grounding 
and the utility ground are all bonded together.
 
-Patrick
 



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Bobby Burrow
Sent: Thu 7/29/2010 8:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding



Ok, since we have been talking grounding, what would be the proper
grounding method for a 'typical' water tower (bowl with maintenance rail
and ladder up the leg). I have a Canopy 900 AP with a vertical antenna
mounted at the top using shielded CAT5 routed down the bowl and ladder.
There is a NEMA at the bottom where the CMM-3 is located with a #10 wire
to the ground rod at the bottom of the NEMA.

I am 'feeding' this tower APs during the spring/summer stormy months.
Are there any better methods to grounding this setup?

Thanks in advance,

Bobby



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Water Tower grounding

[Patrick Wheeland]

If you've put in your own ground rod and not bonded it to the electrical 
ground, then you're doing more harm than good.  That will create a ground 
potential difference and smoke your equipment.  You absolutely must have all 
the grounds tied together.  I would make sure the water tower, your grounding 
and the utility ground are all bonded together.
 
-Patrick
 



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Bobby Burrow
Sent: Thu 7/29/2010 8:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding



Ok, since we have been talking grounding, what would be the proper
grounding method for a 'typical' water tower (bowl with maintenance rail
and ladder up the leg). I have a Canopy 900 AP with a vertical antenna
mounted at the top using shielded CAT5 routed down the bowl and ladder.
There is a NEMA at the bottom where the CMM-3 is located with a #10 wire
to the ground rod at the bottom of the NEMA.

I am 'feeding' this tower APs during the spring/summer stormy months.
Are there any better methods to grounding this setup?

Thanks in advance,

Bobby



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Your experiences with Everyone.net email service?

[Josh Luthman]

I will get flak for this, don't know why.

We use Google Apps Partner Edition.  We initially started because it
was free.  We have had almost 0 issues with our email.  It's months
between ANY issues.  The issues themselves are usually the older
generation stuck on Eudora/Outlook interfaces and get lost when
finding contacts or want to email many people.

Right now I believe it is the reseller edition...but Google makes
these things complicated.  Partner edition, after we started on it,
was said to be $0.15/user/year per someone on another list.

We offer free email and have nearly 0 expense through this.

If someone wants a vanity domain, say bark...@joesbar.com, we use the
standard edition and charge them for the domain.

Imaginenetworksllc.com is Premier edition.  There are several
additions but the few I can recall are: globally stored messages
in/out for later reviewing (like an employee misbehaving), increases
your mbox quota, SLA (which seems like a joke because all it does is
add a person on the phone), developer stuff, and some others. This is
$50/user/year.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Justin Mann  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have been  considering changing our email provider from Everyone.net
> to another service and wondered if anyone else shares our experience. We
> started using their service in 2008, migrating our older Linux and
> Windows servers to them. Initially, they were very helpful, and went to
> considerable lengths to help us ease our transition. Since then, things
> have changed.
>
> Off and on, we have experienced tremendous problems with their service,
> from both a technical standpoint and a support standpoint. The biggest
> issue we face is deflection, where they work very hard to prove a
> problem isn't a fault of their service, rather than trying to help us.
> For about 8 months we battled constant issues with SMTP, where customers
> on or off our network would be unable to send email for 6+ hours at a
> time. It took us carefully documenting every event and then threatening
> to cancel for them to finally agree to look into our problem. I have a
> saved folder with about 15 messages from their support manager telling
> me the problem must be in my head - then a follow up from about 3 months
> ago where they found a deeply-hidden sql bug that was causing our
> problem. This took nearly 5 months for them to actually look into, and
> another 3 to fix.
>
> That's just one example of many - we have a history with them of not
> responding to our support requests, along with recurring technical
> issues. We would really hate to migrate our email yet again, but it's
> gotten to that point. Are we just incredibly unlucky, or has anyone else
> in the community had issues with them? We expected difficulty in
> transitioning - what we have experienced are non-stop chains of support
> issues stretching back two years now.
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] Water Tower grounding

[Mike]

I'm not sure how others might answer this, but here goes.

Unless water towers are constructed differently than those I have dealt
with, they are by nature a solidly grounded structure.  

Having said that, the only problem I would see is having any ungrounded
metal on the side of that tower which could build up excess electrons and
create a streamer towards the clouds and invite a strike.

I have never looked at a Canopy 900.  Does it have a ground lug?  If so I
would take that right to a bare metal spot on the tower.  Make sure the
antenna (external) is solidly grounded to the tower structure as close as
you can accomplish.

They typically use epoxy paint to paint such monsters, so you would have to
check with the owners where they want you to ground, stressing you want the
ground bonded as close to your equipment as possible.  I would put the
equipment on a standoff away from the tower if possible.  They will have to
paint the tower again during the lifetime of your equipment.

I hope some of this helps.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Bobby Burrow
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Water Tower grounding

Ok, since we have been talking grounding, what would be the proper 
grounding method for a 'typical' water tower (bowl with maintenance rail 
and ladder up the leg). I have a Canopy 900 AP with a vertical antenna 
mounted at the top using shielded CAT5 routed down the bowl and ladder. 
There is a NEMA at the bottom where the CMM-3 is located with a #10 wire 
to the ground rod at the bottom of the NEMA.

I am 'feeding' this tower APs during the spring/summer stormy months. 
Are there any better methods to grounding this setup?

Thanks in advance,

Bobby




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Service in Belfair, WA?

[Kevin Sullivan]

Anyone cover that town?

Kevin


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Your experiences with Everyone.net email service?

[Justin Mann]

Hello,

We have been  considering changing our email provider from Everyone.net 
to another service and wondered if anyone else shares our experience. We 
started using their service in 2008, migrating our older Linux and 
Windows servers to them. Initially, they were very helpful, and went to 
considerable lengths to help us ease our transition. Since then, things 
have changed.

Off and on, we have experienced tremendous problems with their service, 
from both a technical standpoint and a support standpoint. The biggest 
issue we face is deflection, where they work very hard to prove a 
problem isn't a fault of their service, rather than trying to help us. 
For about 8 months we battled constant issues with SMTP, where customers 
on or off our network would be unable to send email for 6+ hours at a 
time. It took us carefully documenting every event and then threatening 
to cancel for them to finally agree to look into our problem. I have a 
saved folder with about 15 messages from their support manager telling 
me the problem must be in my head - then a follow up from about 3 months 
ago where they found a deeply-hidden sql bug that was causing our 
problem. This took nearly 5 months for them to actually look into, and 
another 3 to fix.

That's just one example of many - we have a history with them of not 
responding to our support requests, along with recurring technical 
issues. We would really hate to migrate our email yet again, but it's 
gotten to that point. Are we just incredibly unlucky, or has anyone else 
in the community had issues with them? We expected difficulty in 
transitioning - what we have experienced are non-stop chains of support 
issues stretching back two years now.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/29/2010 11:51 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>Fred,
> Does the bill state that the voice and data service have to be
>provided by the SAME carrier or just that the consumer has access to them?

It says that they purchase it "from" the unsupported non-incumbent 
provider.  So that implies at least a resale relationship.  Bear in 
mind that many cable companies who provide voice service do not have 
their own voice networks; Sprint, for instance, is the wholesale CLEC 
supplier to much of Suddenlink and TW Cable.  The bill does not 
specify that the seller be a CLEC per se.  It does require a 
stand-alone voice service (bundles only don't count), toll 
restriction option, E911, etc.  And there can be "just and 
reasonable" charges for extending the line outside of the normal 
service range, again resembling telco practice for houses set back 
too far, etc.

>Would cellular service qualify in that case?

No; it's written for wireline, and "standard" POTS parameters.  The 
bill allows up to two CMRS carriers to get USF too.  If there are at 
least three CMRS carriers in an area, they "bid" for the right to 
receive USF.  If there aren't three, but one already gets USF, it 
keeps it, without bidding, at current levels.  This latter clause 
might end up giving VZ and ATT a lot of extra money vs. current FCC 
plans to reduce USF support to them, which shows you how the bill is 
not really one to reduce USF so much as to direct it certain ways!

>Thought is that is there is
>cell or CLEC service and a WISP also covers the same area with only
>broadband, it could be considered served. The issue of QOS and all the other
>call reliability standards would be addressed by others and not the WISP.

No, because mobile standards are counted differently, towards the 
separate mobile USF entitlement.  WISPs are left out.  (Time to crack 
out the lobbyists!)


> I get and understand every point you made on the bill and the
>players. It all makes sense and pretty much what one would expect. Changes
>to allow WISP's or wireless to be considered part of the 75% coverage would
>really hurt the rurals that are trying to save their revenue stream and will
>meet with a massive fight. USF reform was expected to have spurred a big
>fight from those who stand to lose. There have been a lot of votes and
>campaign contributions bought with that money over the years.

Yes, I expect that this bill will receive a fair amount of opposition 
from the subsidy-suckers too.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
>Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
> >Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers to
>get
> >other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a more level
>one
> >should the cable companies try to compete in other markets. We might also
> >get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to support the position although
> >most of their deployments will probably be in areas that would never have
> >qualified for USF to begin with. If the terms wireline are kept in the bill
> >it would appear that wireless services might also be excluded from
>receiving
> >any USF funds which basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the
> >Telco's as it has been.
> >
> >Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
> >reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
> >industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will be
> >spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What we need
> >to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas already served by
> >WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could also be fought and won
>to
> >allow WISP's access to the funds for broadband deployments then great. When
> >going up against the cable and Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about
> >picking their battles as the funding to fight this will be limited.
>
>And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,
>
> >You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
> >Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
> >against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
> >only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
> >re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
> >exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
> >second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.
>
>Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal
>argument boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal,
>unless it's a flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see,
>since the main issue h

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Yes, he is very informative! Thanks Fred. Always helps for everyone to know
the other side of the fence and get a reality check of the world we play in.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:41 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

I am so glad you moved over to the Wispa list Fred!  I don't always agree
with you, but I REALLY appreciate how much thought and detail you put into
your responses. 


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
ImageStream
800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
+1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers 
>to get other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a 
>more level one should the cable companies try to compete in other 
>markets. We might also get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to 
>support the position although most of their deployments will probably 
>be in areas that would never have qualified for USF to begin with. If 
>the terms wireline are kept in the bill it would appear that wireless 
>services might also be excluded from receiving any USF funds which 
>basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the Telco's as it has
been.
>
>Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF 
>reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP 
>industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will 
>be spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What 
>we need to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas 
>already served by WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could 
>also be fought and won to allow WISP's access to the funds for 
>broadband deployments then great. When going up against the cable and 
>Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about picking their battles as the
funding to fight this will be limited.

And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,

>You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates 
>against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the 
>only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the 
>re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds 
>exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services 
>second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.

Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal argument
boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, unless it's a
flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, since the main issue
here is simply who gets government handouts, and handing out money (and
taxing) is sort of the normal role of government.  The problem is that the
system is so corrupt by now that the handouts appear to be irrational.  In
practice they're not; they just aren't done for the public good.

Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill this is.
Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his staff, though they
know more about it than most congressional staffers.  Boucher's job in
Washington is, and has always been, to carry Verizon's water.  When he puts
a bill in the hopper, it comes from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably
drafted most of the bill.

So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is all
about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation reform.  Before
USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high enough to pay the
subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural carrier gets 50 cents for
terminating it.  This worked because Long Distance was a huge luxury and
thus could be milked.  As the cost of delivering LD went down, the amount
that could be diverted to supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system
broke down under competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something
called "reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that forever.
It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from IXCs to LECs no
longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes up the difference.  The
IXCs, however, are the main payers of USF.  They count the cards differently
but the kitty still goes the same way.

In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on the
receiving end of IXC switched access charges.  But now the Bells get much
lower switched access rates, so it's not a big revenue 

Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge

[Jerry Richardson]

Streakwave in Salt Lake

- Jerry


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Kosinet Wireless
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge

Anyone have the 30dB Dishes in stock?

-Gary-

- Original Message - 
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge


> For this I would use two Rocket M5's with the 30dB Rocket dishes. Reason 
> being is after the event is done, you will have a set of radios you can 
> use in another part of the network for up to a 30 mile shot.
>
> Configure:
> One as AP WDS
> One as Station WDS.
> 10MHz channel
> Max Tx Rate Automatic
> AirMax Enabled
> No ACK mode for PTP enabled
>
> Watch it fly
>
> - Jerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of KosiNet Wireless
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:57 PM
> To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>
> Thanks, I'll look at that option.
>
> Problem is - The Link must be up and running by early next week. No time 
> to
> experiment...
>
> -Gary-
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>
>
>> 6.5 miles long shot... I would do with either a Rocket M5 + Rocket Dish
>> or a PowerBridge M5 (available in us next week or so).
>> The smaller shots you could use NanoBridges M5 or even the NanoStation
>> M5 or even the NanoStationLoco M...
>> Ligowave units appear to be very nice, but hard to tell if the cost
>> difference between Rocket M5 + Dish vs them is justifiable.
>>
>> If you did not want to purchase a whole variety of stuff , you could
>> easily do this via a bunch of Bullet M5's with 22db Panels as well.
>>
>> Overall Bullets will have less thruput but still will get you your 20meg
>> + easily.
>>
>> BTW, on the UBNT.COM now has a calculator / estimator... you can
>> determine what models will work well for you.
>>
>> http://ubnt.com/linkcalculator/
>>
>> Lots of good choices, the gear works well, takes a little playing with
>> and getting used to.. but then again what doesn't
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>
>> On 7/28/2010 7:46 PM, KosiNet Wireless wrote:
>>> Sorry for not giving all the details.
>>>
>>> The long shot is about 6.5 miles - Good LOS - We'll also be doing two
>>> (less
>>> than) 1 miles shots to get it there - All good LOS. Probably going to 
>>> end
>>> up
>>> using 6 Radios to get the job done.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Josh Luthman"
>>> To: "WISPA General List"
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>>>
>>>
>>>
 What kind of distance?  I assume you have LOS?

 I would go with Ubiquity probably.  150 megs aggregate for $200 is
 very convenient for building to building bridges.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373



 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Kosinet Wireless
 wrote:

> Gentlemen,
>
> I need opinions...
>
> We have an opportunity to provide a short term / high speed link for 
> an
> event - They need 20 Meg Internet speed. We've got the bandwidth, and
> locations scoped out, just curious as to experirnce with radios.
>
> Currently looking at using the LigoPTP 5-23 units. Any experience? 
> Good
> or
> bad?
>
> Also considering the new Ubiquity units as price is always a
> problem.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> -Gary-
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Fred,
Does the bill state that the voice and data service have to be
provided by the SAME carrier or just that the consumer has access to them?
Would cellular service qualify in that case? Thought is that is there is
cell or CLEC service and a WISP also covers the same area with only
broadband, it could be considered served. The issue of QOS and all the other
call reliability standards would be addressed by others and not the WISP.

I get and understand every point you made on the bill and the
players. It all makes sense and pretty much what one would expect. Changes
to allow WISP's or wireless to be considered part of the 75% coverage would
really hurt the rurals that are trying to save their revenue stream and will
meet with a massive fight. USF reform was expected to have spurred a big
fight from those who stand to lose. There have been a lot of votes and
campaign contributions bought with that money over the years.



Brian


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers to
get
>other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a more level
one
>should the cable companies try to compete in other markets. We might also
>get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to support the position although
>most of their deployments will probably be in areas that would never have
>qualified for USF to begin with. If the terms wireline are kept in the bill
>it would appear that wireless services might also be excluded from
receiving
>any USF funds which basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the
>Telco's as it has been.
>
>Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
>reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
>industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will be
>spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What we need
>to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas already served by
>WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could also be fought and won
to
>allow WISP's access to the funds for broadband deployments then great. When
>going up against the cable and Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about
>picking their battles as the funding to fight this will be limited.

And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,

>You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
>against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
>only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
>re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
>exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
>second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.

Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal 
argument boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, 
unless it's a flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, 
since the main issue here is simply who gets government handouts, and 
handing out money (and taxing) is sort of the normal role of 
government.  The problem is that the system is so corrupt by now that 
the handouts appear to be irrational.  In practice they're not; they 
just aren't done for the public good.

Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill 
this is.  Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his 
staff, though they know more about it than most congressional 
staffers.  Boucher's job in Washington is, and has always been, to 
carry Verizon's water.  When he puts a bill in the hopper, it comes 
from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably drafted most of the bill.

So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is 
all about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation 
reform.  Before USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high 
enough to pay the subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural 
carrier gets 50 cents for terminating it.  This worked because Long 
Distance was a huge luxury and thus could be milked.  As the cost of 
delivering LD went down, the amount that could be diverted to 
supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system broke down under 
competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something called 
"reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that 
forever.  It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from 
IXCs to LECs no longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes 
up the difference.  The IXCs, however, are the main payers of 
USF.  They count the cards differently but the kitty still goes

Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge

[Kosinet Wireless]

Anyone have the 30dB Dishes in stock?

-Gary-

- Original Message - 
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge


> For this I would use two Rocket M5's with the 30dB Rocket dishes. Reason 
> being is after the event is done, you will have a set of radios you can 
> use in another part of the network for up to a 30 mile shot.
>
> Configure:
> One as AP WDS
> One as Station WDS.
> 10MHz channel
> Max Tx Rate Automatic
> AirMax Enabled
> No ACK mode for PTP enabled
>
> Watch it fly
>
> - Jerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of KosiNet Wireless
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:57 PM
> To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>
> Thanks, I'll look at that option.
>
> Problem is - The Link must be up and running by early next week. No time 
> to
> experiment...
>
> -Gary-
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>
>
>> 6.5 miles long shot... I would do with either a Rocket M5 + Rocket Dish
>> or a PowerBridge M5 (available in us next week or so).
>> The smaller shots you could use NanoBridges M5 or even the NanoStation
>> M5 or even the NanoStationLoco M...
>> Ligowave units appear to be very nice, but hard to tell if the cost
>> difference between Rocket M5 + Dish vs them is justifiable.
>>
>> If you did not want to purchase a whole variety of stuff , you could
>> easily do this via a bunch of Bullet M5's with 22db Panels as well.
>>
>> Overall Bullets will have less thruput but still will get you your 20meg
>> + easily.
>>
>> BTW, on the UBNT.COM now has a calculator / estimator... you can
>> determine what models will work well for you.
>>
>> http://ubnt.com/linkcalculator/
>>
>> Lots of good choices, the gear works well, takes a little playing with
>> and getting used to.. but then again what doesn't
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>
>> On 7/28/2010 7:46 PM, KosiNet Wireless wrote:
>>> Sorry for not giving all the details.
>>>
>>> The long shot is about 6.5 miles - Good LOS - We'll also be doing two
>>> (less
>>> than) 1 miles shots to get it there - All good LOS. Probably going to 
>>> end
>>> up
>>> using 6 Radios to get the job done.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Josh Luthman"
>>> To: "WISPA General List"
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] High Speed Bridge
>>>
>>>
>>>
 What kind of distance?  I assume you have LOS?

 I would go with Ubiquity probably.  150 megs aggregate for $200 is
 very convenient for building to building bridges.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373



 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Kosinet Wireless
 wrote:

> Gentlemen,
>
> I need opinions...
>
> We have an opportunity to provide a short term / high speed link for 
> an
> event - They need 20 Meg Internet speed. We've got the bandwidth, and
> locations scoped out, just curious as to experirnce with radios.
>
> Currently looking at using the LigoPTP 5-23 units. Any experience? 
> Good
> or
> bad?
>
> Also considering the new Ubiquity units as price is always a
> problem.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> -Gary-
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Jeff Broadwick]

I am so glad you moved over to the Wispa list Fred!  I don't always agree
with you, but I REALLY appreciate how much thought and detail you put into
your responses. 


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
ImageStream
800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
+1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers 
>to get other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a 
>more level one should the cable companies try to compete in other 
>markets. We might also get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to 
>support the position although most of their deployments will probably 
>be in areas that would never have qualified for USF to begin with. If 
>the terms wireline are kept in the bill it would appear that wireless 
>services might also be excluded from receiving any USF funds which 
>basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the Telco's as it has
been.
>
>Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF 
>reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP 
>industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will 
>be spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What 
>we need to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas 
>already served by WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could 
>also be fought and won to allow WISP's access to the funds for 
>broadband deployments then great. When going up against the cable and 
>Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about picking their battles as the
funding to fight this will be limited.

And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,

>You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates 
>against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the 
>only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the 
>re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds 
>exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services 
>second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.

Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal argument
boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, unless it's a
flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, since the main issue
here is simply who gets government handouts, and handing out money (and
taxing) is sort of the normal role of government.  The problem is that the
system is so corrupt by now that the handouts appear to be irrational.  In
practice they're not; they just aren't done for the public good.

Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill this is.
Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his staff, though they
know more about it than most congressional staffers.  Boucher's job in
Washington is, and has always been, to carry Verizon's water.  When he puts
a bill in the hopper, it comes from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably
drafted most of the bill.

So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is all
about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation reform.  Before
USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high enough to pay the
subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural carrier gets 50 cents for
terminating it.  This worked because Long Distance was a huge luxury and
thus could be milked.  As the cost of delivering LD went down, the amount
that could be diverted to supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system
broke down under competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something
called "reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that forever.
It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from IXCs to LECs no
longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes up the difference.  The
IXCs, however, are the main payers of USF.  They count the cards differently
but the kitty still goes the same way.

In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on the
receiving end of IXC switched access charges.  But now the Bells get much
lower switched access rates, so it's not a big revenue source for them.
Instead, you have Verizon owning the former MCI and Worldcom assets and
Southwestern Bell owning the former AT&T Corp. 
assets, so the two mega-Bells are probably net payers, not recipients, of
subsidies to the rurals, both via USF and access charges.  Sprint, of
course, no longer has any affiliated LECs, so it's a big net loser too.
Those three companies thus want to lower the bill.  The rural carriers, from
the few remaining mom-and-pops to the coops up

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/29/2010 10:34 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
>Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers to get
>other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a more level one
>should the cable companies try to compete in other markets. We might also
>get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to support the position although
>most of their deployments will probably be in areas that would never have
>qualified for USF to begin with. If the terms wireline are kept in the bill
>it would appear that wireless services might also be excluded from receiving
>any USF funds which basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the
>Telco's as it has been.
>
>Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
>reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
>industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will be
>spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What we need
>to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas already served by
>WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could also be fought and won to
>allow WISP's access to the funds for broadband deployments then great. When
>going up against the cable and Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about
>picking their battles as the funding to fight this will be limited.

And on a related note, Patrick Leary wrote,

>You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
>Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
>against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
>only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
>re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
>exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
>second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.

Patrick's first... We're talking about a new law, so the legal 
argument boils down to whatever the law says is legal, is legal, 
unless it's a flagrant constitutional violation.  Which I don't see, 
since the main issue here is simply who gets government handouts, and 
handing out money (and taxing) is sort of the normal role of 
government.  The problem is that the system is so corrupt by now that 
the handouts appear to be irrational.  In practice they're not; they 
just aren't done for the public good.

Back to Brian's point... You first have to think about whose bill 
this is.  Boucher doesn't make this stuff up himself.  Nor does his 
staff, though they know more about it than most congressional 
staffers.  Boucher's job in Washington is, and has always been, to 
carry Verizon's water.  When he puts a bill in the hopper, it comes 
from them.  Tom Tauke's staff probably drafted most of the bill.

So what is Verizon asking for?  You again have to look at what USF is 
all about.  It was created as part of intercarrier compensation 
reform.  Before USF, toll settlements to rural carriers were high 
enough to pay the subsidies. Make a 30 cent call and the rural 
carrier gets 50 cents for terminating it.  This worked because Long 
Distance was a huge luxury and thus could be milked.  As the cost of 
delivering LD went down, the amount that could be diverted to 
supporting the ILECs went up.  But the system broke down under 
competition, especially from VoIP, but also from something called 
"reality" -- you can't perpetuate a rotten system like that 
forever.  It was hugely inefficient.  So intercarrier payments from 
IXCs to LECs no longer pay the whole freight, and explicit USF makes 
up the difference.  The IXCs, however, are the main payers of 
USF.  They count the cards differently but the kitty still goes the same way.

In the 1980s, Verizon (then called Bell Atlantic) was a LEC and on 
the receiving end of IXC switched access charges.  But now the Bells 
get much lower switched access rates, so it's not a big revenue 
source for them.  Instead, you have Verizon owning the former MCI and 
Worldcom assets and Southwestern Bell owning the former AT&T Corp. 
assets, so the two mega-Bells are probably net payers, not 
recipients, of subsidies to the rurals, both via USF and access 
charges.  Sprint, of course, no longer has any affiliated LECs, so 
it's a big net loser too.  Those three companies thus want to lower 
the bill.  The rural carriers, from the few remaining mom-and-pops to 
the coops up to big CenturyTel and Citizens/Frontier, want even 
more.  So they are using "broadband" as an excuse.  Give them more 
USF money and they'll extend DSL out further, even FTTH.  Hey, it's 
not *their* money!  They don't build gold-plated networks.  It's 
solid 14k gold.  (Not 24k.  They're too modest for that, and besides 
14k is harder.)

So what the Boucher bill does is push the FCC along the path it was 
considering anyway, with some tweaks.  The 75% clause is there to cut 
off support to ILECs that have been almost fully overbuilt by cable, 
not because cab

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Yes Patrick I agree with you but remember who is lobbying this bill. They
will play to win even though the government is not supposed to be picking
winners..



Brian


-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary [mailto:ple...@apertonet.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:37 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List; Fred Goldstein
Subject: RE: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason
to document and map your network coverage ever

You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.  


Patrick Leary
Aperto Networks
813.426.4230 mobile

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:02 AM
To: 'Fred Goldstein'; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most
compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever

Fred,
That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby
to have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that
delivers the defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to
meet the 75% requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there
are opportunities to change this although I don't expect that one to go
through without a fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves
with the cable industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose
their USF subsidies in markets that are served by cable.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers (i.e.,
cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to
hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75%
of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be
eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have
access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage
and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be
a
huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from
coming
in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as
a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no
artificial
> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service.
We
all
> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
density
> > markets.
> >
> >
> >
> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First
and
> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required.
Next
one
> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you
would
> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including
paying
me
> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be
participating
in
> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those
state
maps
> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the
75%
> > coverage. The FC

Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Health Insurance

[Mark Nash - Lists]

The IDEA of an HSA (Health Savings Account) is not for the employer to save 
money.  

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account

It's for the employee to have a employer-funded savings account for medical 
expenses.  Putting the normal, small expenses on the employee.  So if the 
employee is healthy and doesn't see a doctor much, that employee can realize a 
savings account that grows.  There is coverage in the case of a large problem.

So, while premiums ARE technically lower for the employer, the employer is then 
SUPPOSED to put what essentially is the difference between a traditional 
premium and an HSA premium in the employees HSA account.

This is a small step toward people paying for their own healthcare and having a 
savings later on in life when health care costs are higher.  The advisor I 
talked to stated that the payoff seems to be about 18 months.  In 18 months, if 
you don't have much in expenses, you begin to build your savings account to a 
point where it outperforms what a "normal" person would pay for out-of-pocket 
expenses.  If you run it dry constantly, then it will not perform well for you, 
and therefore YOU should stay on a traditional premium plan.

This is an employee-by-employee decision to make depending on the life 
circumstances of THAT employee and his/her family needs.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Bret Clark 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Cc: memb...@wispa.org ; motor...@afmug.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 4:56 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Health Insurance


  We went through an independent broker who essentially had created a small 
business group plan of area businesses that help keep cost down verses us going 
to the insurer ourselves. Another thing to consider is Health Savings Accounts 
(HSA) which are a lot less then regular health insurance but at least affords 
some piece of mind for employees in the event they are faced with a serious 
medical or health issue. 

  Bret

  On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 19:07 -0400, David Weddell wrote: 
I know that we are constantly battling pricing in health insurance. We 
would be interested in how we could participate in a “WISPA” group plan and 
with 60+ employees and families that we cover, you can imagine our monthly 
premium. I would assume that in an association plan, the more that participate, 
the better rates could be negotiated. We would be interested in helping with 
negotiations if needed. I believe this is a great idea and could benefit WISPA 
as a whole and encourage membership as well. 

 

 

Regards,

David Weddell

VP Business Development &

Corporate Partnerships

Omnicity, Inc.

 

www.omnicity.net

OTCMarkets: OMCY

 

866 586 1518 Corporate Office

765 499 7310 Cell

 

 


From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On 
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:40 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'; memb...@wispa.org; motor...@afmug.com
Subject: [WISPA Members] Health Insurance





I am curious about all the small operators out there.  What are you doing 
for Health Insurance?  Do you have individual policies?  Are you on your wife’s 
policy?  Is there a need for a WISPA Group Health Insurance Plan?  

 

I will be investigating this topic over the next few weeks.  I will most 
likely send out a survey in a week or two once I get together with an 
underwriter and see what the feasibility is.  Between now and then, I would 
like to encourage discussion to see whether it is worth our effort.

 

My goal is to offer a group plan that will assist those who do not have 
enough employees to justify an in-house group plan for their employees or 
themselves.  Hopefully, we can reduce your cost and improve your coverage.

 

Respectfully,

 

Rick Harnish

President

WISPA

260-307-4000 cell

866-317-2851 WISPA Office

Skype: rick.harnish.

rharn...@wispa.org

 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Patrick Leary]

You'd think there would be an excellent legal argument to fight that.
Seems it'd be difficult to enact a law that in effect discriminates
against certain classes of providers, especially since WISPs are the
only "pure play" broadband providers out there. Theorectically the
re-configured USF is meant to propel broadband...so how could the feds
exclude the only entity that provides broadband first, other services
second. All other providers have "broadband" as a secondary play.  


Patrick Leary
Aperto Networks
813.426.4230 mobile

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 7:02 AM
To: 'Fred Goldstein'; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most
compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever

Fred,
That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby
to have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that
delivers the defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to
meet the 75% requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there
are opportunities to change this although I don't expect that one to go
through without a fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves
with the cable industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose
their USF subsidies in markets that are served by cable.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers (i.e.,
cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to
hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75%
of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be
eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have
access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage
and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be
a
huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from
coming
in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as
a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no
artificial
> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service.
We
all
> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
density
> > markets.
> >
> >
> >
> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First
and
> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required.
Next
one
> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you
would
> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including
paying
me
> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be
participating
in
> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those
state
maps
> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the
75%
> > coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another
verification
> > source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
>someone
> > to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas.
> >
> >
> >
> > One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers
will
be
> > required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if
>WISP's
> > were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of
the
US
> > is unserved by broadban

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Yes but if the cable companies could also ally with wireless carriers to get
other areas excluded from USF subsidies, the field would be a more level one
should the cable companies try to compete in other markets. We might also
get Clearwire and the cellular carriers to support the position although
most of their deployments will probably be in areas that would never have
qualified for USF to begin with. If the terms wireline are kept in the bill
it would appear that wireless services might also be excluded from receiving
any USF funds which basically keeps USF funds in the exclusive hands of the
Telco's as it has been.

Personally I think that if we don't out and out oppose the bill for USF
reform, but rather do something like this as a minor change, the WISP
industry can make out better. USF reform will happen and USF funds will be
spent on deploying broadband to unserved areas no matter what. What we need
to do is make sure the law does not fund builds in areas already served by
WISP's and other technologies. If the battle could also be fought and won to
allow WISP's access to the funds for broadband deployments then great. When
going up against the cable and Telco lobbies, one has to be wise about
picking their battles as the funding to fight this will be limited.



Brian


-Original Message-
From: Jeff Broadwick [mailto:jeffl...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:07 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason
to document and map your network coverage ever

Is cable not considered a "wireline" service? 


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
ImageStream
800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
+1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:02 AM
To: 'Fred Goldstein'; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason
to document and map your network coverage ever

Fred,
That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby to
have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that delivers the
defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to meet the 75%
requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there are opportunities
to change this although I don't expect that one to go through without a
fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves with the cable
industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose their USF subsidies
in markets that are served by cable.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers (i.e.,
cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to hurt
them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a
huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming
in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> > rev

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Jeff Broadwick]

Is cable not considered a "wireline" service? 


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
ImageStream
800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
+1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:02 AM
To: 'Fred Goldstein'; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compellingreason
to document and map your network coverage ever

Fred,
That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby to
have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that delivers the
defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to meet the 75%
requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there are opportunities
to change this although I don't expect that one to go through without a
fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves with the cable
industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose their USF subsidies
in markets that are served by cable.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers (i.e.,
cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to hurt
them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a
huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming
in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We
all
> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
density
> > markets.
> >
> >
> >
> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next
one
> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying
me
> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating
in
> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state
maps
> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
> > coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification
> > source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
>someone
> > to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas.
> >
> >
> >
> > One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will
be
> > required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if
>WISP's
> > were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the
US
> > is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to
get
>it
> > there will be much less.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation
>that
> > would reform the Universal Service Fund.  The Press Release, Overview,
> > Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at t

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Fred,
That is understood, however I think that WISPA may try to lobby to
have the term "wireline" removed such that any technology that delivers the
defined broadband and voice services should be qualified to meet the 75%
requirement. This is still a bill and not a law so there are opportunities
to change this although I don't expect that one to go through without a
fight. In this case we might be able to ally ourselves with the cable
industry. I am sure they would love to see Telco's lose their USF subsidies
in markets that are served by cable.



Brian

-Original Message-
From: Fred Goldstein [mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:42 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers 
(i.e., cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to 
hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling
reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a
huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I
cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming
in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We
all
> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low
density
> > markets.
> >
> >
> >
> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next
one
> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying
me
> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating
in
> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state
maps
> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
> > coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification
> > source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
>someone
> > to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas.
> >
> >
> >
> > One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will
be
> > required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if
>WISP's
> > were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the
US
> > is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to
get
>it
> > there will be much less.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation
>that
> > would reform the Universal Service Fund.  The Press Release, Overview,
> > Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this
>link:
> >
> >
>http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579
&
>Itemid=122
> >
> >
> >
> > I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon.  A few
highlights
> > that the trade press has noted:
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
>at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a
competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> > - FCC would create cost m

[WISPA] Water Tower grounding

[Bobby Burrow]

Ok, since we have been talking grounding, what would be the proper 
grounding method for a 'typical' water tower (bowl with maintenance rail 
and ladder up the leg). I have a Canopy 900 AP with a vertical antenna 
mounted at the top using shielded CAT5 routed down the bowl and ladder. 
There is a NEMA at the bottom where the CMM-3 is located with a #10 wire 
to the ground rod at the bottom of the NEMA.

I am 'feeding' this tower APs during the spring/summer stormy months. 
Are there any better methods to grounding this setup?

Thanks in advance,

Bobby



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/29/2010 08:01 AM, Brian wrote:
>Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.

As I mentioned, the 75% rule only applies to wireline providers 
(i.e., cable), so mapping WISP coverage buys nothing.

The Boucher-Terry bill has nothing in it to help WISPs and plenty to 
hurt them, including a rather high tax to support your competitors.



>Brian
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of RickG
>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
>to document and map your network coverage ever
>
>I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
>cant even try to figure it out.
>
>On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
> wrote:
> > Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list.
>I
> > took particular note to the following statement:
> >
> >
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> > current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility
>to
> > receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access
>to
> > many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> > Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge
> > factor in leveling the playing field for WISP's in rural markets! I cannot
> > see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than this.
> > Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in
>to
> > your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> > currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> > delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> > revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all
> > know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density
> > markets.
> >
> >
> >
> > There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
> > foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one
> > should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
> > confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me
> > to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in
> > your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps
> > will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
> > coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification
> > source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
>someone
> > to say you don't exist and don't offer coverage in their areas.
> >
> >
> >
> > One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be
> > required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if
>WISP's
> > were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the US
> > is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to get
>it
> > there will be much less.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation
>that
> > would reform the Universal Service Fund.  The Press Release, Overview,
> > Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this
>link:
> >
> >
>http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&;
>Itemid=122
> >
> >
> >
> > I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon.  A few highlights
> > that the trade press has noted:
> >
> > - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
>at
> > least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> > provider that does not receive support
> >
> > - FCC would create cost model that includes broadband in figuring
> > support models
> >
> > - competitive bidding among wireless carriers for USF support
> >
> > - no more than two wireless CETCs could get support in the same area
> >
> > - carriers would have 5 years to provide broadband throughout their
> > service areas, or would lose support
> >
> > - all broadband providers would pay into USF to expand contribution
>base
> >
> > - FCC to decide appropriate speed for broadband
> >
> >
> >
> > Rep. Boucher has said that the bill is on his "front burner" and that he
> > wants to get the legislation passed this Fall.  Please feel free to
>comment
> > on-list AFTER you've reviewed the documents so that you can promote
> > education of the WISPA membership and help shape whatever position WISPA
>may
> > wish to take as the bill works its way through Congress.

Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever

[Brian Webster]

Hit me off list and I can offer some suggestions.



Brian


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
to document and map your network coverage ever

I'd like to but I dont know where to begin and with my limited time I
cant even try to figure it out.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Brian Webster
 wrote:
> Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list.
I
> took particular note to the following statement:
>
>
>
> - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> provider that does not receive support
>
>
>
> Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility
to
> receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access
to
> many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge
> factor in leveling the playing field for WISP’s in rural markets! I cannot
> see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than this.
> Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in
to
> your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all
> know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density
> markets.
>
>
>
> There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
> foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one
> should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
> confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me
> to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in
> your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps
> will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
> coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification
> source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for
someone
> to say you don’t exist and don’t offer coverage in their areas.
>
>
>
> One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be
> required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if
WISP’s
> were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the US
> is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to get
it
> there will be much less.
>
> Brian
>
> --
>
>
>
> Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation
that
> would reform the Universal Service Fund.  The Press Release, Overview,
> Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this
link:
>
>
http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&;
Itemid=122
>
>
>
> I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon.  A few highlights
> that the trade press has noted:
>
>     - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where
at
> least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> provider that does not receive support
>
>     - FCC would create cost model that includes broadband in figuring
> support models
>
>     - competitive bidding among wireless carriers for USF support
>
>     - no more than two wireless CETCs could get support in the same area
>
>     - carriers would have 5 years to provide broadband throughout their
> service areas, or would lose support
>
>     - all broadband providers would pay into USF to expand contribution
base
>
> - FCC to decide appropriate speed for broadband
>
>
>
> Rep. Boucher has said that the bill is on his "front burner" and that he
> wants to get the legislation passed this Fall.  Please feel free to
comment
> on-list AFTER you've reviewed the documents so that you can promote
> education of the WISPA membership and help shape whatever position WISPA
may
> wish to take as the bill works its way through Congress.  Thanks.
>
>
>
> Stephen E. Coran
>
> Rini Coran, PC
>
> 1140 19th Street, NW, Suite 600
>
> Washington, D.C. 20036
>
> 202.463.4310 - voice
>
> 202.669.3288 - cell
>
> 202.296.2014 - fax
>
> sco...@rinicoran.com - e-mail
>
> www.rinicoran.com
>
> www.telecommunicationslaw.com
>
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
--