RE: [WISPA] Good news on the wimax unlicensed front
Jeffrey Thomas = Jeff Booher Jeffrey Thomas Booher actually -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 11:58 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Good news on the wimax unlicensed front Jeffrey Thomas - DOH ! - For some reason I had Jeff Booher on the brain and made mistake of making this post ! ! ! ! Please - pretty please forgive me for mixing you up ? /me holds head down and kicks rocks JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 11:32 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Good news on the wimax unlicensed front Jeff - how many other platforms have you tooted the horn on that have never produced the results you claimed ? Not trying to rain on your parade here, but every platform you've tooted ranting raves about, has never lived up to it's hype from what I have seen. JohnnyO Wanting to be a believer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Good news on the wimax unlicensed front Simple. Since the CPE self provisions and aligns itself, the customer only need to know they need to install the device on their rooftop. And they also have indoor devices that work to maybe a KM or so from the tower but those Are as simple as a customer plugs in the ethernet plug and power and puts The CPE near a window. I honestly doubt anyone will use them, but they Are available. So really zero truck roll? Not really as most customers will want the wisp to install it- but the major benefit is that the CPE's will not require techs to carry a pc or anything other than cabling and tools to set up the roof mount. - Jeff On 6/8/06 8:04 PM, Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Color me jaded, but how can you get a zero truck roll CPE in 5.4-5.9 unlicensed? Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless jeffrey thomas wrote: Guys, Just got out of training for the new AIRSPAN wimax product for 5.8. Unlike most other vendors, they are going to market with their 802.16-2004 5.4-5.9 solution and are shipping in JULY, and expect FCC certification for their 802.16-2004 product for 4.9 Ghz as well in July! I am very excited about this as the 3 plus years of waiting for a viable, wimax product in a band that everyone can deploy in will be available. So, while the equipment has not been ratified by the Wimax forum as of yet, ( and they havent even decided when they will be certifying vendors ) this product will be either complaint as is or will require a minor software upgrade for Wimax forum certified compatiability, assuming that the forum go with the 802.16-2004 spec as planned. some notes on the product: initial pricing expected to be very reasonably priced on the AP side of things, 600.00 / cpe 35 mb / sector real world throughput @ 64 QAM full service flow integration for QOS can be used in either 5 mhz channel size or 10 mhz channel zero truck roll CPE ( users can easily install the equipment ) full blown FCAPS compliant NMS ( Fault monitoring configuration authentication provisioning security ) color me excited :) - Jeff -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] looking for a device
I think Jon is asking about the double VLAN -- or a q in q implementation It's extremely useful for creating virtual bridged customer networks -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:10 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device Virtual LAN. Imagine segregating segments of your network across a backhaul pipe so that they flow together but don't actually see each other. Managed switches have the ability to create VLANs per port. Think of it as a merger between routing and switching. Its a pipe or several inside a pipe. Tried to be simple here, I'm sure someone else can give you a more technical description. Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:39 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of such a thing. How can it be used to help us? Thanks, Scriv Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new Firmware4 supports double VLAN also. Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second integrated radio into it. I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] looking for a device
Hi Matt, To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution - it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you have (and you get ZERO support =) Example RB532A: $185 SR5: $105 SR2: $105 All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc Then you got to figure out how to make it work =) For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos, Firetide, Skypilot, etc) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low cost radio vendors like Trango, etc. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements? Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it being pre-built, software installed, and support available. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and pigtails installed. All you would need to do is set up the software end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial setup done. One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their quality was questionable. I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the same. No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never ordered them. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the next 30 days. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't messed with the VLAN stuff. I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either a WRAP or WAR board would work as well. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I am looking for a device with the following requirements: * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band * Can support VLANs * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required) * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN than the Ethernet port * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure Any ideas? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] looking for a device
snip I don't think i am unrealistic. We built a platform from off-the-shelf parts that meets our requirements for under $500. How well that will work outside of our lab coupled with the time it took to build tells us we want nothing to do with building our own. /snip EXACTLY The bits and pieces will definitely fit in your budget (in this case, $500), but keep in mind, integration, development, support etc adds a lot to the top line Remember, most manufacturers are selling products at 40-60% gross margin -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device -Matt Charles Wu wrote: Hi Matt, To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution - it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you have (and you get ZERO support =) Example RB532A: $185 SR5: $105 SR2: $105 All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc Then you got to figure out how to make it work =) For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos, Firetide, Skypilot, etc) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low cost radio vendors like Trango, etc. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements? Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it being pre-built, software installed, and support available. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and pigtails installed. All you would need to do is set up the software end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial setup done. One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their quality was questionable. I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the same. No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never ordered them. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the next 30 days. -Matt Sam Tetherow wrote: Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't messed with the VLAN stuff. I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either a WRAP or WAR board would work as well. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Matt Liotta wrote: I am looking for a device with the following requirements: * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band * Can support VLANs * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required) * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN than the Ethernet port * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure Any ideas? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE!
Some interesting statistics -- 30% of the WISPs who attended our last WiNOG claimed on their surveys they had been in the wireless business for more than 5 years and had more than 1k wireless CPE deployed in the field Less than 10% of them claimed to be pure-play license-exempt fixed wireless providers This is why we call them Wi- NOGs instead of ISPs nowadays Don't forget, a lot of rural telcos / CLECs / ILECs (e.g., the enemy) have gotten into license-exempt fixed wireless... -Charles P.S. - I heard a rumor that the current UL market leader, Motorola Canopy sold close to $100 million in gear last year alone --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:46 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Hopefully, the 8% (6,000,000) figure includes ONLY end-users who use wireless broadband to get to/from their home and NOT the end-users who have a copper/fiber-based (cable/telco) broadband connection to their home and then use a Wi-Fi router/access point that provides the final 50-ft connection wirelessly. There's so much sloppy and innacurate journalism these days that I need reassurance that the article means what it appears to be saying. If there are 6,000,000 end-users and if there are 5000 WISPs then each WISP would, on average, have 1,200 subscribers. I'm not sure that this passes the sniff test. jack John Scrivner wrote: Check this out from the Pew report. It appears that fixed wireless is much bigger than what even I thought. According to this report 8% of all broadband connections in the US are delivered via fixed broadband wireless. That means you guys! Woo Hoo! Scriv -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Our next WISP Workshop is June 21-22 in Atlanta, GA. Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE!
30% of what number Charles? At the last show, 500+ attended representing about 350ish operators Of these, about 40% responded Unfortunately, we have a confidentiality agreement with our survey respondents, so I cannot list names How many WISPs said they have over 1,000 CPE. I can only think of about 20 with that high a number. A recent Tim Saunders article in BBW World alone that showed about 40+ Wireless Network Operators w/ 1,000+ CPE (and there are a lot more that Tim missed) Keep in mind, the majority of these operators no longer actively participate in these list-servs, most of em are busy out in the field installing customers / running their businesses =) Did you know that in Sedona, AZ alone (middle of no-where in Northern AZ mountains), w/ a total population of ~15k, there are 2 Operators w/ 1,000+ CPE? (and there's also cable and DSL competition in town too) Even at the end of my equipment distribution days (late 2004), I had at least 50 customers whom I'd been working with over the years who had purchased over 1,000 CPE from me...I know for sure that most of these guys are still operating and in business If you think about it, 1,000 isn't all that much -- take a look at the numbers If you've been a WISP since 2001, and you've been steadily buying CPE / installing 20 net new customers (minus churn, etc) / month (~ 1 install / working day / month), in over 5 years time (e.g., today in 2006), you'd have 1,200 customers Nowadays, w/ $150-$200 turn-key WISP CPE pricing (Motorola, Tranzeo, Trango), it's hard to even buy CPE in anything smaller than a 20-pack -Charles P.S. -- now another interesting statistics is the top-end of the license-exempt operator market -- although a lot of people nowadays have over 1,000 CPE installed, ALMOST NONE have been able to successfully scale beyond the 10,000 CPE level -- still trying to figure that one out... --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 3:35 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Patrick -Original Message- From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:34 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Some interesting statistics -- 30% of the WISPs who attended our last WiNOG claimed on their surveys they had been in the wireless business for more than 5 years and had more than 1k wireless CPE deployed in the field Less than 10% of them claimed to be pure-play license-exempt fixed wireless providers This is why we call them Wi- NOGs instead of ISPs nowadays Don't forget, a lot of rural telcos / CLECs / ILECs (e.g., the enemy) have gotten into license-exempt fixed wireless... -Charles P.S. - I heard a rumor that the current UL market leader, Motorola Canopy sold close to $100 million in gear last year alone --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:46 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Hopefully, the 8% (6,000,000) figure includes ONLY end-users who use wireless broadband to get to/from their home and NOT the end-users who have a copper/fiber-based (cable/telco) broadband connection to their home and then use a Wi-Fi router/access point that provides the final 50-ft connection wirelessly. There's so much sloppy and innacurate journalism these days that I need reassurance that the article means what it appears to be saying. If there are 6,000,000 end-users and if there are 5000 WISPs then each WISP would, on average, have 1,200 subscribers. I'm not sure that this passes the sniff test. jack John Scrivner wrote: Check this out from the Pew report. It appears that fixed wireless is much bigger than what even I thought. According to this report 8% of all broadband connections in the US are delivered via fixed broadband wireless. That means you guys! Woo Hoo! Scriv -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Our next WISP Workshop is June 21-22 in Atlanta, GA. Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless
RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE!
snip Probably close to true, though I believe a bit on the high side. We probably sold around $80M in UL last year out of our $195M total since our UL/licensed split has historically hovered about 60% licensed/ 40% UL. Not bad in the face of massive behemoth like Motorola. /snip So -- you sold $80M in UL last year What percentage of the was in the US? Let's gestimate that 50% of your UL sales were in North America (which, IMO, might be a bit low, since Internationally, 5 GHz and 900 MHz is kinda @#$@ up) So we're at $40M total Not knowing you're exact numbers, lets say there's an even split between all product lines (e.g., Backhaul, 900 Mhz, 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz) So 75% is PtMP Now we're at $30M Now, AP/CPE ratio -- not sure about Alvarion, but I remember from my equipment distribution days that we used to sell something like a 1:20 ratio -- Lets assume an average AP / infrastructure price of $2.5k, and an average CPE price of $500 - so using those numbers...about 20% of your sales revenue is APs, and 80% of your revenue is CPE 80% of $30M = $24M $24M / 500 = 48,000 CPE shipped into the US in 2005 alone How many Alvarion WISPs are there today still buying your product? If the number is 1,000 than that's an average of 480 CPE installed / WISP this year (or ~2 CPE installation / day) If 2,000, then that's an average of 240 CPE installed / WISP this year (or ~1 CPE installation / day) Over a 5 year time period (I would bet that many of your customers have been operating since 2001) -- that's a total of 2,000 WISPs w/ over 1,000 CPE installed Now, remember, you're Alvarion, and some of your customers have been installing these things since 1998... -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 3:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Charles said - P.S. - I heard a rumor that the current UL market leader, Motorola Canopy sold close to $100 million in gear last year alone In the total combined market we still lead, but for sure the real test comes when all major TEMs field their own 802.16e-2005. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 -Original Message- From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:34 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Some interesting statistics -- 30% of the WISPs who attended our last WiNOG claimed on their surveys they had been in the wireless business for more than 5 years and had more than 1k wireless CPE deployed in the field Less than 10% of them claimed to be pure-play license-exempt fixed wireless providers This is why we call them Wi- NOGs instead of ISPs nowadays Don't forget, a lot of rural telcos / CLECs / ILECs (e.g., the enemy) have gotten into license-exempt fixed wireless... -Charles P.S. - I heard a rumor that the current UL market leader, Motorola Canopy sold close to $100 million in gear last year alone --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:46 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] This is HUGE! Hopefully, the 8% (6,000,000) figure includes ONLY end-users who use wireless broadband to get to/from their home and NOT the end-users who have a copper/fiber-based (cable/telco) broadband connection to their home and then use a Wi-Fi router/access point that provides the final 50-ft connection wirelessly. There's so much sloppy and innacurate journalism these days that I need reassurance that the article means what it appears to be saying. If there are 6,000,000 end-users and if there are 5000 WISPs then each WISP would, on average, have 1,200 subscribers. I'm not sure that this passes the sniff test. jack John Scrivner wrote: Check this out from the Pew report. It appears that fixed wireless is much bigger than what even I thought. According to this report 8% of all broadband connections in the US are delivered via fixed broadband wireless. That means you guys! Woo Hoo! Scriv -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Our next WISP Workshop is June 21-22 in Atlanta, GA. Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
Hi Matt, You are only limited to 1.5 Mbps service due to the fact that it is almost impossible to achieve anything about a 10 dB SNR In 900 Mhz -- say you had a 25+ dB SNR (e.g., how life works in licensed bands) -- you could deliver 10-15 Mb on a 5 MHz channel -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 9:59 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment The radios that exist for 900Mhz today barely qualify from a delivered bandwidth perspective. We hardly ever lead with a 1.5Mbps service, but sometimes are forced to sell just 1.5Mbps because we can only make the shot with 900Mhz. If we were limited to 5Mhz with a 3.65Ghz radio then I don't see why we would use them at all. 10Mhz would at least be interesting, but that is too much channel space for multually exclusive spectrum. About the only interesting thing you can do with 5Mhz is a WiMAX mobile service, but it would never compete with a similar service operating in 2.3Ghz or 2.5Ghz (not that I think a 5Mhz WiMAX mobile service in those bands does much to compete with 3G anyway). Ultimatelly, I think a 5Mhz license is only going to create 3G me too services that aren't that interesting. I know all the radio manufactures would love that since services that target individuals sell more radios, but alas, I am not a radio manufacture. -Matt Patrick Leary wrote: Respectfully, I do not agree. Look how much is done in UL with just 26MHz in 900MHz, most of which is not useable due to the noise of high power primary users and consumer devices. Also, rural customers and operators should have the ability to achieve high QoS services and not merely best effort. Splitting the band leaves some room for both types of services. I would also prefer the UL part of the split to be broken up into something like 5MHz channels so gear is not sold into the market that will use the entire swath of band from one radio UNLESS it is a P2P radio, in which case the entire range should be usable. Patrick -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 12:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Splitting up the band will just make it useless and interference free. -Matt Patrick Leary wrote: You make the mistake of assuming that I am talking about an unlicensed 3.65 product Charles. We would not likely build a UL version of all that. I am in complete agreement with you on 3.650 in terms of the end reality and utility of the band in a licensed versus unlicensed allocation. That is why I support essentially splitting the band. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 -Original Message- From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 10:46 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Hi Patrick, But all the fancy schmancy technology you implement won't do @#$@ unless 3650 is licensed b/c interference from 20 other systems in the area (including several from our GPS-synced FM-based FSK friends) eats you for breakfast, lunch dinner =( -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 4:41 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment A. More power Tom. B. Much more sophistication in the equipment yielding much higher spectral efficiency and system gain. Frequency plays a major role, but you need to understand that other factors are of almost similar levels of importance. For example, our 802.16e version of WiMAX uses SOFDMA with beam forming and 4th order diversity at the base station and MIMO with 6 antennae embedded in the self-install CPE with a SIM card. Couple that with higher power available in a licensed allocation and you get zero truck roll self-install CPE with no external antenna. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 -Original Message- From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:23 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment 3.5Ghz does, I find that hard to believe. 2.4Ghz couldn't do it, which is why we rely on 900Mhz. What makes 3.5Ghz appropriate for the task? With 3650 from what I understood, is only supposed to be allowed for PtP or mobile service only (not indoor) based on the high power levels allowed. Not sure whats at the other 3.5G ranges in US. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
W/out a license, 3.6 is going to work just as *bad* You really need 700 (or a 1 GHz band) to really get mobility / portability in an unlicensed / uncoordinated environment -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jeffrey thomas Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:02 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment The benchmark is the ability to provide NLOS, portable or fixed service to at least a 2 mile radius per cell, indoors. 5.8 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 5.4 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 4.9 doesnt really give true NLOS to that disance indoors 3.5Ghz does, to portable devices similar to the equipment used by clearwire. Airspan for example claims their wimax solution works indoors to about 3 miles out, which is pretty good IMHO. When you can deliver a zero truck roll model with 90% or above availablity, is when operators by the truckload will deploy equipment. At that point, you will see deployments in the thousands, like the ones in mexico of 750,000 homes serviced. - Jeff On Thu, 25 May 2006 02:20:23 -0400, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: How do you figure? You don't think 5.4 is going to solve part of that? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Frankly, The FCC should really hurry up and finish the rules to allow the industry to really take off. The common view with most manufacturers I have found is that until there is 3.5ghz or near spectrum available, there will be small and limited deployments of wisp size and not many large scale deployments outside of 2.5ghz or 700 mhz operators. - Jeff On 5/24/06 6:14 AM, Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All the same time, the industry doesn't bother to fill out their Form 477s also The sad thing is is that there are long term consequences towards flaunting the rules -- namely the fact that you are just reinforcing the ILEC argument that unlicensed spectrum just creates a bunch of cowboys that can't be taken seriously Heck, even Marlon knows better than to wear his skin-tight pink flamingo suit when he represents the industry in DC -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jeffrey thomas Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 11:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment In the larger scale of things- when you compare this to a carrier deployment which would deliver thousands of CPE's service, this is a test. I know of one company that has recieved 28 STA's for 14 markets, for over 2000 CPE. - Jeff On Tue, 23 May 2006 21:33:33 -0400, Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Do you really think towerstream need 150 field units or cpes to test a single base station? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 9:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Gino, Is Towerstream doing this - using 3650 to deliver commercial service? jack Gino A. Villarini wrote: Towerstream anyone ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 6:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Jeffrey, I have to question the judgement ability (or the lack of it) of anyone who abuses the FCC rules to the extent of taking a licensed experimental system and using it for a commercial, revenue-generating purpose. Someone who would do this is (IMHO): 1. Someone with no business sense 2. Someone with no appreciation of (or experience with) the enforcement powers of the FCC 3. Someone who will likely turn out to be their own worst enemy 4. NOT someone who I could rely upon to provide me reliable, long-term WISP service. jack jeffrey thomas wrote: Patrick, It doesnt change the fact that many have launched limited deployments as a test but still charged for the access service, banking on the fact that the FCC has set the band aside for unlicensed anyways
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
To say the least -- a highly upsetting (to many operators) isse about WiMAX is the fact that not all WiMAX is created equal... Sure, WiMAX talks about QoS, ARQ, encryption, scheduled MACs, etc -- but is it required for base certification today? Hehe -Charles P.S. -- BREAKING NEWS FOR WISP types -- I saw a WORKING DEMO of a MINI-PCI WiMAX card for 3.5 Some interesting CPE makers (they all use this mini-pci WiMAX card inside) http://www.ente.com.pl/default.aspx?docId=2555mId1=2509 http://www.winetworks.com/products_win2000.html The Book CPE (IMO - quite nifty looking) http://www.quadmaxsystems.se/products.php --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 10:00 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment All WiMAX vendors will have some version of this type of CPE since that is a mandatory requirement for licensed band operators. Each will have their own attempts at special sauce to differentiate their offering. It will get very interesting come fall (which is not to say that these last 8 years have not been interesting!) Patrick -Original Message- From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:15 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Patrick Leary wrote: A. More power Tom. B. Much more sophistication in the equipment yielding much higher spectral efficiency and system gain. Frequency plays a major role, but you need to understand that other factors are of almost similar levels of importance. For example, our 802.16e version of WiMAX uses SOFDMA with beam forming and 4th order diversity at the base station and MIMO with 6 antennae embedded in the self-install CPE with a SIM card. Couple that with higher power available in a licensed allocation and you get zero truck roll self-install CPE with no external antenna. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 I don't know how much more we cn ask for, zero truck roll self install How well does it penetrate trees and what kind of bal park pricing are we talking here. Please throw something out there for pricing. Thanks George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
Hi Patrick, But all the fancy schmancy technology you implement won't do @#$@ unless 3650 is licensed b/c interference from 20 other systems in the area (including several from our GPS-synced FM-based FSK friends) eats you for breakfast, lunch dinner =( -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 4:41 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment A. More power Tom. B. Much more sophistication in the equipment yielding much higher spectral efficiency and system gain. Frequency plays a major role, but you need to understand that other factors are of almost similar levels of importance. For example, our 802.16e version of WiMAX uses SOFDMA with beam forming and 4th order diversity at the base station and MIMO with 6 antennae embedded in the self-install CPE with a SIM card. Couple that with higher power available in a licensed allocation and you get zero truck roll self-install CPE with no external antenna. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 -Original Message- From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:23 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment 3.5Ghz does, I find that hard to believe. 2.4Ghz couldn't do it, which is why we rely on 900Mhz. What makes 3.5Ghz appropriate for the task? With 3650 from what I understood, is only supposed to be allowed for PtP or mobile service only (not indoor) based on the high power levels allowed. Not sure whats at the other 3.5G ranges in US. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: jeffrey thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 4:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment The benchmark is the ability to provide NLOS, portable or fixed service to at least a 2 mile radius per cell, indoors. 5.8 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 5.4 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 4.9 doesnt really give true NLOS to that disance indoors 3.5Ghz does, to portable devices similar to the equipment used by clearwire. Airspan for example claims their wimax solution works indoors to about 3 miles out, which is pretty good IMHO. When you can deliver a zero truck roll model with 90% or above availablity, is when operators by the truckload will deploy equipment. At that point, you will see deployments in the thousands, like the ones in mexico of 750,000 homes serviced. - Jeff On Thu, 25 May 2006 02:20:23 -0400, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: How do you figure? You don't think 5.4 is going to solve part of that? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Frankly, The FCC should really hurry up and finish the rules to allow the industry to really take off. The common view with most manufacturers I have found is that until there is 3.5ghz or near spectrum available, there will be small and limited deployments of wisp size and not many large scale deployments outside of 2.5ghz or 700 mhz operators. - Jeff On 5/24/06 6:14 AM, Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All the same time, the industry doesn't bother to fill out their Form 477s also The sad thing is is that there are long term consequences towards flaunting the rules -- namely the fact that you are just reinforcing the ILEC argument that unlicensed spectrum just creates a bunch of cowboys that can't be taken seriously Heck, even Marlon knows better than to wear his skin-tight pink flamingo suit when he represents the industry in DC -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jeffrey thomas Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 11:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment In the larger scale of things- when you compare this to a carrier deployment which would deliver thousands of CPE's service, this is a test. I know of one company that has recieved 28 STA's for 14 markets, for over 2000 CPE. - Jeff On Tue, 23 May 2006 21:33:33 -0400, Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Do you really think towerstream need 150 field units or cpes to test a single base station? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
A shared license (w/ zero barriers to entry, etc) w/out a very strict coordination scheme (which will never be implemented by the FCC due to the fact that it's A LOT of work to build, maintain and administer) is still basically an unlicensed system Say there are 10 operators in a market You deploy your fancy schmancy 1024-FFT OFDM/mimo/beam-forming/space-coded/blah blah system w/ it's superior scheduled WiMAX MAC The other 9 of em deploy FM modulated FSK based systems across town What do you think is going to happen? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 12:17 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment But, 3.65 isn't going to be unlicensed; it is going to be a shared license program. IMHO, that means that you will only have to contend with other operators as opposed to every consumer with a laptop. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: W/out a license, 3.6 is going to work just as *bad* You really need 700 (or a 1 GHz band) to really get mobility / portability in an unlicensed / uncoordinated environment -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jeffrey thomas Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:02 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment The benchmark is the ability to provide NLOS, portable or fixed service to at least a 2 mile radius per cell, indoors. 5.8 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 5.4 doesnt really give true NLOS to that distance indoors 4.9 doesnt really give true NLOS to that disance indoors 3.5Ghz does, to portable devices similar to the equipment used by clearwire. Airspan for example claims their wimax solution works indoors to about 3 miles out, which is pretty good IMHO. When you can deliver a zero truck roll model with 90% or above availablity, is when operators by the truckload will deploy equipment. At that point, you will see deployments in the thousands, like the ones in mexico of 750,000 homes serviced. - Jeff On Thu, 25 May 2006 02:20:23 -0400, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: How do you figure? You don't think 5.4 is going to solve part of that? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Frankly, The FCC should really hurry up and finish the rules to allow the industry to really take off. The common view with most manufacturers I have found is that until there is 3.5ghz or near spectrum available, there will be small and limited deployments of wisp size and not many large scale deployments outside of 2.5ghz or 700 mhz operators. - Jeff On 5/24/06 6:14 AM, Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All the same time, the industry doesn't bother to fill out their Form 477s also The sad thing is is that there are long term consequences towards flaunting the rules -- namely the fact that you are just reinforcing the ILEC argument that unlicensed spectrum just creates a bunch of cowboys that can't be taken seriously Heck, even Marlon knows better than to wear his skin-tight pink flamingo suit when he represents the industry in DC -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jeffrey thomas Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 11:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment In the larger scale of things- when you compare this to a carrier deployment which would deliver thousands of CPE's service, this is a test. I know of one company that has recieved 28 STA's for 14 markets, for over 2000 CPE. - Jeff On Tue, 23 May 2006 21:33:33 -0400, Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Do you really think towerstream need 150 field units or cpes to test a single base station? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 9:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment Gino, Is Towerstream doing this - using 3650 to deliver commercial service? jack Gino A. Villarini wrote: Towerstream anyone ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto
RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
Read below and you can decide on whether or not you will be breaking the law w/ a 3650 deployment --- To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Cc: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 6:32 AM Subject: [equipment-l] Experimental Licensing in the 3650 MHz Band - Clarifications Recently, there have been some misleading advertisements promising turn-key 3.65 GHz licensing services as a means of avoiding interference in congested license-exempt ISM/UNII bands. Although the FCC issued adopted rules back in March 2005 to open access to new spectrum for wireless broadband in the 3.65 GHz band, a minor contention-based requirement has delayed the deployment of wireless broadband services in this band as equipment manufacturers currently work behind the scenes to iron out the details. As things currently stand, deploying a 3.65 GHz system today falls under Subpart 5: Experimental Radio Service of the FCC Rules. Infrastructure Investment Experimentation under Part 5 needs to be done strictly from a curiosity perspective rather than one of commercial network expansion. Part 5 permits experimentation in scientific or technical operations directly related to the use of radio waves. The rules provide the opportunity to experiment with new techniques or new services prior to submitting proposals to the FCC to change its rules. Some useful excerpts regarding Experimental Licensing 47CFR5.3: Scope of Service Stations operating in the Experimental Radio Service will be permitted to conduct the following type of operations: (a)Experimentations in scientific or technical radio research (b) Experimentations under contractual agreement with the United States Government, or for export purposes. (c)Communications essential to a research project. (d) Technical demonstrations of equipment or techniques. (e)Field strength surveys by persons not eligible for authorization in any other service. (f) Demonstration of equipment to prospective purchasers by persons engaged in the business of selling radio equipment. (g)Testing of equipment in connection with production or regulatory approval of such equipment. (h)Development of radio technique, equipment or engineering data not related to an existing or proposed service, including field or factory testing or calibration of equipment. (i) Development of radio technique, equipment, operational data or engineering data related to an existing or proposed radio service. (j) Limited market studies. (k) Types of experiments that are not specifically covered under paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section will be considered upon demonstration of need 47CFR5.51: Eligibility of License (a)Authorizations for stations in the Experimental Radio Service will be issued only to persons qualified to conduct experimentation utilizing radio waves for scientific or technical operation data directly related to a use of radio not provided by existing rules; or for communications in connection with research projects when existing communications facilities are inadequate. 47CFR5.63: Supplementary Statements (a)Each applicant for an authorization in the Experimental Radio Service must enclose with the application a narrative statement describing in detail the program of research and experimentation proposed, the specific objectives sought to be accomplished; and how the program of experimentation has a reasonable promise of contribution to the development, extension, or expansion, or utilization of the radio art, or is along lines not already investigated. For further information regarding experimental licensing, the FCC has a nice online FAQ that gives a step-by-step how-to on experimental licensing: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/elbfaqs.html --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale?
You can do a 5 MHz channel size on an Atheros chip (Off the top of my head, Alvarion Airaya have implemented it so far) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 10:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale? Patrick Leary wrote: But which WiMAX are you talking about? There are lots of versions and the one version that no one has...and no one should be clamoring for just yet...is unlicensed WiMAX. I am certainly looking for WiMAX features such as spectral efficiency in 5 Ghz unlicensed gear right now. I don't really care about the standard. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit coming back (and so forth) Then there's servicing costs / etc Keep in mind -- Bell copper has been amortized for quite a long time now -- and has been installed at almost a 100% penetration rate -- if you're building your own infrastructure (wireless per say) -- do you realistically believe that you're monthly costs for transport (inclusive from your NOC to the customer's house) is less? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality) It is? IIRC, the tariff price of 1.5 meg DSL from BellSouth is $23.95. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: But what about oversubscription? Transit costs aside, the cost of last-mile transport of even 1 Mbps of data pipe is still far more than $20-30 / month What happens when users actually start *using* the bandwidth they are *promised*... -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 8:46 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality) Content is supposed to get a free ride since we all sell data pipes. If a customer buys 1 meg of data service from me then they are free to use that 1 meg for whatever they want. If that isn't enough bandwidth for what they want then they better buy more. Over time will the customer be able to buy more bandwidth for less money? Sure, that trend has been going on for a long time now. Does that mean content providers are getting a free ride? No, they still have to pay transit costs on their side. Although, we are certainly peering with as many content providers as we can to reduce our transit costs and increase our customers' quality. Its pretty hot shit when you are 4ms away from Google and you don't have to pay for it. -Matt George Rogato wrote: It is a stretch peter. But you have to look at both ends of the argument, if you agree content providers will prevail in the future and you accept that the pipe has to get bigger, you can only come to the conclusion that the provider will have increased costs. Can the wisp actually raise thier prices while the telco and cable ops lower theirs? Not likely. The burden has to be shared by the content providers. I'm not saying make google pay per click, but movies and heavy consumption content can't get a free ride. So what should we do? George Peter R. wrote: That is one huge IF! Cuz how would they make money? If it did happen, you could always change your pricing model. Isn't there a clause in your AUP about total usage in a month? How about 30 days notice to affect a price change? - Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. George Rogato wrote: I don't know , Travis, web pages voip ftp streaming music occasional movies low bandwidth streaming video, no problem. But what if, what if tomorrow Travis wakes up and reads in his newspaper that the local cable company or satellite co is going to offer a substantial discount if the just unplug the cable wire and plug in that new set top box into their isp's little router and get ALL their tv that way. Wouldn't you ask, why can you guys use my network to feed your customers. Wouldn't you start wondering if those p4 routers and DS3's you got there be enough to handle that type of traffic? Would you have to upgrade your infrastructure to accomadate this? What if it was google, yahoo, msn, att or even verizon that was offering this as a way to reach customers without trying to build local infrastructure? I'm realizing I'm exaggerating this some, at least for the near future, but if this scenario was to take place, what would you be saying then? George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
I was simply responding to your statement regarding just the last mile transport. If you want to include other considerations in the discussion then I don't understand your earlier email. When considering net neutrality and its implications (e.g., allowing the TV company to stream video over your network) -- I'm am trying to point out that it's not simply a matter of bandwidth from the tower to the customer, but also the tower backbone all the way to your NOC Now -- if you're selling dedicated commercial bandwidth, this isn't an issue, but if you're following standard residential oversubscription rules / ratio (e.g., 1000 acounts equates to about 10 Mb @ 95%) -- it's going to get EXTREMELY PAINFUL if those customers actually try to use all the bandwidth that's been marketed to them Then there's the issue of all those nasty/filtered services and net neutrality -- will filtering bittorrent (or whatever nasty new bandwidth hogging file sharing or whatever new program out there) violate the terms of network neutrality? -Charles -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute / Ruling favoring Verizon may hike price of service
OMFG stunned silence -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 6:31 PM To: WISPA General List; isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com Subject: [WISPA] Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute / Ruling favoring Verizon may hike price of service All, As quoted from the article; The US Court of Appeals in Boston ruled April 11 that Verizon Communications Inc. can charge per-minute fees for calls to local numbers that dial-up users need to connect to the Internet -- in much the same way that they charge for long-distance or other calls. Also quoted from the article; Verizon claims it is owed more than $65 million by Global NAPs. The court did not rule on damages, but Verizon cut off Global NAPs's access to its network, effectively shutting down Internet service for customers of dial-up providers like MegaNet of Fall River, which had to find another company to supply emergency connections for its approximately 7,500 dial-up subscribers. Full story here; http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/04/28/dial_up_provider_lo ses_net_access_amid_fee_dispute/ Regards, Dawn DiPietro --- --- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes
Take that article/session with a grain of salt -- as it is being run by an organization that is supported by vendors trying to *sell* the concept of muni-wifi -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes Free Municipal Wi-Fi Service Boosts Economic Development in the City of St. Cloud, FL at http://www.digitalcityexpo.com/agenda.htm -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Business Value
One thing to remember -- when buying and selling a business (or anything for the matter) there has to be benefits on both sides (e.g., a win-win solution) Just as you are trying to maximize all your time and effort put into your company, the buyer needs to be able to see a light at the end of the tunnel (e.g., look at your business from the outside, and, being honest w/ yourself, ask yourself how much you'd be willing to pay for it, given an acceptable risk / reward ratio where you also have other options in investing your money -- e.g., stocks / real estate / etc) From a valuation perspective, if you want $ -- the *good* companies are able to get up to 1.5x annual revenues (e.g., solid stand-alone businesses that are profitable, self sustainalbe, etc -- using a standard residential pure-play WISP business model w/ a $40-60 / month ARPU -- it means you need to have a minimum of at least 1000 customers to make this cut) That said, at 180 customers, the bad news is is that you're probably sitting at a pain point where the value of your business (e.g., what you can realistically sell for) is still far less than what you have invested in it -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:15 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Business Value Mark at the Chicago Wispnog Charles put on, there was a couple investors that bought and sold wisps. We had a session on it. The way they described the valuation of a wisp brought the price down well under 1x yearly revenue. More like 6 months of revenue cash buyout. They picked everything apart and devalued based on what ever they could find. And there was a couple of wisps who sold their operation for about 1x yearly. One guy said the buyer wanted some of his commercial subs and took the whole thing and even hired him and another seller said he wanted to toss in the towel after fighting with the telco, get a law degree and donate the rest of his life to fighting the telco's I seem to remember that he sold for under 1x with some cash now and paper. Both of these guys were 802.11b wisps. And I think both are still on some of the wireless lists. You might want to ask on the isp-wireless list or part-15 list as well. Seems that wisps with contracts to their customers and a network of Alvarion, Trango, Canopy or similar was more appealing and had a higher value. Maybe this is helpfull. How many subs do you have? George Mark Nash wrote: Thanks Marlon... For the record, it's not a rough split between me and my partner. He's got a more profitable business going, he's put up money for the wireless business, he's 53 and going to retire when he's 55, so he wants to focus on his other business. That's what I would do if I were him. The money he put in is easy to account for and pay back, but he has also put in a considerable amount of unpaid time and he'd like to realize some benefit from that, and I should honor that in the split. Makes sense. So I'm trying to figure out what's reasonable to offer for his part in all of this. Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:45 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Business Value Hi Mark, I don't have time to get into the deep details right now. I can probably help with this if you'd like. I've done some valuations based on income, customer base etc. Standard business stuff would put your company value at 1.2 to 2x annual earnings. OR 3 to 5 x annual profit (probably not much of that if you're growing well). With a wisp, it gets more complicated because most wisps are growing fast and are just starting to get into the profit mode. So the value of the company won't even hit most guys for a couple more years. shrug I've also seen WISPs get paid for the number of homes passed in addition to the above. The last valuation I did I took the number of customers possible on the hardware installed, cut that down to more reasonable numbers (100 users per ap), figured a moderate growth rate (max of 4 per day after 3 years) and came up with an expected customer base in 36 months. That's the point that I put a value on the company. I used 1.5x annual earnings. At this point the company would have been HUGELY profitable though. (started out with 1 install per day, ramped that up by 1 every 6 months or so) *I* think I had a reasonable growth rate (market size was nearly 1,000,000 people much of which had NO broadband) and left room for several competitors to gain market share. On a partnership
RE: [WISPA] Tranzeo BH
Title: Message Here isone possible source for the information that you are looking for http://www.cwlab.com/testing_criteria.htm -Charles ---CWLabTechnology Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooperSent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:35 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Tranzeo BH Has anyone had any experience = or with the Tranzeo 5a 32 or the 5amp 32? The claims are 25 and 40 miles respectively. Im wondering about reliability and performance at those distances. Hit me off list if you can advise. Thanks, Chris -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] [Fwd: Illinois' broadband gap squeezes small businessfrom Crain's]
FWIW -- there is a WISP in contact with the Lt Governor's Office and Crain's about servicing this customer (they have a tower ~ 4 miles from the physical location) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete Davis Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:40 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Fwd: Illinois' broadband gap squeezes small businessfrom Crain's] He must share a t1 with 12 other tenants and its barely faster than dialup? If I had to buy a t1 for every 12 broadband subscribers, I would go broke! Someone needs to manage that t1 or clean viruses on 13 computers, or something.. pd John Scrivner wrote: Can someone in the Chicago area please serve this guy? If you get him a wireless connection please let me know and I will have a press release prepared and sent out. Thanks, Scriv PS. If you are in Illinois and have not done so yet, please join the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email list server for Illinois specific information. http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/illinois Original Message Subject: Illinois' broadband gap squeezes small business from Crain's Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:18:16 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From Crain's Illinois' broadband gap squeezes small business By Julie Johnsson April 16, 2006 Even the cheapest DSL service is out of Steve Zaransky's reach. The line providing high-speed Internet access from ATT Inc. stops 600 yards short of his company, Airways Digital Media. Comcast Corp. doesn't serve his neighborhood, an industrial corridor on the city's Far Northwest Side. Broadband remains elusive for some Chicagoans living or working in industrial areas - as Mr. Zaransky learned when he moved his three-employee Web development firm from the West Loop last summer. I just assumed that anywhere in the city, you'd be able to get broadband, he says. That's not the case. Illinois ranks 21st nationally for broadband lines per capita, trailing California, Massachusetts and even sparsely populated Nevada and Alaska. In a world of instant information, that's a serious disadvantage for small business owners like Mr. Zaransky, who can't afford the T-1 lines larger companies use to tap into the Internet. It creates a struggle to do business here, rather than making it simple. It doesn't bode well for economic development, says Janita Tucker, executive director of the Peterson Pulaski Business and Industrial Council, which represents 22 businesses employing about 2,000 people in the industrial corridor including Mr. Zaransky's business. Most of them don't have access to digital subscriber line (DSL) or cable modem service, she says. That's ironic in a city that boasts one of the richest fiber networks in the country. Illinois had 1.85 million high-speed Internet lines as of June 30, the fifth-highest total of any state, according to new Federal Communications Commission data. Much of that broadband is clustered in downtown Chicago, a major Internet hub. However, gaps in the network are a problem elsewhere, leaving Illinois with one broadband connection for every 6.70 residents, according to an analysis by Crain's that compared the FCC tally of broadband lines to population figures from the 2000 U.S. Census. The District of Columbia and Connecticut, with the best coverage nationally, have broadband connections for every 4.52 and 4.97 residents, respectively. We do have large areas of the city and many suburban areas that don't have basic broadband availability, says Scott Goldstein, vice-president for policy and planning at the Metropolitan Planning Council. All sectors of the economy are going high-tech, not just large companies. That's where Chicago needs to compete. The problem is a hangover from the 1990s, when Chicago's dominant phone and cable companies were slow to upgrade networks that were later acquired by ATT (formerly known as SBC Communications Inc.) and Comcast. NO RESIDENCES, NO COVERAGE Philadelphia cable giant Comcast has made cable modem available to about 99% of homes in its Northern Illinois service area, but it doesn't provide service to office parks and industrial areas where there are no residences, a spokeswoman says. DSL service, provided by phone companies, reached only 77% of Illinois phone customers as of June 30, 2005, according to federal data. In Florida, the state with the widest DSL availability, some 85% of customers could hook into the service as of mid-2005. New York's DSL network reached 81% of the state. An ATT spokesman says 80% of its Illinois customers had access to DSL by the end of 2005. He can't say when the company's DSL coverage will approach 100%. Our goal is to get to these areas as soon as we can, and we're working at it. He says
RE: [WISPA] Charles Wu email ?
Title: Message [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---CWLabTechnology Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. VillariniSent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:32 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Charles Wu email ? Charles whats you email, I lost my drive new laptop Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP
And to add version 4.0 changes the rules again. Stay tuned. Brad Hi Brad, That statement has piqued my curiosity Care to elaborate? (on or offlist) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Larson Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 8:12 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP -Original Message- From: Jeffrey Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 2:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP agreed, VL is far from carrier grade On Apr 12, 2006, at 9:16 AM, Charles Wu wrote: snip Motorola designed Canopy specifically for the WISP market, not the carrier market. Alvarion designed VL specifically for the carrier market, not the WISP market. /snip Ah, the mis-perceptions of the rugged metal enclosure =) Steve, can you please explain why carriers would prefer a CSMA/CA over a scheduled (WiMAX-like) MAC? Thanks -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Stroh Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:05 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP Thanks, Steve On Apr 11, 2006, at 18:55, Dylan Oliver wrote: How is any product qualified as 'Carrier-Grade'? What is it about Alvarion VL that makes the cut vs. Canopy? Lord knows Motorola produces far more 'Carrier-Grade' equipment than Alvarion ever will - so where did they go wrong with Canopy? Also, I've heard lately several complaints that Waverider has trouble sustaining even 1 Mbps throughput ... what is your experience, John? Best, -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC-- --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Quick note of hello
Title: Message Hi Patrick, I had an interesting discussion with an Alvarion rep at WiNOG who implied that Alvarion is reevaluating its position towards and is showing greater interest again in the license-exempt service provider market This confirms that rumor =) Good to see you back -Charles ---CWLabTechnology Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick LearySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 11:17 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Quick note of hello Hi all, I just wanted to drop you guys a note that I have re-subscribed after being off the list for maybe two years. Hope all is well. Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 Skype: pleary -- 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 Willis, OK
Does anyone provide coverage in Willis, OK -- have a business account lead (contact offlist) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 12:32 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Universal Service Fund Here's what I wrote up on USF. Several felt it's got some errors that need fixing. Feel free to fix this, toss it and start over. Anything at all. But right now, officially, we're doing NOTHING. And that must change guys. Someone needs to come up with a position paper for WISPA to work from. Right now I've got some access to some in congress and I think we should work with that! laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:25 AM Subject: [WISPA] Universal Service Fund Marlon has been asking us for a while to give him feedback on Universal Service. We have not helped him as much as we should have. He asked for input from the WISPA membership originally. I am asking everyone, members or not, if you can help. Marlon has been asked by a member of the House Commerce Committee (One of his Reps in Washington) to help them structure legislation toward the re-working on the Universal Service Program. Thoughts on the Hill are now leaning toward making it available to multiple operators in a market and opening it to aid in broadband as well as telco. The feeling from most WISPs is two things to date. Most think the government should make Universal Service just go away. I share some of that feeling myself. What should be known though is that government rarely makes things go away. They usually want a role. With that said we need to give them ideas on how to make this program help us in our goal to bring broadband into underserved and/or unserved areas. To do this we need to understand what the program does, what was its history, how it works and how it does not work. We need to develop a strong strategy for dealing with Universal Service and offer a position that legislators can feel good about and that helps show we are serious about helping in legislative issues. I welcome feedback from anyone with information which can help us develop this position. We need to act soon as the legislature is wanting to do something now. Please help us mold our future through this important effort. Your thoughts and knowledge are needed. Input from anyone with knowledge of Universal Service would be helpful at this time. What we do not need is an argument that we should just tell them to make it go away. We know that is what many of you want. In lieu of it going away we need to know how it can be made to help us. Thank you, Scriv -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP
snip Motorola designed Canopy specifically for the WISP market, not the carrier market. Alvarion designed VL specifically for the carrier market, not the WISP market. /snip Ah, the mis-perceptions of the rugged metal enclosure =) Steve, can you please explain why carriers would prefer a CSMA/CA over a scheduled (WiMAX-like) MAC? Thanks -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Stroh Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11:05 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP Thanks, Steve On Apr 11, 2006, at 18:55, Dylan Oliver wrote: How is any product qualified as 'Carrier-Grade'? What is it about Alvarion VL that makes the cut vs. Canopy? Lord knows Motorola produces far more 'Carrier-Grade' equipment than Alvarion ever will - so where did they go wrong with Canopy? Also, I've heard lately several complaints that Waverider has trouble sustaining even 1 Mbps throughput ... what is your experience, John? Best, -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC-- --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband
Higher ARPU WISPs in the business are selling their services as WiMAX -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KyWiFi LLC Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:56 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband I'm noticing more and more WISP's selling their wireless broadband service as DSL or Wireless DSL. I know that 75% of the people who call our sales number have a difficult time understanding what Wireless Broadband is. They already know what DSL is and that is what the majority of them ask for so I would be interested in hearing everyone's opinions on the pros and cons of a WISP labeling their wireless broadband service as DSL, wDSL or Wireless DSL instead of Fixed Wireless, WiFI or Wireless Broadband. If the masses are more familiar with the term DSL then I think we would generate more sales leads by advertising our (WISPs') broadband as DSL instead of Wireless Broadband. I'm sure the local telco would just love to see all of us selling DSL. Are there any legalities to this? Does wireless broadband qualify as DSL or a form of DSL in the eyes of the law? Is it legal for a WISP to sell their wireless broadband service as DSL? Sincerely, Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky http://www.KyWiFi.com http://www.KyWiFiVoice.com Phone: 859.274.4033 A Broadband Phone Internet Provider == Wireless Broadband, Local Calling and UNLIMITED Long Distance only $69! No Taxes, No Regulatory Fees, No Hassles FREE Site Survey: http://www.KyWiFi.com == -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX?
snip That is correct, however those companies are expected to be shipping product ( and are taking pre orders ) that will comply with the testing whenever the gods at wimaxforum decide to get off their collective arses and certify 5.8. Airspan for example, already has wimax 4.9 product and is getting FCC certification. So in conclusion, yes on product, no on the interop profile or tests yet. /snip Basically, a roadmap to WiMAX? Look at the result of Wi-LAN's Continuty Program Roadmap to WiMAX? ducking Wi-LAN Continuity Program The Wi-LAN Continuity Program Provides - Standards Based W-OFDM Performance Today - Clear Path to the Standards - Risk Free Migration Strategy - Investment Protection - Proven Future Proof Solution History shows that when new standards are created then there is a lot of buzz and expection and a lot of marketing noise about standards based products being available soon. Again, history has shown that soon is often delayed until later or much later. High expectations turn into dissapointment and frustration. The Continuity Program shows Wi-LAN's clear path to the standards. Customers can purchase Libra products today and be confident that their investment will be protected when WiMAX products become available Oh Really? February 2, 2006 Wi-LAN Inc. is transitioning out of its broadband wireless equipment business to concentrate solely on its intellectual property rights business. So -- this leads one to ask -- how guaranteed is a roadmap to WiMAX? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:38 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? - Jeff On Apr 4, 2006, at 7:06 PM, Steve Stroh wrote: Neat trick... considering... There is not yet a WiMAX 5.8 GHz interoperability profile. Because there is not yet a WiMAX 5.8 GHz WiMAX interoperability profile, there have not yet been any 5.8 GHz interoperability tests. Because there has not yet been any WiMAX 5.8 GHz interoperability tests, there cannot be any WiMAX 5.8 GHz products certified as having completed the tests and declared interoperable. And, unless a product has been through the interoperability tests and declared interoperable, it cannot use the WiMAX brand name. Nope - no _5.8 GHz_ (license-exempt is assumed) WiMAX products. PERHAPS by year end... but I suspect it will be longer given that the vendors are going to be VERY busy selling all the 3.5 GHz (licensed, non-US markets) gear they can make AND getting Mobile WiMAX out will consume the available interoperability testing facilities and the attentions of the Mobile portions of the WiMAX industry. 5.8 GHz WiMAX is kind of an afterthought at the moment for the WiMAX industry. Thanks, Steve On Apr 4, 2006, at 11:37, jeffrey thomas wrote: George, Yes there is. Airspan and Aperto both have products and are taking orders now. - Jeff On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 08:16:46 -0700, George [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: What is going on with unlicensed WIMAX? Is there any products released yet or about to be released? Thanks George --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX?
Hi Jeff, Out of curiosity, since QoS base WiMAX certification currently are mutually exclusive, how does having QoS allow one manufacturer to have product that's more WiMAX than another (not to say that QoS makes a product better, but that's a whole different argument) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? George, I am sure there will be others, but likely the first will be Airspan ( May is Beta ) and Aperto ( shipping in June ). Redline likely will have product as well, but based on the fact that both Aperto and Airspan have considerable experience with QOS PTMP, I would think they will have the only great product out there. As well, on the CPE front, there are a number of taiwanese ODM's expected to announce sub 300 dollar integrated CPE. - Jeff On Apr 4, 2006, at 5:28 PM, George wrote: Ok, so far Jeff is the only one to say that unlicended Wimax will be available with Aperto and Airspan. What do you know Charles? George Charles Wu wrote: Alvarion VL is based on a WiFi chipset (this isn't meant to knock Alvarion, since almost every 5 GHz PtMP WISP manufacturered product out there is also based on a similar chipset) Alvarion BreezeMAX (they're product pending WiMAX certification) doesn't operate in 5 GHz -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete Davis Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 6:42 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? I thought Alvarion was Wimax, or wimax-able, or wimax compatible, or software-flashable to wimax. Wimax-ilicious, or something. pd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George From what we have seen most of the unlicensed WIMAX will come into its own in the first half of 2007. The limitation for low cost units comes down to the chipsets, we have tested prototype mini-pci WIMAX radios (5Ghz) but they are far from ready for prime time. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? What is going on with unlicensed WIMAX? Is there any products released yet or about to be released? Thanks George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/ wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX?
There is no such thing right now as unlicensed WiMAX (e.g., no way today to officially certify 5.8 Ghz WiMAX) So you *could* say that Motorola, Alvarion, Trango, Tranzeo, Mikrotik, StarOS, etc all have roadmaps to WiMAX just like Airspan Aperto -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 7:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? Ok, so far Jeff is the only one to say that unlicended Wimax will be available with Aperto and Airspan. What do you know Charles? George Charles Wu wrote: Alvarion VL is based on a WiFi chipset (this isn't meant to knock Alvarion, since almost every 5 GHz PtMP WISP manufacturered product out there is also based on a similar chipset) Alvarion BreezeMAX (they're product pending WiMAX certification) doesn't operate in 5 GHz -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete Davis Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 6:42 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? I thought Alvarion was Wimax, or wimax-able, or wimax compatible, or software-flashable to wimax. Wimax-ilicious, or something. pd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George From what we have seen most of the unlicensed WIMAX will come into its own in the first half of 2007. The limitation for low cost units comes down to the chipsets, we have tested prototype mini-pci WIMAX radios (5Ghz) but they are far from ready for prime time. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? What is going on with unlicensed WIMAX? Is there any products released yet or about to be released? Thanks George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband
snip Maybe we should be branding our service as Wi-Fiber. or Maybe Ethernet Internet Access (of course like end users will know what Ethernet means.) /snip Spend trying to build a new brand around Wi-Fiber or just ride Intel / WiMAX Forum's Marketing machine... Here's the thing, chances are, whatever name you choose to brand this technology, the customer will probably be ignorant (it's still a new technology, eh?) However, when talking to them, and saying something like just google WiMAX to learn about our technology -- they'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of entries from reputable business magazines (from INC to Business Week to Fortune) all talking about how WiMAX is better than WiFi Cellular and how it can compete against T1s, they'll go ah-hah Not to be offensive here, but most WISPs don't know @[EMAIL PROTECTED] about sales marketing - Just remember, it takes about 8 touches to effectively sell a medium ARPU ($200-600 / month) data account -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX?
Alvarion VL is based on a WiFi chipset (this isn't meant to knock Alvarion, since almost every 5 GHz PtMP WISP manufacturered product out there is also based on a similar chipset) Alvarion BreezeMAX (they're product pending WiMAX certification) doesn't operate in 5 GHz -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete Davis Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 6:42 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? I thought Alvarion was Wimax, or wimax-able, or wimax compatible, or software-flashable to wimax. Wimax-ilicious, or something. pd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George From what we have seen most of the unlicensed WIMAX will come into its own in the first half of 2007. The limitation for low cost units comes down to the chipsets, we have tested prototype mini-pci WIMAX radios (5Ghz) but they are far from ready for prime time. Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Un- licensed WIMAX? What is going on with unlicensed WIMAX? Is there any products released yet or about to be released? Thanks George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message snip Charles, Your point is well demonstrated, except 6' Dish: +34 dBi Not sure what dishes you are talking about, You can get 34 dbi out of an Andrews 3 footer. With 6 foot you should be able to get 37 dbi. /snip Lol -- you're right after not sleeping for a week -- I guess I'm allowed to make a mistake wink -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggiSent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:10 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Charles Wu To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul optionsTravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message Charles you make a good point, but Im going to throw a but in here: but the Orthogon / Canopy 300 radios will run also run at: 64 QAM .92 dual -62 receive sensitivity +18 output (252.9 throughput) 64 QAM .75 dual -68 receive sensitivity +18 output (206.7 throughput) 16 QAM .87 dual -71 receive sensitivity +20 output (160.8 throughput) In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps Based on this data (and adding in timing degradation that a link would sustain when traveling over a longer distance), in order to acheive true "wire-speed" full-duplex 100 Mb Ethernet on the radio, I would guess that you would need to maintain the full-order modulation in order to keep the "apples-to-apples" comparison with a licensed 100 Mb radio link (e.g., Ceragon, Dragonwave, MNI). Full list can be found in the release notes and if you do the math on those modulations you can get some very good performance. I do agree with you that the licensed links would make more sense, buthanging4 foot dishes on towers becomes a very expensive task or if you have to do a non-penetrating roof mount skid, the cost difference between the sleds is big. So we have to take in more than the cost of the radios, licenses, leases and dishes but put together the total cost because if you are hanging BIG dishes youre going to dig deeper into your pocket. if he has clean spectrum to "spare" and doesn't need full 100 Mb wire speed performance, than the Spectra does make more economical sense -- but I would argue that you would need similarly (if not larger) sized dishes on the Spectra (4' 6' dishes) due to 5 GHz spectrum congestion "risks" and the need/desire to minimize Rf beamwidths -Charles -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dustin JurmanSent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:47 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Dustin Jurman From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles WuSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 5:26 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options TravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
We are running FreeBSD boxes w/ Gigabit Ethernet NICs I don't know all the details, since I'm not the technical guy running the tests, but I believe we are using standard 1500-byte packets w/ standard MTUs, etc On a 100 Mb FastE link (benchmark) we get the following 1 Way TCP Max: 94.0 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 92.7 / 92.4 Mbps On a GiGE link, due to Linux kernal processing issues, we max out at about 400 Mbps of raw TCP throughput -Charles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles Wu wrote: In an attenuated lab setup, running TCP (w/ Iperf), we see the following results with the Spectra @ the 300 Mbps data rate 1 Way TCP Max: 143 Mbps 2 Way BiDirectional TCP Max: 98.1 / 105 Mbps What TCP settings did you use to achieve the above? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Hi Matt, To answer your questions from my relatively limited sales marketing point of view RFC 2018 SACK Yes it is enabled -- if you purchase a copy of our report, it shows the exact system parameters configured on the box (basically, sysctl -a | grep tcp) RFC 896 Nagle Can you please explain how this is applicable in modern-day implementations of TCP? From my limited understanding, Nagle is a relic of the past (been replaced by TCP Westwood, etc) RFC 3168 ECN Yes, the bit is turned on, but can you please explain how this is applicable for a transparent layer-2 bridging scenario? RFC 1323 TCP Extensions for High Performance Yes -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
But a Spectra WILL NOT DELIVER anything close to 300 Mbps of REAL TCP THROUGHPUT from 9-16 miles (not even half duplex) And that's even assuming 30 Mhz of clean spectrum ( +25 dB SNR) in BOTH V H polarities -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.Villarini Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 7:54 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Charles, Ill chime in here cause you can get a Spectra for $15 to $16k wheras a Licensed link goes from $20k and up... Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:46 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message but with 2' on the Spectra, you're likely only to get about 60 Mbps of REAL THROUGHPUT at 10+ miles =( -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.VillariniSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 6:14 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options Tad less wit 2 footers about $17k Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 12:03 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more.TravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt,I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the OrthogonSpectra?-Charles---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Matt LiottaSent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options-MattBobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles.We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop.Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop?Thanks,Bobby BurrowEast Texas Rural Netwww.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
Title: Message The Spectra would be around $20k with external antennas. A licensed product is going to be at least that, and probably $5k more. Sit back and actually think for a second about this comparison, and you'll realize thata similarly performing"unlicensed" solution will cost MUCHMORE (and be much riskier)relative to the licensed solution The main difference is that the spectra requires 30 Mhz of ABSOLUTELY CLEAN SPECTRUM in both the vertical and horizontal polarities (150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on V-pol 150 Mb "Air Rate" transmits on H-pol -- cut off 1 polarity, you halve throughput) In addition, the Rx sensitivity of the Spectra at the 300 Mb data rate (256 QAM) is -59 dB with an output power of +18 (so you'll need HUGE dishes to guarantee the link budget) So, lets do a "theoretical" path calc / comparison (15 miles) 11 Ghz Licensed Link (100 Mb Full Duplex) Rx Sensitivity: -76 dBm Tx Power: +21 dBm 4' Dish: +39 dBi Expected RSSI: -42.9 (30 dB of fade margin= ROCK SOLID LINK =) 5 GHz Spectra Rx Sensitivity: -59 dB Tx Power: +18 6' Dish: +34 dBi Expected RSSI: -49.4 (~10 dB of fade margin w/ 2' more of each dish) Then there's all sort of "real-world" performance issues that occur with higher-order modulation schemes and license-exempt operation -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:03 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul optionsTravisMicroservCharles Wu wrote: You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
You don't need licensed to high throughput backhaul. For example, Orthogon's Spectra provides 300Mbps aggregate at a price point generally Less than 45Mbps licensed. Hi Matt, I am curious to see where / what you got those numbers for the Orthogon Spectra? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options -Matt Bobby Burrow wrote: I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options
snip I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? /snip Hi Bobby, From reading your post, I could surmise (to your detriment) that you missed the WiNOG conference in Austin last week. One licensed manufacturer was actually offering a show special for a FREE 100 Mb upgrade (e.g., buy the radio at the 50 Mb price but get a 100 Mb radio) to show attendees (this is worth thousands of dollars per link). That said, now that you've listened to my snide remark -- I'm actually going to provide some useful information (consider it the cost of free but useful advice =) To go 9-17 miles, you will have to use either the 6 or 11 GHz frequencies...FCC Part 101 stipulates a minimum dish size of 4' for 11 GHz, and 6' for 6 GHz -- the first question you must ask yourself is whether this doable for your towers/rooftops? Anyone who tells you that 18 GHz (which allows for a 2' dish size) will do the link for has no idea what they're talking about. I would recommend reading the following article put out by Broadband Wireless Magazine a few years ago helping WISPs understand Point-to-Point Licensed Links http://www.shorecliffcommunications.com/magazine/volume.asp?Vol=39story=365 If you have any additional questions, feel free to ping me offlist -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bobby Burrow Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:21 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Licensed Backhaul options I'm looking at moving to a licensed solution to increase throughput across one of out backhaul links that spans 5 hops. Distances between hops range anywhere from 7 to 19 miles. We are currently using the dual nstreme Mikrotik solution and it is working very well, however the WRAP/RB532 solutions are only yielding ~25Mb per hop. Can anyone recommend a licensed radio manufacturer that should net us 50Mb-100Mb per hop? Thanks, Bobby Burrow East Texas Rural Net www.etxrn.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.4/282 - Release Date: 3/15/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Rodopi Vs. Platypus
Title: Message another WISP / ISP OSS vendor to check out is Airpath Wireless - www.airpath.com They come from the WiFi side, and are trying to do a few interesting things for fixed wireless ISPs (in respect to roamingideas, etc) -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.VillariniSent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:17 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Rodopi Vs. Platypus What are the hardware requierements? We are trying to choose between the soft pkg or the hosted application Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis JohnsonSent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:04 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Rodopi Vs. Platypus Hi,We have been running Rodopi for almost 8 years now. It works great and we have never had a problem.TravisMicroservG.Villarini wrote: Any info on the pro and cons of both billing platforms ? Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] WiNOG AUSTIN TX - MARCH 13-15 - JOIN MOTOROLA FOR FREE ADVANCED CANOPY TRAINING ($995 VALUE)
Join us this month in Austin, TX at WiNOG, the premier forum for the exchange of technical information and discussion of specific implementation issues that organizations involved in the design, deployment and operation of wireless networks face on a daily basis. CPT300: ADVANCED CANOPY TECHNICAL TRAINING This one-day instructor-led course teaches advanced topics pertaining to Canopy systems. This course builds off the foundation established in the Canopy Technical Training course, covering both RF and IP topics in more depth. Hands-On Labs provide in-depth experience working with Canopy equipment (Access Point and Subscriber Modules). More info at: http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/sessions/day1_moto.htm FREE VIP EXPO / VENDOR SESSION PASS The WiNOG Expo Hall and Vendor Application Sessions feature the latest in broadband wireless, WiMAX, WiFi, Mesh and much more. WiNOG has gone beyond just equipment to include software, applications, entertainment and content. Attend Vendor Application Sessions to see how the latest technologies, demonstrations and technical presentations are designed to meet the substantial business and technology needs of today's network operator. Register NOW online at www.winog.com --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Adzilla Revenue Streams
What are the subs that I have to have to get a system like this??? Jory Privett WCCS Hi Jory, Are you coming to WiNOG? The people from Adzilla will be there, so you can meet them first-hand and talk with them directly -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jory Privett Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 6:10 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Adzilla Revenue Streams - Original Message - From: Eric DaVersa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 5:34 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Adzilla Revenue Streams The simple answer to that is don't use that option. The ad optimization is transparent and its basically free money. I usually have to say it 3 times before ISPs start to understand the concept, so in the interest of saving time... It's free money, it's free money, and - you guessed it - it's still free money. Eric DaVersa Vice-President, Business Development NetLogix OFFICE: 858.764.1998 CELL: 858.245.6702 FAX: 858.764.1982 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Adzilla Revenue Streams North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - - Original Message - From: Eric DaVersa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 8:57 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Adzilla Revenue Streams For a Network Operator, you have some incredible new tools as part of the package. You have a GUI interface where you can insert messaging DIRECT TO THE DESKTOP. This means, Dear Customer, your payment is 7 days past due, your account will be shut off if you do not pay within x hours. I think if I tried that with my customers, I would be losing, not gaining, customers. The notion of inserting something into thier data is... too intrusive for me to consider. North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] New revenue stream *THREAD CLOSED!*
Title: Message Like it or not, it is worth noting that p0rn accounts for a VAST OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of Internet traffic -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron WallaceSent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:05 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] New revenue stream *THREAD CLOSED!* Rick, I can certainly understand that many among us are offended by the very mention of nudity on the internet, however, I do not understand why the topicin question cannot be discussed on the WISPA list. I understood the WISPA lists to be a forum of discussion to determine how 'members' felt about the activities of the FCC, and how we could have our interests represented, for example. Rick why is it 'not proper' for us to discuss the propriety of allowing nude web sites, or not allowing, based upon the free and open discussion of the precise impropriety of the question Mr. Huppenthal asked? I am a paid member, I do not allow, if I know, sexually explicit material on my system. Notwithstanding, I believe that an open discussion of the very issue Mr. Huppenthal raised might clear the air and set some valuable guidelines forus all. Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: Rick Harnish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 09:35 PMTo: ''WISPA General List''Subject: RE: [WISPA] New revenue stream *THREAD CLOSED!*Alex,Please take this offlist. This is not proper content for discussion on theWispa list servs.Respectfully, Rick HarnishPresidentSupernova Technologies, Inc.260-827-2482 Office[EMAIL PROTECTED]Founding Member of WISPA -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OnBehalf Of A. HuppenthalSent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 8:46 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] New revenue streamI have client who asked me if a tasteful nude picture web server would be okay to deploy on the network.They are willing to pay 5 times the normal rate for co-location, plus additional fees for high load times.When I called Qwest to find out about their policy they said they aren't in the business of clensing the net or otherwise filtering content.Since this server is not one of the companies, I wonder what sort of liability exists..It appears this is a huge source of revenue. In fact the same crew says they want to provide DRM downloadable movies of the adult nature.Now I've watched with some interest, what the major hotel chains are doing and how much pay per view adult movies add to their bottom line. I don't think this is a simple - you know I don't like it myself - answer. Its policy, revenue and finding the proper ground.Any experience with this?-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance
snip I think everyone of us need to be in our own VoIP business!! I have even given thought to a Coop kind of deal, but I need to have some more beer and thoughts on that :-) /snip Mac, You need some BEER -N- WIRELESS GEAR -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance
snip We pay between $0.002 to $0.005 per minute on average for domestic long distance. /snip Matt, Out of curiosity...do you mean 2-5 cents per minute? Or 0.2 to 0.5 cents per minute? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 2:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance The notion of avoiding toll costs by working with other WISPs sounds great in theory. From our standpoint, it would cost us more to connect to a single WISP than to pay our entire long distance bill. -Matt Mac Dearman wrote: I agree with that bit of advice whole heartedly Matt! We are in the process of setting up our own VoIP solution as we speak. I think that by the time that 100 of us WISPs get into our own VoIP offerings we can allow access from the other WISPs PRI's...etc for PSTN access to limit the amount of LD charges if their is availble access from a fellow WISP...etc I think everyone of us need to be in our own VoIP business!! I have even given thought to a Coop kind of deal, but I need to have some more beer and thoughts on that :-) Mac Dearman Maximum Access, LLC. Authorized Barracuda Reseller MikroTik RouterOS Certified www.inetsouth.com www.mac-tel.us www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief) Rayville, La. 318.728.8600 318.303.4228 318.303.4229 - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 1:21 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance In our case, the most expense part of our VoIP deployment was getting our network ready to support it correctly. Whether the backend is outsourced doesn't affect the requirement to support end-to-end QoS. Therefore, I believe that you should either get in all the way or not at all. The worst thing in the world you could do is bundle a 3rd party service that doesn't work very well and then because it is outsourced not be able to fix it. -Matt Tom DeReggi wrote: MAtt, I agree with you on most of your comments. However, there is more to it. Offering VOIP is not just about making money on it. Its about controlling who has access to your subscribers, if one does not have the time to be a VOIP provider themselves. Bundling is a necessarily part of succeeding going in to the future. Its more important that ever to outsource VOIP, if it will likely never be a profitable business. let someone else loose the money, and reap the rewards of bundling today. Give the companies access to your clients that will be the lowest threat. What benefit is it to allow, Vonage, ATT, Comcast, Verizon access to your client base, by allowing your subscribers to choose their VOIP options? So Matt, I agree if the ISP/WISP intends to make significant money on the service, build your own. But don't knock the Primus/CommPartner models, they have their purpose and will enable many WISPs/ISPs to have an option to offer, that don;t have the resources to build their own. What this industry needs to recognize is that there are industry trends that are going to gain market share, because consumers demand them and are willing to buy. They don't care who makes or looses money, they jsut know how to compare retail price they pay to the quality the receive. JUst like Muni broadband, its a reality of something that is going to happen. So my point is, pick the companies that you want to help succeed, and which ones you want to help NOT succeed, because some of them ARE going to succeed. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 1:09 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance Primus/Lingo is calling every WISP in the country trying to sign them up for a very CommPartners like deal. All of these VoIP providers are using the same shitty model that will be worthless in 2 years time. There is no money to be made in VoIP short-term unless you operate your own equipment. Long-term, there is no money to be made in VoIP at all. VoIP will soon be a loss leader; plan for it or do get into the VoIP business. BTW, Primus makes all their money on international termination. The domestic stuff is losing money hand over fist. -Matt John Scrivner wrote: Primus tells me they are more than a VOIP company and that they do make money. They impressed me in my dealings with them. Can you share more about your information about Primus? I have a big interest in knowing anything I can about them right now. Thanks, Scriv Peter R. wrote: You haven't seen it yet, because Lingo is not profitable yet. Primus
RE: [WISPA] WiNog
Jory Give me a call 773.326.4614 x534 and I'll try to work something out for you -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jory Privett Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:57 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] WiNog Does anyone have a source for some passes that wont cost me $395. I will only be able to attend for one day Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000
Title: Message Have you looked at Airaya's web site? It's pretty informative: http://www.airaya.com/products/p2m.asp -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 10:05 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000 Whats the deal n the airaya stuff? Are they making the 5.3 stuff? What are the specs? Dan MetcalfWireless Broadband Systemswww.wbisp.com781-846-6798 ext 6201[EMAIL PROTECTED]support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 11:04 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000 Hiya Matt, I used to sell Solectek gear. Years ago. It was a good company with good gear as I recall. If you are up and running and have a good reputation in your market it never hurts to try new toys. These days most of the gear I'm buying for links like that comes from Airaya. It's great stuff and I LOVE the 5.3 band! laters, Marlon(509) 982-2181 Equipment sales(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp!64.146.146.12 (net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Matt Glaves To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:49 PM Subject: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000 I have never used the Solectek equipment and am looking at either trying their Skyway 7101 or the Trango Atlas for some short building to building links. I have seen enough favorable posts about the Atlas to know plenty of you are using it successfully although I sure wish I could get one of their sales folks to return a phone call. Leave a message about buying 250 CPEs and no one calls back Anyway J I would like to get opinions on the Skyway 7000. This would be for very short .5 mile links between buildings. We would normally use Terabeam/Proxim systems but are looking for alternatives with similar capabilities and 20-40% lower cost. Any info/opinions on reliability and real world throughput would be great. Thanks, Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/267 - Release Date: 02/22/2006 --No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/267 - Release Date: 02/22/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services -- Some Observations
Generally, we end up debating all day and all night on the lists of what's the best radio or who's got those cool blue lights -- however, FWIW, I've noticed that there seldom is any debate on useful topics like sales marketing (especially of the product positioning of license-exempt wireless) Do we call it wDSL? Wireless? More than Wifi? WiMAX? -- who knows? But fuel the fire with a few observations - rant - ARPU is an acronym for the Average Revenue per User. This is the average revenue factored across all customers as if each were charged the same price -- with some customers charged less and others more. Customer type usually determines price. In addition, a Network Operator's valuation is a direct multiple of its ARPU. The Marginal Recurring Cost (MRC) as compared to its Service Level / Marginal Recurring Revenue (MRR) of delivering the following license-exempt broadband wireless WiMAX connections have been calculated as follows: Broadband Lite Residential Service (512 / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $24.95 MRC: $20 Best Effort Residential Service (5 Mb / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $39.95 MRC: $20 Best Effort Business Class Service (5 Mb / 1 Mb Burstable) MRR: $149.95 MRC: $25 Dedicated Business Class Service (5 Mb / 3 Mb Burstable) (1 Mb / 1 Mb Dedicated) MRR: $249.95 MRC: $30 Dedicated Business SLA Service (5 Mb / 3 Mb Burstable) (3 Mb / 3 Mb Dedicated) MRR: $449.95 MRC: $40 Looking at the numbers, it's obvious that a higher ARPU increases the overall health of the bottom line. Interestingly enough, all the following service plans are achieved using the EXACT SAME license-exempt broadband wireless access technology. So why is the differentiating factor that allows some WISPs to sell that Canopy/Trango/Alvarion/whatever last mile connection for $300+ month ARPU while other can barely get $30 / month ARPU? IT'S OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN JUST TECHNOLOGY... - rant - -Charles -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Wisp In Killington VT?
Title: Message East Coast Snow =( Go Rockies -- east coast is WAY too icy -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G.VillariniSent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 4:52 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Wisp In Killington VT? Hey folks, I up in Killington VT doing some skiying Who the wisp servicing the area with Trango stuff? Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --Some Observations
snip Generally speaking, we have found the cost/time to sell a customer is the same no matter how large the service delivered is. In other words, it takes just as long to sell a DS3 as it does a T1 even though the DS3 is significantly more profitable. /snip Hi Matt, I would disagree with you on the above statement IMO, I've found that the SMB service offering (e.g., sub-T1 to 3xT1) plans seem to be the most profitable (highest margin) opportunities available Once you get to carrier services (e.g., 10+ Mb) -- the big guys start to take notice and completely drop their pants -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --Some Observations We have observed the following: It is easier to explain wireless after the fact then to sell wireless itself. In other words, we sell a service that provides X amount of internet access and Y phone lines that we just happen to deliver wirelessly. Once a customer is sold on the value of the service it is easy to explain the benefits of fixed wireless over copper. Our T1 price is lower than the rest of the market, but it is easier and more profitable to sell 3Mbps at the market price of a T1 then to sell our lower priced T1 service. All of the above means that while we are a seemingly large WISP, we don't have that many customers; our ARPU is just very high. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: Generally, we end up debating all day and all night on the lists of what's the best radio or who's got those cool blue lights -- however, FWIW, I've noticed that there seldom is any debate on useful topics like sales marketing (especially of the product positioning of license-exempt wireless) Do we call it wDSL? Wireless? More than Wifi? WiMAX? -- who knows? But fuel the fire with a few observations - rant - ARPU is an acronym for the Average Revenue per User. This is the average revenue factored across all customers as if each were charged the same price -- with some customers charged less and others more. Customer type usually determines price. In addition, a Network Operator's valuation is a direct multiple of its ARPU. The Marginal Recurring Cost (MRC) as compared to its Service Level / Marginal Recurring Revenue (MRR) of delivering the following license-exempt broadband wireless WiMAX connections have been calculated as follows: Broadband Lite Residential Service (512 / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $24.95 MRC: $20 Best Effort Residential Service (5 Mb / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $39.95 MRC: $20 Best Effort Business Class Service (5 Mb / 1 Mb Burstable) MRR: $149.95 MRC: $25 Dedicated Business Class Service (5 Mb / 3 Mb Burstable) (1 Mb / 1 Mb Dedicated) MRR: $249.95 MRC: $30 Dedicated Business SLA Service (5 Mb / 3 Mb Burstable) (3 Mb / 3 Mb Dedicated) MRR: $449.95 MRC: $40 Looking at the numbers, it's obvious that a higher ARPU increases the overall health of the bottom line. Interestingly enough, all the following service plans are achieved using the EXACT SAME license-exempt broadband wireless access technology. So why is the differentiating factor that allows some WISPs to sell that Canopy/Trango/Alvarion/whatever last mile connection for $300+ month ARPU while other can barely get $30 / month ARPU? IT'S OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN JUST TECHNOLOGY... - rant - -Charles -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --SomeObservations
snip I desperately need a GOOD VOIP wholesale deal, where I own the customer and do frontline support, it's my own brand (if I brand it) and I merely bulk buy minutes, numbers, and CPE.I can't sell my customers a 400 minute account that costs me 25 bucks a month. They can buy Packet8 for less than most resell deals. /snip You're thinking like the ISP techie -- e.g., if I'm not better / cheaper / faster...then I can't be in business Obviously, this isn't how things work Case in point -- I know of a market that consists of 2 Canopy WISPs -- the owners / principles of one come from a techie / residential ISP background, and sell wireless broadband connections (various rates of 1 Mb, 2 Mb, 3 Mb burstable connections) for $29-69 / month In the same market, the 2nd Canopy WISP has people who come from a carrier / enterprise sales background, and they sell the EXACT SAME WIRELESS CONNECTION (from a technological standpoint that is, it's still an unlicensed Motorola SM / AP) for $300-600 / month Now, it is worth noting that the guys in WISP #2 are 100 lbs overweight, have grey hair, and wear suits, while the guys in WISP #1 (although in their late 20s now) -- still resemble adolescent college fraternity kids However, when they first hit the market, I was thinking, jeez, these guys (WISP #2) are absolutely nuts, they're morons, trying to sell overpriced @#$@ -- they'll never turn on a customer Yet consistently, I see guys from WISP #2 outsell guys from WISP #1 in competitive deals (e.g., customer has a T1 line they're paying $500 / month for, and WISP #1 comes in and tries to sell a 3 Mb connection for $69 -- nothing happens -- 3 months later, WISP #2 comes in and sells a 3 Mb dedicated connection for $600 / month to the same customer) Go figure... -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:09 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --SomeObservations Quote: IT'S OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN JUST TECHNOLOGY... yes, it is. More to the point, it's about meeting your customer's needs or wants. Not shoving things at them they don't need or want, but genuinely discovering what it is that sparks them to buy in the first place. I'd rather just bundle a VOIP service in a higher level tier (let's move from 38 / mo to 55 or 60/mo ) of service, but needs to be affordable for me to do. Still, nobody's offering this kind of service, that I can find. Either it is sold as raw products (requiring me to build a whole VOIP system for my customers use) or as higher than retail priced wholesale programs. What I really need, then, is someone who does more of the backend stuff (including providing e911) but does so in mass quantity, and doesn't touch my customer. I've also found that pc service can be a good side venture, but I'm not convinced that we can actually compete on price with the computer store. If we're busy, it's better value for our time to install and support our own services. Just random thoughts on the topic... North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - - Original Message - From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com Cc: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 2:45 PM Subject: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services -- SomeObservations Generally, we end up debating all day and all night on the lists of what's the best radio or who's got those cool blue lights -- however, FWIW, I've noticed that there seldom is any debate on useful topics like sales marketing (especially of the product positioning of license-exempt wireless) Do we call it wDSL? Wireless? More than Wifi? WiMAX? -- who knows? But fuel the fire with a few observations - rant - ARPU is an acronym for the Average Revenue per User. This is the average revenue factored across all customers as if each were charged the same price -- with some customers charged less and others more. Customer type usually determines price. In addition, a Network Operator's valuation is a direct multiple of its ARPU. The Marginal Recurring Cost (MRC) as compared to its Service Level / Marginal Recurring Revenue (MRR) of delivering the following license-exempt broadband wireless WiMAX connections have been calculated as follows: Broadband Lite Residential Service (512 / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $24.95 MRC: $20 Best Effort Residential Service (5 Mb / 512 Kb Burstable) MRR: $39.95
RE: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --SomeObservations
snip Maybe you stumbled upon the fact that no one offers what you want because it isn't cost effective to do so. As much as we try to wholesale our VoIP offers to other WISPs, they want their cake and eat it too. Being an ISP or for that matter a VoIP provider requires either relying on others' infrastructure, making thin margins, and making it up in volume or building out your own infrastructure and making great margins. There really is no in-between. /snip I know a lot of people out there who are willing to pay $30+ / month for a VoIP handset (in fact, my office has 40 handsets, and we still pay an outsourced VoIP provider $30 / month FOR EVERY SINGLE HANDSET -- then we get charged per minute local / long-distance rates) Another example A good friend of mine runs a colocation company in the Equinix IBX -- he charges $50 / month per U of rack space IBM, in a cage less than 50' away from him, charges $1k / month per U for rack space IBM has more colo'd servers than my friend Maybe you just aren't selling properly? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:26 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sales Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services --SomeObservations Mark Koskenmaki wrote: I'd rather just bundle a VOIP service in a higher level tier (let's move from 38 / mo to 55 or 60/mo ) of service, but needs to be affordable for me to do. Still, nobody's offering this kind of service, that I can find. Either it is sold as raw products (requiring me to build a whole VOIP system for my customers use) or as higher than retail priced wholesale programs. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000
Title: Message Hi Matt, Your questions on the Skyway 7000 Trango Atlas would be answered by our Backhaul Bash Report (costs $3k) or--you can go to WiNOG and see a presentation of the results live http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/sessions/day3_backhaul1.htm http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/sessions/day3_backhaul2.htm -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt GlavesSent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:50 PMTo: wireless@wispa.orgSubject: [WISPA] Solectek Skyway 7000 I have never used the Solectek equipment and am looking at either trying their Skyway 7101 or the Trango Atlas for some short building to building links. I have seen enough favorable posts about the Atlas to know plenty of you are using it successfully although I sure wish I could get one of their sales folks to return a phone call. Leave a message about buying 250 CPEs and no one calls back Anyway J I would like to get opinions on the Skyway 7000. This would be for very short .5 mile links between buildings. We would normally use Terabeam/Proxim systems but are looking for alternatives with similar capabilities and 20-40% lower cost. Any info/opinions on reliability and real world throughput would be great. Thanks, Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput)
Title: Message Are there any notes from the session? The winog website doesnt show anything. it's one of those things where you "kinda have to be there" Also, you mention the login script is broken on wispreviews.com but I cant even browse the forms as a guest. Here's the problem Due to excessive spamming / trolling, we had to configure the forums where you can't browse unless you have a user account (there's no charge for that) the problem is is that the site got hacked about 1-2 months ago, and although we were able to recover the database, the login script (though working) -- is misleading b/c when you log in, it goes to a file not found page (if you go back, the cookie is saved and you are technically logged in) to compound the problem, the administrative interface is broken too, so it is impossible for me to log in and change things sniff our current network admin guy can't seem to figure it out -Charles P.S. I'm still looking for a goodphp guy to help fix things here ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan BouterseSent: Monday, February 20, 2006 10:07 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) Dylan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles WuSent: Monday, February 20, 2006 8:10 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) old news =) that was covered at the last WiNOG http://www.winog.com/park-city_2005/sessions/day2_900mhz_bakeoff.htm another place to check is http://www.wispreviews.com (the login script is broken, but if you fiddle around with it, you should be able to get in) -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan BouterseSent: Monday, February 20, 2006 9:17 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) We are in the beginning stages of evaluating 900MHz for our wireless portfolio. Im very interested to hear about implemented systems and what kind of max throughput and latency is expected. Any help is greatly appreciated. Dylan Bouterse . Sr. System Engineer___p. 352.253.2200 f. 352.742.2211 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] i.http://www.power1.com - www.onepowerfulsolution.com - www.power1golf.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput)
FWIW -- wispreviews is just a little blogging site to help people in the industry out We used PhpBB b/c it was easy to setup and fairliy intuitive (for not so computer savy people like me) Do you have any better suggestions? -Charles P.S. -- if it'd help the list, I can still access the databases, and I could post the 900 Mhz stuff on the listserv for all to see - as text though =( --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) Charles Wu wrote: P.S. I'm still looking for a goodphp guy to help fix things here The first step would be to stop using PHP or for that matter any other language that encourages unmaintainable code. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Wispcon? - OFFLIST
Title: Message
Hi
Linda,
This
is offlist, since I don't want to spam the listserv with Unsolicited Commercial
Email
The
next event is scheduled for March 13-15, 2006 -- check our website: www.winog.com for a full list of exhibitors /
speaking sessions / etc
btw --
we're still working out the details w/ the new WISPA board this year, but we've
got an arrangement from past shows where we offera WISPA discount coupon
code (use WISPA06 when registering online) which will give a $100 off conference
registration -- in addition, for each person who uses the code, we make a $50
donation to WISPA
-Charles
---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch
13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Linda PondSent: Monday, February 20, 2006 11:34
PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA]
Wispcon?
Thanks, Charles. Steve had lots of great
things to say about WiNOG. Good work.
When is the next one, hmmm?
Linda
Linda PondPresidentCustomer
Connects"Bridging Technology Relationships"www.customerconnects.com613-253-0240
(w)613-291-2884 (c)BLOG: http://lindaleepond.blogspot.com/
- Original Message -
From:
Charles Wu
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 8:18
PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Wispcon?
Hi
Linda,
This is what Steve Stroh has to say about WiNOG, WISPCON, Broadband
Wireless World, WiMAXWorld
WiNOG is well-positioned to
serve a segment of the Broadband Wireless industry that has gone unnoticed
and unserved. PART-15.ORGs WISPCON focuses on smaller and startup Wireless
Internet Service Providers (WISPs), The combination of Wireless
Communications Associations (WCA) two annual conferences, Shorecliff
Communications Broadband Wireless World, and Trendsmedias WiMAX World
focuses on much larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service
Providers.
WiNOG targets WISPs that are
well beyond the startup phase in longevity of business, overall scale of
business, network, and number of customers, but have not yet grown to have
their needs met by the three larger conferences. This is a very real, but
specialized market segment, and Charles Wu, Operating Manager of CWLab, has
laser-focused WiNOG to serve this segment very well. While WiNOG is an ideal
conference to attend for WISPs that are intent on growing larger and have
already started to endure the pains of growth, WiNOGs main audience is to
provide peer-to-peer experience exchanges between the Big WISPs.
Full article is: http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/vendors/what_i_learned_at_winog.pdf
-Charles
---WiNOG Austin,
TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181Sent: Monday,
February 20, 2006 6:38 PMTo: Linda Pond; WISPA General
ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Wispcon?
Hiya Toots!
That last joke you sent me want funny!
I'd have beaten the biker dude! LOL
Anyhow, which show you should go to really
depends on what you want to do. If I had my way I'd go to ALL of
them. They ALL have something to offer if you're willing to listen
and learn.
I just got back from the annual www.ec-expo.com. That's a free
show with lots of product specific stuff. There's a GREAT group that
goes to this one and lots of help is available. Charles, Matt, I,
Damien (Tranzeo), and a few others (forgive me) had a very good very high
level chat about a number of things. I picked up quite a few new
bits from here and there. AND I ran into David Huges. I hope I
am half as with it at 78 as he is! (Yeah yeah, I'm already half as
good. Har har grin)
WISPCON has always been about nothing but
wisps.
WCA is more carrier based.
ISPCon is a GREAT show. The wireless
track is light as there's usually only one track. But there's a lot
to running a wisp than just wireless stuff.
I think about the best mix would be to go to
one or two different ones each year.
That help?
Marlon(509)
982-2181
Equipment sales(408) 907-6910
(Vonage)
Consulting services42846865
(icq)
And I run my own wisp!64.146.146.12 (net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From:
Linda Pond
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006
2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WISP
RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput)
Well...look at http://www.wispreviews.com It's basically a blog site where WISPs post reviews of the gear they've used (expeiences, 2 thumbs up, stuff sucks, etc) In an idea world, I'd like something like DSL Reports -- where you could even rate it and stuff -- but being a free site, we don't have much from a budget perspective -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:38 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) Charles Wu wrote: Do you have any better suggestions? What are your requirements? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput)
Title: Message old news =) that was covered at the last WiNOG http://www.winog.com/park-city_2005/sessions/day2_900mhz_bakeoff.htm another place to check is http://www.wispreviews.com (the login script is broken, but if you fiddle around with it, you should be able to get in) -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan BouterseSent: Monday, February 20, 2006 9:17 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] 900MHz performance (Latency, Throughput) We are in the beginning stages of evaluating 900MHz for our wireless portfolio. Im very interested to hear about implemented systems and what kind of max throughput and latency is expected. Any help is greatly appreciated. Dylan Bouterse . Sr. System Engineer___p. 352.253.2200 f. 352.742.2211 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] i.http://www.power1.com - www.onepowerfulsolution.com - www.power1golf.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Wispcon?
Title: Message Hi Linda, This is what Steve Stroh has to say about WiNOG, WISPCON, Broadband Wireless World, WiMAXWorld WiNOG is well-positioned to serve a segment of the Broadband Wireless industry that has gone unnoticed and unserved. PART-15.ORGs WISPCON focuses on smaller and startup Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), The combination of Wireless Communications Associations (WCA) two annual conferences, Shorecliff Communications Broadband Wireless World, and Trendsmedias WiMAX World focuses on much larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers. WiNOG targets WISPs that are well beyond the startup phase in longevity of business, overall scale of business, network, and number of customers, but have not yet grown to have their needs met by the three larger conferences. This is a very real, but specialized market segment, and Charles Wu, Operating Manager of CWLab, has laser-focused WiNOG to serve this segment very well. While WiNOG is an ideal conference to attend for WISPs that are intent on growing larger and have already started to endure the pains of growth, WiNOGs main audience is to provide peer-to-peer experience exchanges between the Big WISPs. Full article is: http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/vendors/what_i_learned_at_winog.pdf -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 6:38 PMTo: Linda Pond; WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] Wispcon? Hiya Toots! That last joke you sent me want funny! I'd have beaten the biker dude! LOL Anyhow, which show you should go to really depends on what you want to do. If I had my way I'd go to ALL of them. They ALL have something to offer if you're willing to listen and learn. I just got back from the annual www.ec-expo.com. That's a free show with lots of product specific stuff. There's a GREAT group that goes to this one and lots of help is available. Charles, Matt, I, Damien (Tranzeo), and a few others (forgive me) had a very good very high level chat about a number of things. I picked up quite a few new bits from here and there. AND I ran into David Huges. I hope I am half as with it at 78 as he is! (Yeah yeah, I'm already half as good. Har har grin) WISPCON has always been about nothing but wisps. WCA is more carrier based. ISPCon is a GREAT show. The wireless track is light as there's usually only one track. But there's a lot to running a wisp than just wireless stuff. I think about the best mix would be to go to one or two different ones each year. That help? Marlon(509) 982-2181 Equipment sales(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp!64.146.146.12 (net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Linda Pond To: WISPA General List Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wispcon? Excellent post, Tom. I have been an attendee and a presenter at WISPCON I and II. Once with anOptical Wireless company, Plaintree Systems and once with Marlon's startupof 2002, WNOC. Both were outstanding experiences. I personally got alot of value from the WISPCON shows, especially meeting the people behind the posts on this (and other) lists. Those WISPCON days were more about the relationships. This list has some close roots,and the shows then were about connecting, wirelessly and spiritually, so-to-speak. I met Marlon and Bullet and Steve Stroh (hiya Steve!) for the first time in Chicago, and it was a hoot!Learning and having fun are two things that do it for me, especially if I can do them at the same time. I have been away from the directWISP loop since 2002,running my own kind of Networking business.However, I still enjoy the WISP listconversations, and have stayed in touch. And am glad I did stay in touch, for I have just signed an agreement to work with a company called Arryba Communications - whose mission is to provide high speed Internet to Rural Eastern Ontario (that's me!).Besides being obvious self-interest, Arryba has a very interesting business model, and their timing and leadership are spot on. I would like to attend a spring show, and would beinterested in knowing where the best shows are now, for its time for me to reconnect with the WISP world. Marlon? Steve? Victoria? Where do you guys hang? Linda Linda PondPresidentCustomer Connects"Bridging Technology Relationships"www.customerconnects.com613-253-0240 (w)613-2
RE: [WISPA] Wispcon?
Title: Message Hi Chris, Here is something that Steve Stroh (who is a member of this listserv and who speaks at ALL shows including WISPCON, ISPCON, WiNOG) wrote about WiNOG http://www.winog.com/austin_2006/vendors/what_i_learned_at_winog.pdf (P.S. -- he wasn't paid by us to do this or anything) -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chris cooperSent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:59 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Wispcon? SO what do most folks here do about shows like wispcon? I attended the one in DC last year and it appeared to be sparsely attended both on the wisp and vendor sides. I always thought the shows were a good chance to get together and share ideas etc. Do you value them? If you could attend one show would it be wispcon/ispcon/winog? Thanks, chris -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Experimental Licensing in the 3650 MHz Band - Clarifications
Recently, there have been some misleading advertisements promising turn-key 3.65 GHz licensing services as a means of avoiding interference in congested license-exempt ISM/UNII bands. Although the FCC issued adopted rules back in March 2005 to open access to new spectrum for wireless broadband in the 3.65 GHz band, a minor contention-based requirement has delayed the deployment of wireless broadband services in this band as equipment manufacturers currently work behind the scenes to iron out the details. As things currently stand, deploying a 3.65 GHz system today falls under Subpart 5: Experimental Radio Service of the FCC Rules. Infrastructure Investment Experimentation under Part 5 needs to be done strictly from a curiosity perspective rather than one of commercial network expansion. Part 5 permits experimentation in scientific or technical operations directly related to the use of radio waves. The rules provide the opportunity to experiment with new techniques or new services prior to submitting proposals to the FCC to change its rules. Some useful excerpts regarding Experimental Licensing 47CFR5.3: Scope of Service Stations operating in the Experimental Radio Service will be permitted to conduct the following type of operations: (a)Experimentations in scientific or technical radio research (b) Experimentations under contractual agreement with the United States Government, or for export purposes. (c)Communications essential to a research project. (d) Technical demonstrations of equipment or techniques. (e)Field strength surveys by persons not eligible for authorization in any other service. (f) Demonstration of equipment to prospective purchasers by persons engaged in the business of selling radio equipment. (g)Testing of equipment in connection with production or regulatory approval of such equipment. (h)Development of radio technique, equipment or engineering data not related to an existing or proposed service, including field or factory testing or calibration of equipment. (i) Development of radio technique, equipment, operational data or engineering data related to an existing or proposed radio service. (j) Limited market studies. (k) Types of experiments that are not specifically covered under paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section will be considered upon demonstration of need 47CFR5.51: Eligibility of License (a)Authorizations for stations in the Experimental Radio Service will be issued only to persons qualified to conduct experimentation utilizing radio waves for scientific or technical operation data directly related to a use of radio not provided by existing rules; or for communications in connection with research projects when existing communications facilities are inadequate. 47CFR5.63: Supplementary Statements (a)Each applicant for an authorization in the Experimental Radio Service must enclose with the application a narrative statement describing in detail the program of research and experimentation proposed, the specific objectives sought to be accomplished; and how the program of experimentation has a reasonable promise of contribution to the development, extension, or expansion, or utilization of the radio art, or is along lines not already investigated. For further information regarding experimental licensing, the FCC has a nice online FAQ that gives a step-by-step how-to on experimental licensing: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/elbfaqs.html --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] BPSK QAM16 DSSS interference
As you start to walk up the modulation line you definitely need more C/I, but you also start to loose the ability to use full power out of the radio. A small bit of trivial regarding this issue With higher order modulation schemes, the EVM (Error Vector Magnitude) can be so high that even on a perfect link (no noise) the receive chip is incable of decoding the signal properly into the correct 64 dots of the QAM modulation plot. This QAM constellation interference can be represented by a grid of 8x8 dots that are being blurred by the transmitter not handling the signals with enough linearity (e.g., the radio power amp is turned to high). When too much blur occurs, the adjacent dots touch each other and the receiver will not be able to decipher the signal (it's blurred) -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Collisions in RF
That's why many, on a quarterly basis, liberally apply their WiFi Lubrication -- keeps things well oiled and humming http://j-walk.com/other/wifispray/ wink -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 3:09 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Collisions in RF Generally speaking the collisions occur at the antenna itself - on the RF receive side Mac Dearman Maximum Access, LLC. Authorized Barracuda Reseller MikroTik RouterOS Certified www.inetsouth.com www.mac-tel.us Rayville, La. 318.728.8600 318.303.4227 318.303.4229 Paul Hendry wrote: Hi all, As standard 802.11 is a half-duplex technology, does anyone know exactly where collisions occur? I.e. is it in the air between antennas, on the feeder inside the antenna, on the jumper/pigtail between the antenna and the radio, on the radio card itself, or all of the above? Cheers, P. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
it has the Chester cheese doodle mount Lol...would you mind posting a pic of what such a mount looks like? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] wisp-router
Title: Message Johnny, I am just pointing out to Brian that maybe it isn't the best idea to destroy his relationship with WISP-Router Not advocating that Brian keep quiet about his issue -- but just merely pointing out to him the "human side" of business Basically, Brian (right or wrong) feels"cheated" by WISP-Router -- and in the "heat" of the moment (understandedly so), he decides to try to "get back" at WISP-Router by (a) charging back his credit card (b) flaming them on a public forum that many of WISP-Router's existing and potential customers may belong to After seeing this, WISP-Router has probably placed him on some sort of "customer blacklist" (e.g., Brian is one of those PITA customers, so ignore him when he calls, charge him higher prices -- basically, he is to WISP-Router what a to the vendor the lady that calls about her "computer broken coffee holder" is to an ISP) Now, disecting the circumstances further, it turns out that Brian isn't exactly "in the clear" (e.g., he should have verified / checked his packing slip ASAP upon receipt, not wait until weeks afterword until the minute he needed the part) -- so other vendors watching this list may also now categorize Brian as a potential "problem customer" What happens when Brian has a tower go down at 5 pm on Friday and wisp-router is the only one that has that RB (or whatever) board in stock -- so he calls them asking them to bend over backwards to help him out -- chances are, the WISP-Router people might be "hrm...that was the guy that screwed us a couple months ago by charging back his credit card and flaming us on the list -- screw him" -Charles ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyOSent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:44 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] wisp-routerCharles - the big bad vendors have to learn when they mistreat someone there will be fallout - I think a public open list is the perfect place to post reviews on products and vendors. How else will others know ? Whisper it into everyone's ear ?JohnnyOOn Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:09 -0600, Charles Wu wrote: Hi Brian, Just a word of advice Although I realize that you are quite displeased with your current service levels from WISP-Router (right or wrong, I don't know enough about the story to make an appopriate judgement), immediately calling your credit card company and filing a fraud complaint / dispute is one way to BURN YOUR BRIDGE with that particular vendor Then again, posting a flame against them across public listservs doesn't really help either... -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] wisp-router Anyone ever have trouble with them. FYI They just informed me it is my fault they didn't ship me out what I paid for. I've never done anything with Mikrotik. I ordered what a friend told me to, I don't know what anything looks like, I assumed when I looked in the box it was all there. Well, I have Butch lined up an am ready to use it and...imagine that, I'm missing parts. Maybe I didn't call within the first 7 days. Who gives a fart! Be warned. I just got screwed. Credit card dispute to the rescue again. Ahh, this just pisses me off. I should get what I paid for. I don't lie. I know I didn't get the part. Speaking of not getting it. Don't these people know the customer (ME) is always right? I can't get away with this crap with my subs, that's for sure. Just so ya'll know, when I first called, the guy I talked to said it looked like it might not have been shipped. They would look into is and call me back. I was happy and thinking how I would post to the list and say how fast they helped me and solved my problem. Nope. Not today. I was promptly called back and blamed for their poor quality control. Also, where can I order a RB564 Daughterboard to replace the one the "ups guy must have stole"? Not wisp-router. Need it overnight. -- Brian Rohrbacher Reliable Internet, LLC www.reliableinter.net Cell 269-838-8338 "Caught up in the Air" 1 Thess. 4:17 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Hi Paul, I haven't been paying attention to this thread close enough to know your exact situation, but it is worth noting that there are always extrra headaches to deal with when trying to jerry-rig consumer grade hardware Remember the days of KarlNet ORiNOCO?? Back in those days, when using an AP-1000 per say, it was necessary to clip the built-in dipoles on a PCMCIA card in order to stem rf bleed Thank goodness for Canopy / Trango / whatever =) -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Hendry Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 2:59 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna Reading further through the RadioWaves docs it clearly states that each polarization is isolated from the other so I'm guessing the issue isn't the dishes or feeds. The radios are mount about a foot from the dishes and the RF cable is LMR-400. Is it possible/plausible that the interference is being caused by one radio card receiving the signal directly from the dish as the radios are mounted so close to the dish? Any other ideas? I'm really stuck with this. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Hendry Sent: 17 January 2006 20:09 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna Just checked the specs for the RadioWaves antennas that I'm having the problems with and see that they have 28dB X-Pol. Rejection would this suggest that the circuitry controlling the 2 feeds are separate? If so, is there anything else that could be preventing us having 2 separate simultaneous links running through these parabolics? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Moldashel Sent: 17 January 2006 18:51 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna Sorry but this whole thread is going sour fast. 1. Dual Polarity antennas work for transmit and receive. They are not TX only or RX only in configuration. 2. The normal isolation between vertical polarity and horizontal polarity can range from 10-30 dB depending on the operating frequency. 3. The biggest issues to using 2 radios on the same dual polarity antenna is the adjacent channel rejection, x-pole polarity, TX power levels and Receiver sensitivity.. 4. 802.XX radios will not work on the same channel because while one radio is transmitting on 5825 GHz. the radio on the other polarity is receiving on the same channel. Considering there is only 10-30 dB of seperation, the radio RX levels will only be reduced by that amount causing receive interference. 5. We have more than 20 dual polarity links running FD radios such as Proxim Tsunamis operating in the same band. Granted, they have much better filtering than the basic 802.XX radio but they work flawlessly.. 6. We presently have 2 DP links in place with 802 style radios. One of the links consists of WRAP/CM9's operating in 5.7-5.8 Ghz. The other has a Proxim MP.11a on one plane and Tranzeo TR-5a on the other. One link is 6.5 miles, the other is 7 miles. There is no desense between radios and both operate fine without interference issues. 7. While Tom may be experiencing the tower rental issues regarding antennas, we have not seen this in the NE. Most leases we have negotiated are based around wind loading on the tower. Like everything, dual polarity antennas have a place like all other equipment. The link just needs to be engineered to operate properly. -B- -- Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. Broadband Deployment Group 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, New York 11741 USA 800-479-9195 Toll Free US Canada 631-585-5558 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 16/01/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 16/01/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 16/01/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 16/01/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives:
RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this?
snip Despite working for a WISP, I can't get my company's service at my house. If it were available here, I'd be a Speakeasy customer in no time, because they're so friendly to the geek market. /snip Out of curiosity -- how does allowing connection sharing qualify as being friendly to the geek market? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners
Not to kick a dead horse here, but I heard the other day (from a WISP friend of mine) that Commpartners has stop installing WISP residential connections (due to E911 compliance issues) for the time being This sucks for him since he's already paid the $5k setup fee and his 1500+ wireless customers are all residential =( Can anyone verify this (right or wrong)? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Shayne Rose
Title: Message Just an FYI - Shayne's contact info was incorrect, revised is as follows... Shayne Rose Director of Channel Sales IP Phone 949-429-4757 Fax 949-487-3340 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesignal.com ---WiNOG Austin, TXMarch 13-15, 2006http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform
Hi Matt, Can you please shed some light on your 3.65 GHz license? To my knowledge (and we work with the FCC on licensing almost on a daily basis) -- 3.65 GHz is not yet legally licensable for commercial common carrier applications -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 8:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform Is there any vendor besides Aperto that has product that will work with our 3.65Ghz license? -Matt Brad Larson wrote: Jeff, LOL. Be careful who you're listening to. Like I said, there is allot of total BS out there being spread by certain people/manufacturer's. There are several waves of certifications coming. Just because we didn't show up for the first wave doesn't mean we don't have a product. When the others get caught up Alvarion will be there for the real test phases. Brad http://www.techworld.com/mobility/features/index.cfm?featureID=2021 http://www.alvarion-usa.com/presscenter/pressreleases/2109/ http://www.alvarion-usa.com/presscenter/pressreleases/ -Original Message- From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:50 PM To: WISPA General List; 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform 3.5 / 2.5 / 5.8 Alvarion I believe from what I heard was waiting for the QOS revision to be agreed on. - Jeff On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:34:42 -0800 , Brad Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Jeff, In what Frequency? There is allot of BS out there in the first wave of testing for those that have yet to get a product to market. We can discuss if you would like? Brad -Original Message- From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:29 PM To: WISPA General List; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform The only product on the market today that will have backwards compatibility to wimax where a cpe can talk to a wimax base station is Aperto. Additionally, Alvarion will not be one of the first round products certified for wimax, Airspan and Aperto however, will be. - Jeff On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:22:30 -0600, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Is there a firmware upgrade path for WiMAX through the VL product line or is it a hardware change? Feel free to have someone contact me offlist for pricing information. I have a need for a PtMP system with more capacity than I have now with my current system. I do not know of many systems that meet the specs you list here and I already know many people are quite fond of the product. Maybe this time the price won't drive me away as has been the case in the past. Please do not take that as a slam. It is not. I know the quality is there and it is a matter of economics for me only that has ever kept me away from Alvarion products. You guys build good stuff and in some markets the price is easily recovered through ROI. Thanks, Scriv Brad Larson wrote: John, Typically 4 sector base stations are built with either 5.3 or a licensed link as backhaul. With BreezeAccess VL, true data sector performance is 28 meg's in a 20 Mhz channel and half that in 10 Mhz Next firmware release is going to mid 30's in a 20 Mhz channel (again true data rates). I know of one sector that has 200 sub's attached although most sectors have less than 100. This customer looked at most manufacturer's gear and concluded Alvarion had the management feature sets, ease of batch processing for firmware uploads, obstructed NLOS for their application, and a host of other likes including Alvarion's support infrastructure. To be honest I don't think we have many Alvarion Operators that subscribe here but that doesn't mean there aren't a crap load of them out there which should be obviuos to everyone. Typically our Operators use Alvarion support Application Engineers and Alvarion web servers such as Mike Cowan's at ACC when needed. This could end up being a long dialog about the differences in operators, products, and ROI models but I won't go there. Brad -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com *** * This footnote confirms that this
RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISP] Renting Spectrum Analyzers
Hi Brian, XL Microwave makes a spectrum analyzer that is extremely easy and simple to use It doesn't have all the add-ons that an anritsu or rhode and shwarz unit will provide, but for the normal user -- those extra buttons / knobs confuse more than anything else I believe that they have a rental program, but I've cc:ed Tom Duckworth from XL Microwave (he's an engineer there) -- and he may be able to better answer your question Their website is: http://www.xlmicrowave.com/ -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com On 1/5/06, Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone in love with one of these? http://www.metrictest.com/catalog/views/rental_specials.jsp?searchTerm =Spectrum%20Analyzers Brian Rohrbacher wrote: Can I get one that does 900, 2.4, and 5 gig? Who has them and how much to rent for 2 weeks to a month? -- Brian Rohrbacher Reliable Internet, LLC www.reliableinter.net Cell 269-838-8338 Caught up in the Air 1 Thess. 4:17 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISP] Renting Spectrum Analyzers
Regarding Avcom The Avcom units require extra modules to go beyond 2.4 On a tower, trying to plug-in something else is kind of a hassle From an ease of use perspective, I would recommend that you find a 1 piece spectrum analyzer...that covers all the bands You'll appreciate it when you're hanging off the tower...trust me =) -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 12:17 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISP] Renting Spectrum Analyzers On Thu, 5 Jan 2006, Jenco Wireless wrote: Wow. For the rental price on some of those you can buy one from BVS Systems. I rented one (I can't remember the name but it was an expensive unit) for $250 per week from Wave Rider. If I remember right (it has been a while), it at least covered 900 and 2.4. You should probably have some antennas of your own ready to go for testing when you get the unit. It is a big and expensive unit, so don't plan on carrying it up a tower ! You could, also, talk to Marlon. He has one for rent, or used to. Also, if you are looking to buy, he is able to sell you one through Electrocom. The Avcom units are pretty useful, and easy to use. The one that I have is built for 2.4GHz only, but they have adapters to add 600-1000MHz and 5-6 GHz. These are VERY lightweight units. I have carried mine up a tower with very little effort. Marlon's rental SA is NOT lightweight at all. :-) -- Butch Evans BPS Networks http://www.bpsnetworks.com/ Bernie, MO Mikrotik Certified Consultant (http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html) -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform
Yes -- experimental licenses have been available for quite some time now -- we have one =) But if you read the FCC rules closely -- there are A LOT of limitations, and no, running a business off such a license is a BAD IDEA -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 2:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform This has been discussed in depth on the private WISPA list. The FCC is giving 3.65Ghz licenses for experimental purposes, which you can use to provide customers with service. However, it may not be a wise business decision to rely on experimental spectrum, which can go away at any time. -Matt Charles Wu wrote: Hi Matt, Can you please shed some light on your 3.65 GHz license? To my knowledge (and we work with the FCC on licensing almost on a daily basis) -- 3.65 GHz is not yet legally licensable for commercial common carrier applications -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 8:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform Is there any vendor besides Aperto that has product that will work with our 3.65Ghz license? -Matt Brad Larson wrote: Jeff, LOL. Be careful who you're listening to. Like I said, there is allot of total BS out there being spread by certain people/manufacturer's. There are several waves of certifications coming. Just because we didn't show up for the first wave doesn't mean we don't have a product. When the others get caught up Alvarion will be there for the real test phases. Brad http://www.techworld.com/mobility/features/index.cfm?featureID=2021 http://www.alvarion-usa.com/presscenter/pressreleases/2109/ http://www.alvarion-usa.com/presscenter/pressreleases/ -Original Message- From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:50 PM To: WISPA General List; 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform 3.5 / 2.5 / 5.8 Alvarion I believe from what I heard was waiting for the QOS revision to be agreed on. - Jeff On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:34:42 -0800 , Brad Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Jeff, In what Frequency? There is allot of BS out there in the first wave of testing for those that have yet to get a product to market. We can discuss if you would like? Brad -Original Message- From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:29 PM To: WISPA General List; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform The only product on the market today that will have backwards compatibility to wimax where a cpe can talk to a wimax base station is Aperto. Additionally, Alvarion will not be one of the first round products certified for wimax, Airspan and Aperto however, will be. - Jeff On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:22:30 -0600, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Is there a firmware upgrade path for WiMAX through the VL product line or is it a hardware change? Feel free to have someone contact me offlist for pricing information. I have a need for a PtMP system with more capacity than I have now with my current system. I do not know of many systems that meet the specs you list here and I already know many people are quite fond of the product. Maybe this time the price won't drive me away as has been the case in the past. Please do not take that as a slam. It is not. I know the quality is there and it is a matter of economics for me only that has ever kept me away from Alvarion products. You guys build good stuff and in some markets the price is easily recovered through ROI. Thanks, Scriv Brad Larson wrote: John, Typically 4 sector base stations are built with either 5.3 or a licensed link as backhaul. With BreezeAccess VL, true data sector performance is 28 meg's in a 20 Mhz channel and half that in 10 Mhz Next firmware release is going to mid 30's in a 20 Mhz channel (again true data rates). I know of one sector that has 200 sub's attached although most sectors have less than 100. This customer looked at most manufacturer's gear and concluded Alvarion had the management feature sets, ease of batch processing for firmware uploads, obstructed NLOS for their application, and a host of other likes including Alvarion's support infrastructure. To be honest I don't think we have many Alvarion Operators
RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumbpipeprovidervs.end-to-endconnectivity/content provider (htmlformatted for easier reading)
Again, they should be held accountable for what they have built with PUBLIC MONEY. IMO, it's nearly impossible to do a 1/2 and 1/2 type of model I doubt there is any service provider out there who HAS NOT benefited in some manner from PUBLIC MONEY at some time (or who would want to close the door to access this opportunity) Remember, PUBLIC MONEY includes Erate / RUS Loans / Economic Development Grants / Tax Credits / etc (or the ability to access those types of contracts) Imagine how burdensome it'd be if, in order to do connecitivity business with a government entity, you would have to submit your network to some sort of open access audit it's either all regulated, or no regulation (now, in a non-regulated environment, free-market economics may spawn a market niche of open access regulated-like free access networks, but that's a whole other debate) -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe provider vs. end-to-end connectivity/content provider
snip performance to their VOIP servers over our network. Think about it, do you think I'm going to allow the same performance to our competitive VOIP provider as I do to our own VOIP services? By getting us to be a Partner for them, we'd optimize them for our own benefit, and indirectly Comm Parnters would guarantee that our network /snip Not that I'm trying to start anything...but this is pretty dangerous ground to tread on If you think about it, an argument can be made that preference of one's own traffic (or depreffing competition traffic) is not that much different than FCC fines telco for VoIP Port Blocking http://informationweek.smallbizpipeline.com/60405214 SBC Says Google should pay to use our network http://techdirt.com/articles/20051031/0354228_F.shtml In a larger context, it may come down to a strategy of providing big dumb pipes (like what the phone companies have done) or becoming end-to-end connectivity/content companies (like what the cable-cos have done) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz
Trees are sponges -- there is no scatter with them That said, you're are causing yourself undue headache trying to do NLoS with 2.4 -- especially when 900 MHz is readily available -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Hendry Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 4:44 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz Ola everybody, I hope everyone had a great Christmas and New Year and are all ready for 2006, the year of the WISP :) When I have setup wireless in an area it has always depended on the Geographic's of the area as to if we deploy 2.4GHz or 5GHz and I have always decided that 2.4 should be used where NLOS could be an issue. This decision has always been based on the fact that the lower frequency will pass through trees a lot easier however I have recently read a white paper that suggests otherwise. Basically the document says that the higher the frequency, the better the scatter (the ability to bounce of and around objects). It also says that 5GHz is better at penetrating walls. So my question is, have I been basing some of our deployments on false information or am I missing something here? I know that in tests I have seen a more stable signal at 2.4GHz in a NLOS environment but is this just a fluke? Cheers, P. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.11/219 - Release Date: 02/01/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe providervs.end-to-end connectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)
Title: Message snipYou seem to be taking this beyond what anyone has stated. There maybe those that say the things that you claim above, however what yousaid was that "...preference of one's own traffic...is not that muchdifferent than..." and you went on to show a link to a story thatwas NOT EVEN CLOSE to the same thing. That is what I was pointingout./snipFor some reason, I am getting a feeling that thread may be going beyond "topic debate" to "personal attacks" -- so I will restate my original point (which I may not have been completely clear on b/c this is a topic that I have been thinking of / examining for quite some time now, and things that seem obviously clear to me may not be so for a casual observer) Read the following article and tell me what you think http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/13/telecoms_want_their_products_to_travel_on_a_faster_internet/?page=full Now, Look back at the original topic of debate and ask yourself the following question...is there REALLY a distinction between the "prioritization" and/or "discrimination (or blocking taken to the Nth degree) of certain types of Internet packets? If you think about it, prioritizing "certain my preferred packets" across my physical network is really no different than discriminating (depreferencing or blocking) my competitors -- in fact, the Network Neutrality (free love, etc) camp would argue that "allowing" certain providers to pay for prioritized / privilege access is extortion. The topic of debate that I am addressing is the argument between "it's my @[EMAIL PROTECTED] network so I can do whatever I want" vs. "the Internet is a free and open medium or Network Neutrality). The it's my @[EMAIL PROTECTED] network argumentSBC started it, now BellSouth is getting into the act. Two articles (1, 2) highlight comments made by William L. Smith, CTO of BellSouth, about how hed really like to be able to charge internet companies for priority access to his network and customers.A senior telecommunications executive said yesterday that Internet service providers should be allowed to strike deals to give certain Web sites or services priority in reaching computer users, a controversial system that would significantly change how the Internet operates.William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.Or, Smith said, his company should be allowed to charge a rival voice-over-Internet firm so that its service can operate with the same quality as BellSouths offering.Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge Network Neutrality is the concept that network operators provide free and non-discriminatory transport on their networks between the endpoints of the Internet. This has been a basic concept and function of the Internet since it was invented, and is adopted by the FCC in these four principles to ensure that broadband networks are widely deployed, open, affordable and accessible to all consumers: 1. Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet contentof their choice; 2. Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; 3. Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devicesthat do not harm the network; and 4. Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. Now, lets open the floor for discussion... -Charles---CWLabTechnology Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Re: verizon fios - Advertising Battle
snip You guys haven't been going to enough conferences and listening to very bright people like Kris Twomey try and explain such things to the (W)ISP industry. Shame on that Michael Anderson for putting Kris up in front of an audience to try to keep the WISP industry informed. /snip Thought I'd chime in and add my 2 cents One thing that this WISP / ISP / Operator community lacks is a cohesive and constant voice for wireless in DC (WISPA has done a great job, but guys like Marlon, Rich, Jon and co still have day jobs and families to feed, and we can't rely solely on their volunteer efforts) I would like to take this opportunity to intrtoduce everyone to Michael Hazzard, of Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge Rice (WCSR). WCSR has been quite active in the CLEC / UNE-P / Forebearance battles, and although the outcome of those battles may be a foregone conclusion by now, they are interested in helping on the final front for independents (e.g., broadband wireless). That said, we plan on collaborating together the next several months amongst all affected communities (in this case, WISPs/ISPs are one organization we are interested in working with, but we also plan on working with other types of network operators, including CLECs, Rural Independents, Electrical Coops, Munis, etc) to put together a unified cohesive position on wireless broadband We are currently working on some survey questions, and will probably be contacting everyone shortly to ask some of these questions (so please don't blacklist me =) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] WISPA Buying CoOp
Out of curiosity -- how did that end up? Where you able to prove my naysaying wrong? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] INSURANCE NOW canopy prices
I know you don't support the idea of group buys. It's not that I don't support the concept, truthfully, I could care less whether you buy your gear from a distributor, reseller, or direct from the manufacturer I have just seen it implemented (rather unsuccessfully) many times by ISPs such as yourselves, and am trying to help you avoid making such a mistake The idea of a WISP buying group is nothing original, for the past few years, I've seen this idea come up at least once a month on some WISP listserv / forum / etc... However, if it was really that easy and simple -- why hasn't it been implemented yet on a consistent long term basis? Here's my observation -The guys that fail with their buying group end up getting their inventory liquidated on Ebay, go bankrupt and disappear -The guys that just barely sell their inventory realize how much of a PITA the organization/operation is, and go back to buying from their distributor/reseller/etc -The guys that are extremely successful become resellers/distributors -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] INSURANCE NOW canopy prices
Brian, I commend you on taking the initiative and (hopefully) proving my naysaying wrong However, waving my magic wand (or maybe I'm just full of @[EMAIL PROTECTED]), I predict the following 2 outcomes will occur: 1. Brian will not be able to get enough interest / coordination / payment for the buying club to succeed, and nothing will be bought 2. Brian will be smart enough to coordinate the buying club, but will realize that the coordination of the buying club is a lot of effort (effort that takes away time from running his WISP) -- at that point, he will either (a) stop doing the buying club, since he will need to address his day-to-day business needs / obligations / demands (b) continune doing the buying club, but w/ an initial moderate markup (to handle his administration costs) -- over time, if he continues to succeed, he will evolve into a full fledged reseller / distributor for WISPs providing various value-added services to varying levels of customers, and the middleman will return -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge
Butch, Technically, none of the necessities are ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL to survival If you didn't have electricity, you *could* light a candle If you didn't have heat in the winter, you *could* go chop firewood in the forest If there was no running water, you *could* bring a bucket to the nearby lake If there were no grocery stores, you *could* go shoot a rabbit -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 10:56 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, George wrote: Ok Butch. Lets take a test. Go to your office and your home and unplug all your landlines and turn off all the cell phones for 1 week and lets see what happens. OUCH! I am cold and hungry. Turning pale. My hair is falling out (prolly not related. :-) ). Any rate, If I did this, I would not be happy and I couldn't work, but I WOULD NOT die. Not sure what this test would prove... It is not really a fair test anyway. This would be the equivalent of removing the wrenches from a mechanic. These tools are directly part of what I do for a living. They are not incidental to HELP me do my job, they ARE my job (so to speak). Perhaps I am missing your point. These things (telephone and internet access) are both very important both from a cultural AND a business standpoint. I agree with you (and others) that both are a very important part of American life. Am I missing something else? Do you suggest that everyone who is an American should (by some unwritten rule) have a right to these things? Even if they can't afford it, should we come up with a way to subsidize it? I am not baiting you, I am simply not seeing the point you are trying to make. -- Butch Evans BPS Networks http://www.bpsnetworks.com/ Bernie, MO Mikrotik Certified Consultant (http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html) -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge
snip For example, electricity, gas and water are items that are needed for basic survival in the city. Granted, these services have not always been available, but it is expected by all Americans that if they move somewhere, they can get those services. Most people would not survive without these services. Tell me how internet access fits that description. /snip Is it not generally expected that Internet access be available in a similar manner? If not today, what about 5-10 years from now -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge
The elecric company doesn't care what you do with their electricity... The gas company doesn't care what you do with their gas... The water company doesn't care what you do with your water... Why should the ISP care what you do with your connection, as long as it doesn't affect their network? The electric, water, gas company all bill based on usage Competitive marketing pressures have forced ISPs offer unlimited all-you-can eat plans If I was billing by the bit/byte, I wouldn't give a #$%#^ what the customer did (let him resell, share his connection w/ neighbors, etc - I don't care, b/c now there's no theft of service, since I get paid on everything transfered) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge
snip So Charles, start yourself a usage based only operation and let us know how that works out for you. /snip Lol... We all are already - only difference today b/n the ISP the other 3 operations is the fact that the ISP today obfiscates their usage billing in legalese buried deep within the fine print of a contract -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 4:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge Scriv Charles Wu wrote: Electricity, Gas and Water are billed on a usage basis Competitive market pressures aside, why should Internet be any different? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 11:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] NYCwireless Network Neutrality Broadband Challenge I can see it now. We will soon be charging for termination and origination of IP traffic on networks. Just like long distance phone calls used to be. Yaykill me now. Scriv Frank Muto wrote: Just passing on some information that may be of interest to anyone. Entitlement vs. laws, and a company's TOS/AUP I'm sure are all involved in one form or another, as with anything else concerning the use of a network to access the Internet or other service. As far as I am concerned, this whole Internet and who controls (owns) it, is just getting dumber and dumber by the minute. Congress, the FCC, state and local governments, special interest groups, the Bell's, xLEC's etc, etc, etc., can all suck eggs. Frank - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Frank, I have a problem with the second item listed on the challenge myself. It states: 2) Consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/Calea.htm; I do not allow my broadband subscribers to use their connection for applications or services which act as a server or daemon for delivering content to others. Broadband networks are not designed to be content delivery networks from the customer end generally. In the case of wireless broadband access, customers can cause network problems if they allow thousands of open ports to a popular file download. I have seen this many times and I have provisions in my AUP which allow me to turn customers off who cause network problems from trying to use broadband as a content delivery mechanism. I welcome other thoughts but I believe we need to have the ability to stop abuses of a network which can cause us problems. With that said I agree that there needs to be some commitment from operators to allow access to their networks for free and open competition. I just do not agree that there can be no limits to what we can or cannot allow on the network. Especially when some things can harm network functionality. John Scrivner -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] I need 100% participation RIGHT NOW! This means YOU!
snip Trying to put in more towers makes no sense as there could never be enough of them to properly penetrate these vibrant green hillsides. We need the TV frequency. The physics of the frequencies making up the over the air television bands make them ideal for broadband deployment. /snip Hi Chuck, I am curious...if your problem is rolling hills, how will 700 Mhz help you? Dirt is dirt -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] WISPCon
WISPA was started initially in response to Part-15/WISPCON's lack of representation of true WISP issues (although you can't fault Mike for it, it needs to be known that Part-15.org is a FOR-PROFIT organization existing to put money in Mike's pocket). Until recently (due to circumstances created by the Katrina Rita disasters), there has been ill-will b/n Part-15 WISPA due to the fact that Mike has lost revenue from WISPA members, and unless things have significantly changed, it is doubtful that a discount pass relationship b/n Part-15 WISPA exists If you're interested in shows (or just getting together w/ other WISPs) in the Dallas area, Smartbridges is currently in the process of putting together a North American Road Show http://www.smartbridges.com/about/articles.asp?id=398 Best of all, it's free -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jory Privett Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 10:18 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] WISPCon As a WISP paid member does anyone know where I can get discount passes to WispCon in Dallas October 9-11? Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- 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 Show Interests was: WISPCon
Last I understood, Part-15 was also a Non-Profit. That's the sham Although .org domain names are traditionally reserved for non-profit institutions, there is nothing within ICANN policy preventing a for-profit organization from registering a .org domain A quick who-is of Part-15.org WISPCON.info outputs the following: Registrant: Prime Directive Corp. P.O. Box 157 North Aurora, IL 60542 US Domain Name: PART-15.ORG Administrative Contact : Prime Directive Corp [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO BOX 157 NORTH AURORA, IL 60542-0157 US Phone: 630-906-0323 Fax: 630-906-0323 Registrant: Prime Directive Corp. P.O. Box 157 North Aurora, IL 60542 US Domain Name: WISPCON.INFO Administrative Contact : Prime Directive Corp [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO BOX 157 NORTH AURORA, IL 60542-0157 US Phone: 630-906-0323 Fax: 630-906-0323 A lookup in the State of Illinois Corporation/LLC Database shows Prime Directive, Inc as a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION with Michael Anderson (Bullit) as the President http://cdsprod.ilsos.net/CorpSearchWeb/CorporationSearchServlet?fileNumber=5 9278304sysId=CDnameType=MST While there's nothing wrong with running a for-profit industry association / show (ISPCON, Shorecliff's Broadband Wireless World, Jupiter Media, etc), I have an ethical issue when the for-profit group tries to generate goodwill by marketing itself as a not-for-profit trade group when it's express purpose is to maximize shareholder (in this case Michael Anderson) profits. So, in comparing Part-15 vs. WISPA, it is worth noting that Part-15 is an opportunistic for-profit entity focused on capitalizing market share in the WISP industry (can you fault them? I mean, all of us are for-profits), and WISPA is a LEGITIMATE NOT-FOR-PROFIT focused on representing the WISP industry as a whole With that in mind, you should be able to make an intelligent informed decision on who/where to give your money to -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -- 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 Show Interests was: WISPCon
snip It should be noted that of all organizations mentioned above that WISPA is the only one that is federally recognized under CFR # 501c6 as a non-profit trade association.. Every other entity listed above is working to make a profit in their efforts and as such would likely be looking to advance individual interests over those of the industry as a whole. WISPA is designed to promote the efforts of WISP operators over and above all other interests. As a matter of law we cannot act to allow one WISP to be given more consideration from the efforts of this organization than another. This means it is truly level ground for our efforts going forward. /snip As one of the abovementioned for-profit entities, it is worth noting that there is nothing wrong w/ trying to make an honest buck ducking That said, all the other industires (cellular, cable, telco) have their own represented NOT-FOR-PROFIT association that pushes their interests in DC, if you (as a WISP), don't bother to spend the time/money/energy supporting WISPA, then don't complain if legislation leaves you in the dust -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 4:10 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] WISPA Show Interests was: WISPCon There is not a show discount relationship between WISPA and WISPCON. WISPCON is not directly tied to WISPA in any way. I believe WISPCON has a discount program through Part-15 just as WISPA has with ISPCON and WiNOG at times in the past. There have been no discussions of offering these discounts for WISPCON but would consider it if an opportunity were made available to us. I believe you will continue to see options for the discounts for WISPA members through WiNOG and ISPCON shows in the future as long as the ownership of these organizations see this as a valuable opportunity to help WISPA and themselves. This does not mean I think that a for-profit company cannot help the efforts of the industry. This is far from true. I am simply explaining the different philosophies and how one could benefit more than another in certain situations. We are firm believers that WISPA is the organization that most fairly represents the interests of WISPs regarding policy issues. Other interests will develop where our industry can share our collective efforts as we did in the Katrina/Rita effort. WISPA will always look for different organizations that can help us forward our efforts of better policy to help us in our industry. Sometimes the other entities will be for-profit and sometimes not. WISPA has decided at this time to not create another show to the mix of what many would say is an over-crowded industry segment. We do allow the promotion and advertisement of shows when a show owner works with us to provide an opportunity. This could include a scenario where WISPA can make money and further our efforts through exposure at show events by speaking and or exhibiting.. This may be more information than you were looking for but I wanted to make sure everyone understood the dynamics and position of WISPA in relation to shows around the industry. I hope that helped. Scriv Jory Privett wrote: WISPA - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPCon As a paid member of p15 or wispa? Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Jory Privett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 8:18 AM Subject: [WISPA] WISPCon As a WISP paid member does anyone know where I can get discount passes to WispCon in Dallas October 9-11? Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission meeting - Real Audio
Have you read the Part-15 report to the FCC? http://www.broadbandwirelessreports.com/pressreleases/files/FCC%20Briefing%2 009152005.pdf -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 2:06 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission meeting - Real Audio Is is just me, or is there no representation from WISPs at all?? I'm watching it right now trying to figure out what is going on here, but it looks like we have been snubbed again. Matt Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rick Harnish wrote: September 14, 2005 *_PARTICIPANTS FOR _* *_FCC OPEN COMMISSION MEETING IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA_* */Scheduled Thursday, September 15, 2005, 11:00 a.m./* / / The participants for the Federal Communications Commissions September Open Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia at BellSouth Telecommunications Inc.s Emergency Control Center located at BellSouth Midtown I Building, 4^th Floor, 754 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30309 are as follows: § Ken Moran, Director, Office of Homeland Security, Federal Communications Commission § Rod Odom, President, Network Services, BellSouth Corporation § Booker Lester, Administrative Assistant to CWA Vice President Noah Savant, Communications Workers of America § Steve Brownworth, Vice President, Network Planning and Systems, ITC^DeltaCom, Inc. § Steve Largent, President and CEO, CTIA The Wireless Association § Greg Ewert, Executive Vice President, Iridium Satellite LLC § Willis Carter, First Vice President, Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International; Chief of Communications, Shreveport Fire Department § Diane Newman, Operations Director of WWL 870-AM New Orleans, Entercom § Dick Lewis, Regional Vice President for Louisiana and Southern Mississippi, Clear Channel § David Duitch, Vice President, Capital Bureau, Belo Corp. § Fred Young, Vice President for News, Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. Sign language interpreters will be on site and live audio coverage of the meeting will be broadcast over the Internet from the FCC's Audio Events web page with open captioning at www.fcc.gov/realaudio ../Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Documents%20and%20Se ttings/Michelle.Carey/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLK62/ww w.fcc.gov/realaudio. For a fee, live audio of this meeting is available over George Mason University's Capitol Connection. The Capitol Connection will also carry the meeting live via the Internet. To purchase these services, contact (703) 993-3100 or go to www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu ../Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Documents%20and%20Se ttings/Michelle.Carey/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLK62/ww w.capitolconnection.gmu.edu. For additional information concerning this meeting contact Audrey Spivack (202) 418-0512 or Meribeth McCarrick (202) 418-0654, Office of Media Relations; TTY 1-888-835-5322. **/Rick Harnish/** /President/ /OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc./// /260-827-2482 Office/ /260-307-4000 Cell/ /260-918-4340 VoIP/// /www.oibw.net http://www.oibw.net// **/[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/** **/ /***/ http://www.oibw.net//* **//** http://www.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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission Meeting Moved
Title: Message great...so WISPA should be able to do THEIR OWN presentation in addition to the $500 donation for a WISPA designated attendee...I can volunteer PR graphic resources to help with publicity and to put the presentation together -Charles ---CWLabTechnology Architectshttp://www.cwlab.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick HarnishSent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:39 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Bullit'Subject: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission Meeting Moved SCHEDULE AND VENUE CHANGE: FCC TO HOLD OPEN COMMISSION MEETING IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA at 11:00 am Please note that the time and venue for the Federal Communications Commissions September Open Meeting has changed. As described in the Commissions Thursday, September 8th Notice, on Thursday, September 15th, the Commission will hold an open meeting. At this meeting, it will hear presentations from Commission staff and various industry representatives concerning their role in Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. For the convenience of those testifying, the Federal Communications Commission will hold its meeting in Atlanta, Georgia at BellSouth Telecommunications Inc.s Emergency Control Center located at the following address: BellSouth Midtown I Building 4th Floor 754 PeachtreeStreet Atlanta, Georgia 30309 The meeting is scheduled to commence at 11:00 am. Seating is limited and will be on a first come, first serve basis. The prompt and orderly conduct of Commission business permits less than 7-days notice be given. -FCC- Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3' and larger 5.8Ghz dishes
Charles Wu has left the equipment sales business (e.g., we don't sell gear) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Grantier Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:51 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3' and larger 5.8Ghz dishes what about charles wu or super pass maybe they can custome make one for you - Original Message - From: G.Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:38 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3' and larger 5.8Ghz dishes Pac wireless Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.767.7466 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3' and larger 5.8Ghz dishes Any leads on where to get 3' and larger 5.8Ghz dishes without having to spend thousands of dollars? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission Meeting Moved - speaking of government presentations
I am working with the e-NC on organizing their upcoming Southeast Wireless Symposium (November 16 - 17, 2005) to be held in Asheville, NC - this is a wireless show focused on government http://www.e-nc.org/Wireless2005/index.asp While it's not the FCC, we are putting together a keynote session on the Hurrican Katrina Relief Efforts - and this would be a nice place to highlight WISPA's efforts - plus my offer for a $500 reimbursement still stands (I'll even up the ante to 2 speakers) Do we have some interest? -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 4:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Open Commission Meeting Moved Actually, we could. My building has a press briefing room specifically for this sort of thing. -Matt dustin jurman wrote: Too bad WISPA can't offer a larger venue so more people could attend vs. having at Bells facility :-) DSJ -- -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Rick Harnish *Sent:* Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:39 PM *To:* 'WISPA General List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Bullit' *Subject:* [WISPA] FCC Open Commission Meeting Moved *_SCHEDULE AND VENUE CHANGE: _* *_FCC TO HOLD OPEN COMMISSION MEETING_* *_IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA at 11:00 am_* *Please note that the time and venue for the Federal Communications Commission's September Open Meeting has changed. * As described in the Commission's Thursday, September 8^th Notice, on Thursday, September 15^th , the Commission will hold an open meeting. At this meeting, it will hear presentations from Commission staff and various industry representatives concerning their role in Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. For the convenience of those testifying, the Federal Communications Commission will hold its meeting in Atlanta, Georgia at BellSouth Telecommunications Inc.'s Emergency Control Center located at the following address: BellSouth Midtown I Building 4^th Floor 754 Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309 The meeting is scheduled to commence at 11:00 am. Seating is limited and will be on a first come, first serve basis. The prompt and orderly conduct of Commission business permits less than 7-days notice be given. *-FCC-* **/Rick Harnish/** /President/ /OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc./// /260-827-2482 Office/ /260-307-4000 Cell/ /260-918-4340 VoIP/// /www.oibw.net http://www.oibw.net// **/[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/** **/ /***/ http://www.oibw.net//* **//** http://www.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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP Teams For FCCPresentation on Thursday
I agree w/ Alex and will take this one step further Mike has a history of taking undue credit for other's actions At this risk of sounding anti Part-15, in order for WISPA to establish credibility to its members and the FCC, it needs to be able to stand on its own 2 feet as a separate organization with SEPARATE REPRESENTATION Another fact worth noting is the effectiveness of the WISPA (Dearman and a group of 20+ volunteers who ACTUALLY MADE A DIFFERENCE) response vs. Part-15's response. Mac and co have made an IMMEDIATE impact and have gotten exposure on the national news media, while Part-15's efforts got bogged down and ultimately ended up getting lost in the shuffle. At this point, it seems to me that Part-15 is trying to ride WISPA's coat-tails Personally, I think it would be best for Michael to not try to take the spotlight but step aside and turn the FCC presentation over to someone who was actually in the trenches (e.g., a WISPA representative or maybe someone from Mac's crew). That said, unfortunately, with a new baby due this month, my schedule has been filled with diaper changing classes and I have been unable to devote the time/energy that many other volunteers have had; however, I would like to support this effort (and help establish WISPA's credibility) by putting $500 up for a WISPA REPRESENTATIVE to travel to DC to represent WISPA's HURRICANE RELIEF EFFORT in front of the FCC Back to diaper changing class... -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Huppenthal Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP Teams For FCCPresentation on Thursday Steve, Its great the FCC asked Mike to speak to them. He can only represent those people and businesses that establish him as their representative. I have Scriv, Marlon and Rick as well as other WISPA members who represent my interests. I'm curious to understanding what Mike wants to speak about as well as seeing whatever materials he's producing for his 5 minute talk. If he'd like to represent me, I'd like to better understand what his platform is, motivation, interests, previous qualifications, and so on. This looks like a nice opportunity and if Marlon could go along and speak for me, that would be great. I know Marlon, and unfortunately, I don't know Mike, except as a leader of a for-profit organization which uses FCC part15 as its main interest. Congratulations to Mike and his company for getting FCC attention. Its great PR for his company. Whatever he can do to convey that WISPs need more spectrum, better anti-trust legislation that is to say - some policing of mega-business policies and better co-ordination among BLM and FS with WISPs would be wonderful. If he would add his support for WISPA and suggest that the FCC should support WISPA's non-profit effort to create a forum for Part15 associated issues and interests would be greatly appreciated by me. It would be wonderful to see additional FCC interaction with the WISPA organization and its membership. Perhaps he could suggest a periodic meeting between the FCC and WISPA membership? Thanks for the good news that the FCC is paying attention to Independents and their representatives. I hope he invites Marlon or at least mentions that Marlon and WISPA exist and are making good progress. Cheers, AH Steve Stroh wrote: All: Michael, as usual, has understated this a bit a bit, so I'll step into the role of blatant Public Relations once more. There's a detailed explanation at http://www.part-15.org/emergencyrelief/fcc.html. Here's the terse version. Michael Anderson, Chairman of PART-15.ORG was asked to speak at the upcoming FCC Open Commission Meeting on Thursday morning. His speaking slot is 5 minutes. It's short in time, but a lot of content can be crammed into it, considering that he can breeze through the PowerPoint slides, talk fast, and people can look at the replay and the PowerPoint slides in detail later. He needs the inputs soon; Monday's gone already. That basically gives him Tuesday to put an short, effective, punchy presentation together. He flies from Chicago to DC on Wednesday. The more diverse input he gets, the sooner, the better and more representative the presentation can be. It SEEMS likely (we don't know for sure) that this meeting will have lots of press attending, since it's requested that all the entities under FCC jurisdiction (telephone, cable, broadcasting, public safety comms, etc.) do the same sort of presentation. So... we want the WISP industry to be WELL represented, and it will be with YOUR inputs. To be clear... CRYSTAL clear... Michael was NOT asked to speak to represent just PART-15.ORG. He was asked to speak to represent the WISP industry
RE: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP TeamsForFCCPresentation on Thursday
Congratulations Charles, so now we have a little Wu I'm sure you're a proud father. That's great. Well not yet...in about 2-4 weeks (depending on how things go) I'm not trying to start an argument here but WISPA was not invited to attend this function. We received very late notice about the conference call two weeks ago and none of us caught it in time. Because of that missed conference call, Part-15 submitted a plan to the FCC and became one of the approved vendors. It is my understanding that this open commission meeting is to allow those vendors to tell their story. Each vendor has five minutes to give a short presentation. Would the FCC allow another slot for WISPA? I'm not sure, maybe Marlon would have insight into this. The next question is: Do we want to portray a divided industry with Part-15 and WISPA taking credit for the same work? Michael has asked the WISPA board to provide him with bullet points of what we have accomplished this week. He given his word to portray WISPA as an important contributor in the efforts of this week and last week. He is very aware that the Mac Dearman team has been aligned much closer to WISPA than Part-15 and he realizes the damage he will do to his own reputation if he labels this effort as a Part-15 project. Well...here's the situation as I see it Part-15 has promised a lot to the FCC, but has been unable to deliver WISPA on the other hand, just got busy on the ground and got work done Now, Part-15 has nothing to report to the FCC, and they're trying to ride WISPA's coat tails to save face If I were Part-15, I wouldn't have the gall to go up in front of the FCC and try to claim that I was some sort of parent umbrella (especially when I was focusing my efforts elsewhere)...rather, I would invite a WISPA representative along, tell the truth about how I errored (people respect people who admit mistakes, and we all understand that nobody's perfect) and introduce WISPA to the FCC as the ones who saved the day I have been communicating with Michael a lot lately and I believe I have convinced him that part of his frustration in getting assistance has been because his first several press releases focused most of the attention on Part-15. He IS GETTING BETTER now. He took on a huge project, one that is bigger than any one man can handle himself. He has assigned volunteers to help lead different aspects of his plan. If you really look at it, Michael took the reigns of a no win task. I know I appreciate his willingness to do this..I recognized that I didn't have the time to do it right now and thus recommended that WISPA throw our support behind his effort to consolidate resources and give the public a view of a stronger effort. BINGO Many still have the perception that Michael's involvement is purely from a standpoint of personal gain -- Right or wrong, I know of a lot of people who, upon seeing the Part-15 centric press releases, didn't join in w/ Part-15's effort (instead donating to other sources / etc) due to the perception that Michael is once again doing this to increase exposure to his 'non-Profit' that basically is a front for putting $$$ in his pocket So, Michael has been burdened with this huge project and now has a competing association board and members to deal with at the same time. He not only has to organize the effort but he has to try to keep the WISPA members happy at the same time. Sound impossible? It does to me! The real fact is, Michael Anderson has done a trememdous amount for our industry in the last 5 years. Not everything he does is approved by everyone, how can it be. Heck that is why WISPA got started in the first place. Is WISPA perfect, no way, we get criticized all the time for different things. Face it, our industry is a group of rather independent thinkers and businessmen that want to prove that they can do it on their own. We are all leaders in our own minds, we bring solutions to people everyday that make their lives better. I personally think it is time for the Part-15 leadership and the WISPA leadership to unite our efforts or our fragmented industry will crumble a slow death. For some that means swallowing some crow, but if we truly care about the industry and our future, we need to open our eyes, recognize our weaknesses and other's strengths and combine these resources to create a powerful team. Lol...I'm in complete disagreement Ok, flame away! :P Flamethrower on Sleep with the dogs, and you're bound to get fleas Although I have my personal criticisms of WISPA, the one thing that keeps me supporting them is the fact that WISPA represents PROFESSIONAL WISPs -- although somewhat slow, WISPA has managed to do things correctly (e.g., they didn't cut corners on non-profit incorporation, they actually put together bylaws - heck, EVEN Marlon has evolved from a pink Disco outfit to a suit) - sure, we may scoff at the suits and additional overhead - but if we are to make it in
RE: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISPTeamsForFCCPresentation on Thursday
with at the same time. He not only has to organize the effort but he has to try to keep the WISPA members happy at the same time. Sound impossible? It does to me! The real fact is, Michael Anderson has done a trememdous amount for our industry in the last 5 years. Not everything he does is approved by everyone, how can it be. Heck that is why WISPA got started in the first place. Is WISPA perfect, no way, we get criticized all the time for different things. Face it, our industry is a group of rather independent thinkers and businessmen that want to prove that they can do it on their own. We are all leaders in our own minds, we bring solutions to people everyday that make their lives better. I personally think it is time for the Part-15 leadership and the WISPA leadership to unite our efforts or our fragmented industry will crumble a slow death. For some that means swallowing some crow, but if we truly care about the industry and our future, we need to open our eyes, recognize our weaknesses and other's strengths and combine these resources to create a powerful team. Ok, flame away! :P Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 5:53 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP Teams ForFCCPresentation on Thursday I agree w/ Alex and will take this one step further Mike has a history of taking undue credit for other's actions At this risk of sounding anti Part-15, in order for WISPA to establish credibility to its members and the FCC, it needs to be able to stand on its own 2 feet as a separate organization with SEPARATE REPRESENTATION Another fact worth noting is the effectiveness of the WISPA (Dearman and a group of 20+ volunteers who ACTUALLY MADE A DIFFERENCE) response vs. Part-15's response. Mac and co have made an IMMEDIATE impact and have gotten exposure on the national news media, while Part-15's efforts got bogged down and ultimately ended up getting lost in the shuffle. At this point, it seems to me that Part-15 is trying to ride WISPA's coat-tails Personally, I think it would be best for Michael to not try to take the spotlight but step aside and turn the FCC presentation over to someone who was actually in the trenches (e.g., a WISPA representative or maybe someone from Mac's crew). That said, unfortunately, with a new baby due this month, my schedule has been filled with diaper changing classes and I have been unable to devote the time/energy that many other volunteers have had; however, I would like to support this effort (and help establish WISPA's credibility) by putting $500 up for a WISPA REPRESENTATIVE to travel to DC to represent WISPA's HURRICANE RELIEF EFFORT in front of the FCC Back to diaper changing class... -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Huppenthal Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP Teams For FCCPresentation on Thursday Steve, Its great the FCC asked Mike to speak to them. He can only represent those people and businesses that establish him as their representative. I have Scriv, Marlon and Rick as well as other WISPA members who represent my interests. I'm curious to understanding what Mike wants to speak about as well as seeing whatever materials he's producing for his 5 minute talk. If he'd like to represent me, I'd like to better understand what his platform is, motivation, interests, previous qualifications, and so on. This looks like a nice opportunity and if Marlon could go along and speak for me, that would be great. I know Marlon, and unfortunately, I don't know Mike, except as a leader of a for-profit organization which uses FCC part15 as its main interest. Congratulations to Mike and his company for getting FCC attention. Its great PR for his company. Whatever he can do to convey that WISPs need more spectrum, better anti-trust legislation that is to say - some policing of mega-business policies and better co-ordination among BLM and FS with WISPs would be wonderful. If he would add his support for WISPA and suggest that the FCC should support WISPA's non-profit effort to create a forum for Part15 associated issues and interests would be greatly appreciated by me. It would be wonderful to see additional FCC interaction with the WISPA organization and its membership. Perhaps he could suggest a periodic meeting between the FCC and WISPA membership? Thanks
RE: [WISPA] Waverider 900 mhz throughput
Canopy 900 has close to 4 Mb of aggregate *REAL* thoughput now in 2x mode -Charles --- WISPNOG Park City, UT http://www.wispnog.com August 15-17, 2005 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 11:29 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Waverider 900 mhz throughput I do not think you will find any 900 Mhz 2M X 2M solutions out there that will scale well. I use Waverider and it works really well for my service. I offer two plans. 768K and 256K up and down. I can get about 70 to 100 clients per sector with Waverider running this way. I think the polling MAC in Waverider keeps the max speed per client at about 1.5 meg up and down. If I have someone needing 2M or more I sell them a connection to my Trango AP. Scriv Mark Koskenmaki wrote: Anyone with real-world experience with them? I sell 2M X 2M connections... will WR gear keep up with this, and what is the maximum available real throughput? Not radio rates, but real-world throughput? North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! --- - - -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Waverider 900 mhz throughput
I take it from this post regarding Canopy that the other systems you tested were not as much speed? Yes If you want to compare then let us see what you have seen for all the systems you have tested. Let's compare apples to apples. We have already done that -Charles -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
