Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Tracking Solutions
Hi Matt, I have built usage-based accounting systems for ISPs using NetFlow and/or RADIUS Accounting and MySQL running on Linux. Contact me directly to discuss. Tim -- Tim Sylvester Network RADIUS (408) 826-8350 (o) (408) 334-1700 (m) tim.sylves...@networkradius.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 12:24 PM To: Mikrotik discussions; WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Bandwidth Tracking Solutions Hello list, I am looking for a solution that will keep track of the monthly bandwidth consumption for all of my broadband customers and am having a hard time coming up with a good solution. Our goal is to collect the traffic flows every 15 minutes and generate three things: 1) Internal reports showing bandwidth consumption by customers and that is in a database form that we can perform queries on 2) Data that can be exported to our customer portal page that will show customers how much bandwidth they have consumed since the first of each month 3) A batch file showing customers over their thresholds that we can import into our billing system (Freeside) at the end of the month so we can bill overages Our system is setup as follows: 1) StarOS access points 2) OSPF backbone back to two separate 50 meg Internet backbone links 3) Mikrotik core routers at each backbone location 4) StarOS routers performing NAT at each backbone location 5) Mikrotik edge routers connected to the Internet backbone Radius accounting is not an option, due to inaccurate IP accounting information returned by the StarOS APs. PPPoE is also not an option as we have 2000+ customers in place and not all of the hardware would easily convert to PPPoE. Ideally, the data should be collectable at the Mikrotik core routers, as that is the place where all of the private IP traffic is still in its pre-NAT status. We have been trying to keep track of it with Netflow data from our Mikrotik core routers, but it does not seem to be accurate and there are documented problems with the Mikrotik Netflow exports. We have confirmed that the data we have been collecting is not accurate, and I have no intention on billing a customer based on inaccurate data. We have a couple of reporting engines that we have tried, with mixed levels of success. I did contact Brandon Checketts about his program, which was close to what we wanted, but it is out of date and he was not responsive so our efforts are focused on either using something open source that we can modify or just buying an appliance that will do what we need. My preference is to go open source because we have multiple backbone connections and also because I have several consulting customers who want to have similar setups put in place on their networks. Also, I want to make sure that this is revenue neutral and can pay for for itself in the overage billing after it is installed. We can install either a switch or a transparent bandwidth monitoring server of some kind between the core and NAT servers to collect the data flows.My lead tech and I are both Linux savvy, and would prefer something that runs on Linux. I recall that Travis Johnson posted a description of an open source, linux-based system that he uses to track bandwidth, but I cannot find the email where he lays all of the elements out. Does anyone have any recommendations for this situation? Thanks! Matt Larsen vistabeam.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Tracking Solutions
-Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Jenkins Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:34 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Tracking Solutions Have you looked into PMACCT with NetFlow? The short answer is yes. We used the NetFlow collector in PMACCT, MySQL, FreeRADIUS and custom SQL code to build a usage-based accounting system for an ISP. The system will even fire off script to disconnect a user when they have exceeded their usage limit during the current billing period. Tim Tim Sylvester wrote: Hi Matt, I have built usage-based accounting systems for ISPs using NetFlow and/or RADIUS Accounting and MySQL running on Linux. Contact me directly to discuss. Tim -- Tim Sylvester Network RADIUS (408) 826-8350 (o) (408) 334-1700 (m) tim.sylves...@networkradius.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 12:24 PM To: Mikrotik discussions; WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Bandwidth Tracking Solutions Hello list, I am looking for a solution that will keep track of the monthly bandwidth consumption for all of my broadband customers and am having a hard time coming up with a good solution. Our goal is to collect the traffic flows every 15 minutes and generate three things: 1) Internal reports showing bandwidth consumption by customers and that is in a database form that we can perform queries on 2) Data that can be exported to our customer portal page that will show customers how much bandwidth they have consumed since the first of each month 3) A batch file showing customers over their thresholds that we can import into our billing system (Freeside) at the end of the month so we can bill overages Our system is setup as follows: 1) StarOS access points 2) OSPF backbone back to two separate 50 meg Internet backbone links 3) Mikrotik core routers at each backbone location 4) StarOS routers performing NAT at each backbone location 5) Mikrotik edge routers connected to the Internet backbone Radius accounting is not an option, due to inaccurate IP accounting information returned by the StarOS APs. PPPoE is also not an option as we have 2000+ customers in place and not all of the hardware would easily convert to PPPoE. Ideally, the data should be collectable at the Mikrotik core routers, as that is the place where all of the private IP traffic is still in its pre-NAT status. We have been trying to keep track of it with Netflow data from our Mikrotik core routers, but it does not seem to be accurate and there are documented problems with the Mikrotik Netflow exports. We have confirmed that the data we have been collecting is not accurate, and I have no intention on billing a customer based on inaccurate data. We have a couple of reporting engines that we have tried, with mixed levels of success. I did contact Brandon Checketts about his program, which was close to what we wanted, but it is out of date and he was not responsive so our efforts are focused on either using something open source that we can modify or just buying an appliance that will do what we need. My preference is to go open source because we have multiple backbone connections and also because I have several consulting customers who want to have similar setups put in place on their networks. Also, I want to make sure that this is revenue neutral and can pay for for itself in the overage billing after it is installed. We can install either a switch or a transparent bandwidth monitoring server of some kind between the core and NAT servers to collect the data flows.My lead tech and I are both Linux savvy, and would prefer something that runs on Linux. I recall that Travis Johnson posted a description of an open source, linux-based system that he uses to track bandwidth, but I cannot find the email where he lays all of the elements out. Does anyone have any recommendations for this situation? Thanks! Matt Larsen vistabeam.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA
[WISPA] NPR Story on FCC Broadband Plan and Internet Access in Trinity County California
On Monday, NPR aired a story on the FCC Broadband Plan and Internet access in Trinity County California. The story by Laura Sydell was in anticipation of the FCC Broadband Plan today and profiled Trinity County, a rural county in northern California. You can read/listen to the story at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124703744 I have a few technical/business questions for the group. The story talks about Brunt Ranch Elementary School with 92 students that paid $50,000 for a satellite Internet connection. The school is not happy with the cost and the connection does not work reliably. The school doesn't have much money and only has 20 computers. Putting aside the questions about who should pay for the connection and why an elementary school needs Internet, here are my questions: 1. What type of satellite Internet connection costs $50,000? 2. Does anyone have experience deploying satellite Internet access? How much does it cost and how reliable is the service? 3. Does anyone have experience with Hughes Networks satellite Internet service? I exchanged e-mail with a Hughes rep and they offer 5Mbps business class Internet service for $399/month using a .98M dish. You can pay $28/month for 7x24 on-site service and $20/month for 5 static IP addresses. The story also talks about ATT fiber that runs through the county but ATT won't connect anyone in the county to the fiber. ATT claims that the fiber is not engineered for local feeds. A local ISP has requested to tap into the fiber to provide Internet access in the area. My questions are: 4. What does not engineered for local feeds mean? Is it possible that the fiber is for a long haul connection and it would be very expensive or impossible to connect Trinity County to the fiber? Is ATT telling the truth, outright lying or lazy? Finally, many people in the group have used microwave links for backhaul to rural areas. In a worst case scenario, Trinity County might be able to connect to fiber deployed CENIC. CENIC is a non-profit organization that connects educational and research institutions in California. CENIC has fiber in Corning which is 100 miles from Weaverville, the county seat for Trinity County. My questions are: 5. What would it cost to deploy a 100 mile microwave link between Corning and Weaverville with a minimum of 50Mbps of bandwidth but preferably 100Mbps or 1Gbps? Yes, there are many variables but assume worst case. In general, would this work and what is ballpark/order of magnitude pricing for this link? Are we talking about $500K, $1M, $5M, $10M or $50M?? What is the longest microwave link deployed by Clearwire for backhaul? Thanks, Tim -- Tim Sylvester Avanzar Networks (408) 826-8350 (o) (408) 334-1700 (m) t...@avanzarnetworks.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] how to compete with $15 DSL
Yup...we're running several wireless links (for redundancy) to a peering point (CLEC Hotel) then interconnect at that location to the Internet through various BGP interconnections with peer 1 and local CLEC's for short dollars. We found no issues with building management letting us put up our antenna's on the roofs. How long are your wireless links to the CLEC hotel? Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] here it come$
I'm confused by this message. Are you saying you just heard of ESPN360? It has been around since 2007. How much do you think big bad ESPN charges for ESPN360? I have seen estimates between $0.05/sub/month to $0.25/sub/month. As far as I can tell, any ISP can contact ESPN and sign-up to offer ESPN360 to their subscribers. Here's a link to the current list of ISPs offering ESPN360: http://espn.go.com/broadband/espn360/affList. The list of providers ranges from ATT and Verizon each with over 10M subs. Down to the Spencer Iowa Municipal Utilities and Spruce Knob Seneca Rocks Telephone, each with a few thousand subs. The list includes cable, DSL and FTTH ISPs. The only thing that might prevent a WISP from offering ESPN360 is bandwidth. ESPN360 is just an add-on service that an ISP can bundle with their service offerings to customers. Think of it like offering e-mail accounts or web sites. In the mid 90s, ISPs had to pay to provide a TCP/IP stack and a web browser to their customers. If the WISPA members think ESPN360 would be a useful to offer their customers, have someone contact ESPN to see if you can negotiate an ESPN360 contract for all WISPA members. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 10:57 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] here it come$ The television content providers are going to bill ISP's? Try using ESPN Live 360 and see what it tells you. -RickG --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] State Education Networks?
In California, the educational institutions formed an organization called The Corporation for Education Network Initiatives in California (CENIC) http://www.cenic.org/. CENIC designed, built and operates a fiber network that connects to public and private K-20 institutions. They claim that the cost to connect to their network is 50% of comparable commercial networks. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Owen Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 8:17 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] State Education Networks? The State I provide service in (Idaho) is in the process of building a Statewide Educational Network. I am interested in hearing from any of you are providing service in a State that has built a State Educational Network and if so, are local providers used to provide any of the last miles services to the schools? Idaho started by saying they would work with the local providers, however, now they have changed their tune and local providers are not given the opportunity to even bid on the service. Qwest is charging at least 3 - 5 times what any of the other local ISP's could or would charge for the same or more bandwidth. We are simply told we are not able to provide the service due to technical reasons, however, the State thus far has not defined what those technical reasons are. The difference in cost per year is in the millions. Our State IT group is also saying this is how it is done in other states to provide a quality and cost effective network. So does anybody provide any last mile services to any Statewide educational network? Thanks, Kevin First Step Internet, LLC --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice
. But we need to be realistic that nothing is free, and one way or another consumers pay for what they consume, whether the efficiency of spending was hidden from sight or not. The answer is to continue investigating how Government help can be most effective, and how it can still best preserve and protect the private sector. The government does somethings very well, but when trouble occurs is when they think they can do something better than the private sector, when its an industry historically served by the private sector. If there was a better way, the private sector would already be doing it. The problem is not the providers, but maybe barriers that need removed. I beleive in some regulation, not anarchy. Regulation should be used to create a healthy industry environment, not to unnecessarilly burden the providers of the industry. Clearly some improvements to regulation is needed. This is why it is so important that WISPs are involved in National Broadband Plan debates, to help define those new policies. I will always try to reach out to my Government for help, that is why they are there, and I will also standup and protest when they try to give to much help or the wrong kind of help, because that is what I'm here for. There are places where help is needed. I think part of the problem is that definition of need requires better definition, it is way to highly subjective as-is. I live near the nation's capitol, participate in a Broadband intensive IT industry, even distance learning, and I serve my company from a 900Mhz wireless CPE, am happy with it, and it does everything that I NEED. I paid for it myself. I just question why the same is not good enough for everyone else? I personally beleive the Feds need more seed grant money, to help innovators, not necessarilly to help the people at the expense of competition amoungst providers. Respectfully, Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice Took the typing right off of my keyboard Tim. Bravo. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Tim Sylvester wrote: Yes, I am amazed. Amazed by the bitching and whining about government on this list by people who ... - sell wireless service using spectrum owned by everyone and allocated to them by the FCC for free or low cost. - sell access to the Internet, a network originally funded and developed by DARPA and later funded by the National Science Foundation. - drive on roads funded with taxpayer dollars and maintained by the government. - sell Internet service in rural areas to farmers that receive billions in government subsidies per year. - connect CPE equipment to electrical service that was funded by the Rural Electric Administration. - use VA health services. - will use Medicare and Social Security when they retire. - call the police and fire department when they need help. - send their kids to public schools. Amazing. Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 5/15/2009 6:16 AM --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http
Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice
Yes, I am amazed. Amazed by the bitching and whining about government on this list by people who ... - sell wireless service using spectrum owned by everyone and allocated to them by the FCC for free or low cost. - sell access to the Internet, a network originally funded and developed by DARPA and later funded by the National Science Foundation. - drive on roads funded with taxpayer dollars and maintained by the government. - sell Internet service in rural areas to farmers that receive billions in government subsidies per year. - connect CPE equipment to electrical service that was funded by the Rural Electric Administration. - use VA health services. - will use Medicare and Social Security when they retire. - call the police and fire department when they need help. - send their kids to public schools. Amazing. Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice
Of course you can bitch and complain, but for someone who benefits from government to state that the government has done nothing right and free enterprise can solve all of the world's problems is ridiculous. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Eje Gustafsson Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 6:03 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice And whom is providing the government with the monies to do this? The tax payers and isn't a tax payer allowed to comment/argue what the monies are being used for? Can just look at for example Kansas where the government done a poor job in managing the monies. 8 years ago toll free numbers was removed. This year education gotten almost $500 in reduction, might not have monies to pay government payroll. Was talks last year that they might not be able to payout tax refunds (monies where the tax payers paid too MUCH). Anyone paying taxes have the right to bitch, whine and gripe about the government on anything they do that cost monies. Now if I or others might want to hear it here or in another place that is a different matter. / Eje -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tim Sylvester Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 7:28 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Report: Broadband stimulus funds won't suffice Yes, I am amazed. Amazed by the bitching and whining about government on this list by people who ... - sell wireless service using spectrum owned by everyone and allocated to them by the FCC for free or low cost. - sell access to the Internet, a network originally funded and developed by DARPA and later funded by the National Science Foundation. - drive on roads funded with taxpayer dollars and maintained by the government. - sell Internet service in rural areas to farmers that receive billions in government subsidies per year. - connect CPE equipment to electrical service that was funded by the Rural Electric Administration. - use VA health services. - will use Medicare and Social Security when they retire. - call the police and fire department when they need help. - send their kids to public schools. Amazing. Tim --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] health insurance
1. If the high cost of health care insurance is being caused by the insurance company executives raking in loads of money, why hasn't free enterprises created competition. If all the insurance company A is averaging a profit of $100 billion/year, wouldn't free enterprise generate a competitor that decided to charge 25% lower premiums and still make a great $75 billion/year? Health insurance companies are except from anti-trust laws and they carve up markets. If you try purchase a health care plan for your employees, how many different companies offer coverage in your area? So, free enterprise doesn't exist in the health care market. Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Metered Billing (time of use billing)
Talking about electric billing in this thread made me think of time-of-use billing and tiered billing rate schedules for electrical usage. PGE has multiple rate schedules. The standard consumer rate schedule starts at $0.115 per KWh and grows to $0.44 per KWh for usage over 300% of the baseline. They also have time-of-use billing schedules which start at $0.087 per KWh during off-peak times in the summer and move up to $0.297 per KWh during peak times. Has anyone considered tiered usage billing or time-of-use billing for Internet access? It would be complicated to implement and also difficult to explain to customers. If Bit Torrent users are the biggest consumers of bandwidth on a network you could benefit by encouraging them to use the network during off hours. Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google
Matt, Based on an e-mail you sent last month, you have 1,700 subscribers behind a single IP address. That is excessive over-subscription of a single IP address. I am surprised that it even works. I suggest that you create a pool of IP addresses with many IP address - 50 to 200 IP addresses. I don't know if it can be done on a Mikrotik but I know other firewall/router/NAT devices can create a NAT pool with 100s of IP addresses for clients. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:41 AM To: WISPA General List; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] NAT issue with Hotmail/Yahoo/Google We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address of the NAT server every 12 hours now, but am looking for a better solution. Anyone have any similar issues? Matt Larsen vistabeam.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webinar Announced
In previous life I was a product manager for Cisco and two smaller networking vendors. I presented to 100s of groups under various scenarios - everything from a user group with 10 people in Grinnell Iowa, to 2,000 people at Networkers, to private briefings at Cisco's HQ. From the vendor perspective, WISPA is asking the vendor to make a public presentation to a user group about their company, products and technology. If I am the vendor, I make the following assumptions: 1. Everything I say is public and no one is under NDA which means I will not disclose confidential or proprietary information. 2. The event will be recorded either by the user group or someone attending the webinar at their desk. 3. My competitors will be listening to the event most likely using an alias to attend event. 4. The audience might include people that use our products and are fans of the company. The audience might include people that don't like the products and the company. The audience will include people that don't know anything about the company. 5. There will be people in the audience from smaller organizations that don't have direct contact with the company and this is a great opportunity to hear from them directly. Vendors love to hear from directly from people that actually run a network every day rather than having it filtered through sales force and the channel. So, WISPA should: 1. Let the vendor know well in advance that the webinar will be recorded and posted on the WISPA website with member only access. 2. At the beginning of the webinar, the host needs to remind everyone that the webinar is being recorded. The reminder needs to be recorded. 3. After the event, post the recording as is. No editing, no vendor review, just post it. The vendor gave their consent when after being notified that the event was being recorded, they agreed to do the event. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 10:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webinar Announced I think if the vendor agrees to speak before WISPA then the recording should really be implied. There is absolutely nothing implied. It takes like 2 seconds to ASK the vendor the question, and there is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't or couldn't be asked. So why not just Ask the question? You do one of two things... 1) Before Webinar state, Be aware that this Webinar will be archived for full membership's future viewing or 2) After Webinar ask, How did you think it went? We'd like to archive the webinar so other members can benefit from viewing it, Is taht OK? Then no one gets sued. Then no one complains after the fact. Then nobody gets discruntled. And the Vendor now actually knows about it, and may actually consider it an additional VALUE-ADD Free marketing opportuntiy that WISPA is giving them. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: lakel...@gbcx.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 9:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webinar Announced I think if the vendor agrees to speak before WISPA then the recording should really be implied. WISPA has all the right in the world to archieve their media and if they are hosting the webinar for the benefit of their members. Now if WISPA wanted to sell the webinar to someone outside the WISPA membership that may require a release but not for membership distribution. Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:17:55 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webinar Announced I know a lot of people feel that way, but it's bull. If it's that important, don't divulge it to anyone in the first place, which defeats the purpose of the webinar or any presentation to your clients of any kind. Once it's released, your technology is just as good as someone else's anyway. What's to prevent your competitor that you're afraid of from directly attending the webinar? It kinda goes along with the privileged email thread. Trust me, there is very little if anything any vendor or WISP does that's secret or special. Intel, IBM, AMD, etc... I'll buy it. None of these guys. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 3:26 PM To: lakel...@gbcx.net; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webinar Announced Although I think that would be a good idea, before such is done, make sure the vendor authorizes it to occur. Depending on the
Re: [WISPA] FreeRadius / Accounting data
If you store the accounting data in MySQL, you can perform the following SQL query to list the number of bytes Downloaded, Uploaded, Total Bytes by user for a give time period. select username, sum(acctinputoctets) as Download, sum(acctoutputoctets) as Upload, sum(acctinputoctets + acctoutputoctets) as Total Bytes FROM radacct where acctstarttime BETWEEN '2009-06-01' and '2009-07-01' group by username; Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mark McElvy Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 8:51 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] FreeRadius / Accounting data I am running FreeRadius and FreeSide usinf PPPoE. Freeside currently does not give me the reports I need for my accounting data. When I run a report, it gives you details on each record but does not give you totals for each user. I would like to generate a report that would give me upload/download totals for a given time period. Anyone know of software I can run against the FreeRadius accounting data to get this info or have any Freeside customization that would like to share to do this? I am looking at bitcap bill if you have not guessed;) Mark McElvy AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FreeRadius / Accounting data
That was very useful, I was able to cut and paste in into Excel so I could sort. Good! You seem to have gotten the UL and DL labels backward. And the total ends up in the same column as the UL number. Opps! Another issue is that there are some accounting records that cross the first of the month. Is there any way to force an accounting record daily? Do you want to do this for historical data or going forward? If you have all of the accounting messages in a FreeRADIUS detail file, including the interim updates, you can create a script to Going forward, you can run a report at the end of every month that sums all of the data sent by that client from the beginning of time and subtract the previous month's total. That would give you the incremental data sent in the new month. You can then cut and paste it into Excel. Here's a SQL query that will give you the lifetime total data sent by a client. select username, sum(acctoutputoctets) as Download, sum(acctinputoctets) as Upload, sum(acctinputoctets + acctoutputoctets) as Total Bytes FROM radacct group by username order by username; Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Verizon Wireless = Joke
Section 13.10.660 (3) (10) talks about: Small scale, low powered, short-range wireless internet transmitter/receivers (e.g., Wi-Fi hotspots). Would that include WiMAX? Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Frank Crawford Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:43 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon Wireless = Joke If you keep wireless in perspective, 13.10.660 (e) (10) exempts you from 13.10.660 through 13.10.668, inclusive, and the 30 page app. As far as Tom's county, they have the same type of requirements except it only applies to licensed freq's not unlicensed. Frank Tim Sylvester wrote: In Santa Cruz County California, it can cost $25K to go through the permitting process to install an antenna. The County charges $6,000 for a use permit to install a Wireless Communication Facility. That includes towers or just adding an antenna to an existing tower or rooftop. Then they charge you another $750 to $1,000 for the building permit to install the antenna. To be on the safe side you also need to hire a land-use planner for $15K to $20K to handle the permit process on your behalf. After the antenna is installed, you have to hire an engineering firm to measure the RF emissions to make sure that the new antenna operates within the FCC RF radiation exposure standards. This doesn't include any outside engineers the county might have to hire to review your application and it does not include any fees for leasing the tower or rooftop. The county code for Wireless Communications Facilities is 30 pages long with a 30 page application. Check them out at: http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruzCounty/html/SantaCruzCounty13 /Sant aCruzCounty1310.html#13.10.659 Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 10:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon Wireless = Joke Try T-Mobile at $4500 here. Regards, Chuck Hogg Shelby Broadband 502-722-9292 ch...@shelbybb.com http://www.shelbybb.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Kilton Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:33 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Verizon Wireless = Joke I was interested in a Verizon Wireless tower, than they tell me there is a non-refundable $2500 application fee. WOW, what a rip off. I attached there application if nobody else has one to laugh at. -Cameron --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Barriers to WISP growth
Stimulus: I don't believe in it and did not apply. I want to understand people's opposition to the Broadband Stimulus programs. Rick and other people opposed to the stimulus, can you expand on why you don't believe in the Stimulus and why you didn't apply? Are there things you think the government - FCC, congress, etc. - could do to help ISPs and expanding broadband? Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Barriers to WISP growth
I also further the idea that release of public spectrum in the UHF bands would be a great shot in the arm towards the goal of ubiquitous broadband. Cheaper than a stimulus package too. OK. We are getting somewhere. You do want the government to do something. You want the government to open up the UHF bands for wireless data services. How should this be done? Should the spectrum be free or sold at auction to the highest bidder? Unlicensed, licensed, or semi-licensed? What restrictions, if any, should be placed on the devices using the spectrum - power output, cognitive radios, etc.? What about interference with wireless mics? Tim WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods
I have deployed FreeRADIUS for large ISPs terminating PPPoE on Cisco (14,000 subs) and RedBack gear (200K subs). Works great. Tim Disclaimer: By day I am a FreeRADIUS consultant. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert West Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:36 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods
I'll look into this. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nick Huanca Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 8:23 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Hi Tim, Do you know if the Cisco products or the Redback products support bursting based on RADIUS attributes? Thanks, --Nick Huanca On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote: I have deployed FreeRADIUS for large ISPs terminating PPPoE on Cisco (14,000 subs) and RedBack gear (200K subs). Works great. Tim Disclaimer: By day I am a FreeRADIUS consultant. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert West Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:36 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods I've been trying to get around to FreeRADIUS. Do you use that, Josh? I've been looking at Radius Manager as well and have the download but have yet to do a darn thing with any of it. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Authentication Methods Sounds like a job for FreeRADIUS to me. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Nick Huanca n...@gaw.com wrote: Hi all, I currently am working on a project to develop a sustainable, manufacturer agnostic, easy to maintain and provision authentication system for our ISP. We have a mix of access points from Alvarion, Trango, MikroTik, Canopy, and others. We're currently running a distributed PPPoE model with MikroTik PPPoE concentrators. We're concerned about MikroTik's longevity, reliability and support as we move towards a more centralized PPPoE model where all our sessions terminate at a CO. We're looking to migrate over 1,000 customers, currently across 15 or so concentrators, to one single concentrator with either load balancing or redundancy. We're also trying to keep our decisions based around a future IPv6 implementation. My question is if anyone has had any experience in deploying large scale PPPoE with a centralized methodology. I have investigated the Open Source options such as rp-pppoe and others but have found that they don't offer any load-balancing or redundancy options, which are important considerations when moving to a centralized model. These packages also don't offer any type of integrated rate-limiting or burst-limiting based on RADIUS. Does anyone have any experience with other types of centralized authentication for customers that support IPv6 and include integration of rate-limiting/bursting? I have reached out to a Cisco integrator, ImageStream, Fine Point Technologies (http://www.finepoint.com/servpoet.html), and some others to find solutions. Thanks in advance, -- Nick Huanca --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http
[WISPA] BIP-BTOP Grant application executive summaries now on broadbandusa.gov
The three page executive summaries for the BIP/BTOP applications are now on broadbandusa.gov. They have also added the state for the proposed project area and contact e-mail address. Applicants have removed confidential information from the executive summary and not all applicants submitted an executive summary. Applicants were not required to submit a public version of their executive summary. Have fun reading! Tim -- Tim Sylvester Avanzar Networks (408) 826-8350 (o) (408) 334-1700 (m) t...@avanzarnetworks.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] BIP-BTOP Grant application executive summaries now onbroadbandusa.gov
If it is not up there, then the applicant did not submit a public version of their executive summary. They were not required to do it, so they either didn't want to share the info, forgot/didn't have time or they didn't get the message. The e-mail of the contact person is on the web site if you want to contact them. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 2:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] BIP-BTOP Grant application executive summaries now onbroadbandusa.gov I wonder why they're not all up there. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.com Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 2:50 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] BIP-BTOP Grant application executive summaries now onbroadbandusa.gov The three page executive summaries for the BIP/BTOP applications are now on broadbandusa.gov. They have also added the state for the proposed project area and contact e-mail address. Applicants have removed confidential information from the executive summary and not all applicants submitted an executive summary. Applicants were not required to submit a public version of their executive summary. Have fun reading! Tim -- Tim Sylvester Avanzar Networks (408) 826-8350 (o) (408) 334-1700 (m) t...@avanzarnetworks.com - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
I found this page on the USDA web site with a database of Broadband projects funded by the USDA. It looks like this will also be the site that ISPs can use to find proposed BIP/BTOP projects in their area and file a challenge. You can sign up to receive e-mail when a new Public Notice of Filing (PNF) is posted that lists new proposed projects at: http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/Subscription/Initiate.aspx?action=create You can search for existing projects at: http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/SearchTabs.aspx or look at them on a map at: http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/AllStatesMap.aspx You can look up the PNFs and file a response at: http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/LegalNoticeFiling/List.Aspx This is a response form which shows you the type of information required to file a response/challenge: http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/broadband/pdf/legal-notice-response-form-kk.pdf USDA uses an online mapping tool to create maps that show service areas. The tool requires an account with the USDA eAuthentication system. It may take a couple of days to have your account approved, so apply sooner than later. You can sign up for an account at: https://eauth.sc.egov.usda.gov/eAuth/selfRegistration/selfRegLevel1Step1.jsp Again, this is what I have found searching the USDA web site. The site has language about BIP BTOP but there has not been an official announcement that this is the site that will be used. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Bartosch Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 7:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects Realistically, you can't block the application if you can reach less than 50% of the households in an area. Plus they are probably applying for funds to cover an area larger than (or at least not completely coincident with) yours, which would likely make a successful challenge improbable at best. However, BTOP requires that they offer interconnection, and strongly encouages them to offer a real wholesale arrangement. It might be worth your time to approach them about it. Chuck Sent from my iPhone On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:49 AM, L. Aaron Kaplan aa...@lo-res.org wrote: On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: Digital Bridge has asked for money for Underserved for the county that I service, the whole county. Questions: 1. Since I am the only WISP in the Rural areas of my county and my standard is 1024/256 with 2.4 and there is 50% of the clients that I cant get due to trees. I assume that that will be seen as Underserved. Is there anything that I can do to get this blocked? Just a quit though - correct me if I am wrong, but... Isnt blocking competition very un-American somehow? Is blocking even possible? I hope you also applied for getting thru the trees, no? 2. Now it appears that they asked for money for all the Census blocks in the county. ALL the cities have My service, DSL, and Cable. How can that be labeled as Underserved. If we get one Block rejected does that stop the one request which would be all my area? --- there's no place like 127.0.0.1, except maybe ::1 (someday) (üäö) --- --- --- --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- --- --- --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
It's an requirement. From the application: B. Eligibility Factors ** Applicant understands and agrees to comply with the nondiscrimination and interconnection obligations outlined in the NOFA. ** If applying for a last mile Broadband Infrastructure project, applicant understands and agrees to comply with the last mile coverage obligations as outlined in the NOFA. From the NOFA: c. Nondiscrimination and Interconnection All Broadband Infrastructure (both BIP and BTOP) applicants, must commit to the following Nondiscrimination and Interconnection Obligations: i. Adhere to the principles contained in the FCC's Internet Policy Statement (FCC 05-151, adopted August 5, 2005); ii. not favor any lawful Internet applications and content over others; iii. display any network management policies in a prominent location on the service provider's web page and provide notice to customers of changes to these policies (awardees must describe any business practices or technical mechanisms they employ, other than standard best efforts Internet delivery, to allocate capacity; differentiate among applications, providers, or sources; limit usage; and manage illegal or harmful content); iv. connect to the public Internet directly or indirectly, such that the project is not an entirely private closed network; and v. offer interconnection, where technically feasible without exceeding current or reasonably anticipated capacity limitations, on reasonable rates and terms to be negotiated with requesting parties. This includes both the ability to connect to the public Internet and physical interconnection for the exchange of traffic. Applicants must disclose their proposed interconnection, nondiscrimination, and network management practices with the application. All these requirements shall be subject to the needs of law enforcement and reasonable network management. Thus, awardees may employ generally accepted technical measures to provide acceptable service levels to all customers, such as caching and application-neutral bandwidth allocation, as well as measures to address spam, denial of service attacks, illegal content, and other harmful activities. In addition to providing the required connection to the Internet, awardees may offer managed services, such as telemedicine, public safety communications, and distance learning, which use private network connections for enhanced quality of service, rather than traversing the public Internet. An awardee may satisfy the requirement for interconnection by negotiating in good faith with all parties making a bona fide request. The awardee and requesting party may negotiate terms such as business arrangements, capacity limits, financial terms, and technical conditions for interconnection. If the awardee and requesting party cannot reach agreement, they may voluntarily seek an interpretation by the FCC of any FCC rules implicated in the dispute. If an agreement cannot be reached within 90 days, the party requesting interconnection may notify RUS or NTIA in writing of the failure to reach satisfactory terms with the awardee. The 90-day limit is to encourage the parties to resolve differences through negotiation. With respect to non-discrimination, those who believe an awardee has failed to meet the non-discrimination obligations should first seek action at the FCC of any FCC rules implicated in the dispute. If the FCC chooses to take no action, those seeking recourse may notify RUS or NTIA in writing about the alleged failure to adhere to commitments of the award. Entities that successfully reach an agreement to interconnect with a system funded under BIP may not use that interconnection agreement to provide services that duplicate services provided by projects funded by outstanding telecommunications loans made under the RE Act. Further, interconnection may not result in a BIP-funded facility being used for ineligible purposes under the Recovery Act. These conditions will apply for the life of the awardee's facilities used in the project and not to any existing network arrangements. The conditions apply to any contractors or subcontractors of such awardees employed to deploy or operate the network facilities for the infrastructure project. Recipients that fail to accept or comply with the terms listed above may be considered in default or breach of their loan or grant agreements. RUS and NTIA may exercise all available remedies to cure the default. d. Last Mile Coverage Obligation An applicant for a Last Mile Broadband Infrastructure project must identify the census block(s) selected for the project and provide documentation supporting the applicant's determination that the proposed funded service area is either unserved or underserved. There is a presumption that the applicant will provide service to the entire territory of each census block included in the proposed funded service area, unless the applicant files a waiver and provides a reasoned explanation as to why
Re: [WISPA] [Btop-bip] BIP / BTOP Applications are online
The executive summaries with confidential information removed are due today at 5pm. My guess is they will be posted to www.broadbandusa.gov within a week. The instructions want people to printout the executive summary, blackout the confidential information, scan it into a PDF and send it back. This will make it difficult to search the summaries. Does anyone know of software that can do OCR on bunch of PDF files in batch mode? Also, applicants are not required to submit an executive summary and many will probably not submit an exec summary because they are lazy, did see the message or don't want people to know more about their project. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Bartosch Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 7:42 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Btop-bip] BIP / BTOP Applications are online There's no way to know that until they do it since the link doesn't exist yet-and even if they told us it will be at such-and-such link, you're about even odds for them actually putting it at the link they tell you. But, it will no doubt be on the NTIA web site at the least, just as the abstracts were. I'm sure you'll see it posted here in an email the instant it becomes available though. Chuck On Sep 14, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Robert West wrote: Where will the Executive Summaries be posted, what area? I too am interested in seeing some of the content of the applications. - Original Message - From: St. Louis Broadband To: 'WISPA General List' Cc: 'WISPA Members BTOP-BIP List' Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:21 PM Subject: Re: [Btop-bip] [WISPA] BIP / BTOP Applications are online They will show most of it when they post the Executive Summaries...maybe, at least ours does, Victoria -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of jp Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:35 PM To: WISPA General List Cc: WISPA Members BTOP-BIP List Subject: Re: [WISPA] BIP / BTOP Applications are online I'd like to see the actual content of the applications Some of them seem quite far fetched. Others seem like plans I'd like to know more about. On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 05:34:18PM -0400, Kevin Suitor wrote: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/applications/search.cfm [cid:image001.jpg@01CA3173.C2138660] Redline Communications Inc. Kevin Suitor Vice President, Corporate Marketing 302 Town Centre Blvd. Markham, ON L3R 0E8 CANADA o: +1 905.948.2299 f: +1 647.723.0451 m: +1 416.508.1252 Skype: ksuitor e-mail: ksui...@redlinecommunications.commailto:ksui...@redlinecommunications. com Web: www.redlinecommunications.comhttp://www.redlinecommunications.com/ -- /* Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ */ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ___ Btop-bip mailing list btop-...@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/btop-bip - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Chuck Bartosch Clarity Connect, Inc. 200 Pleasant Grove Road Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 257-8268 When the stars threw down their spears, and water'd heaven with their tears, Did He smile, His work to see? Did He who made the Lamb make thee? From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger! --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations
Who are these people? The FCC or the satellite earth station people? The FCC describes an alternative for determining a safe distance for locating a station with in an FSS protection zone in Appendix D of the Report and Order authorizing the 3.65 - 3.70 GHz band. You can read the full document here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-56A1.pdf This is the intro to the appendix. * APPENDIX D: A Methodology For Locating Fixed Stations Within The FSS Earth Station Protection Zone The rules adopted herein require that fixed stations in the 3650-3700 MHz band be located at least 150 km from any grandfathered FSS earth station unless all affected licensees agree on closer spacing. Below, we present as an example, one methodology that can be used to determine a safe distance within the FSS earth station protection zone where a fixed station can be located without increasing the potential of that station to cause harmful interference to the earth station. We reiterate that this is being presented only as an example of one methodology. We recognize that there are many methods for providing the required protection, such as locating the fixed station behind an obstruction, and that licensees are free to propose any method they deem appropriate. * I would assume that you could use this method to calculate the safe distance for operating at 3.65GHz and present it to the FCC and the FSS earth station operator. I will need to do this for my WiMAX deployment which will have two mountain ranges between the WiMAX network and the earth station. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of pat Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations Anybody else having any luck with these people. They're trying to tell me I might have to clear all my customer sites for a proposed WiMax deployment on a case by case basis. I'm at the edge of the 150km exclusion zone and have a mountain range in between us. This is getting really annoying. Thanks, Pat --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations
It sucks to be in the satellite business today. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of pat Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations SES Americom, and they suffer from cranial rectitus. Tim Sylvester wrote: Who are these people? The FCC or the satellite earth station people? The FCC describes an alternative for determining a safe distance for locating a station with in an FSS protection zone in Appendix D of the Report and Order authorizing the 3.65 - 3.70 GHz band. You can read the full document here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-56A1.pdf This is the intro to the appendix. * APPENDIX D: A Methodology For Locating Fixed Stations Within The FSS Earth Station Protection Zone The rules adopted herein require that fixed stations in the 3650-3700 MHz band be located at least 150 km from any grandfathered FSS earth station unless all affected licensees agree on closer spacing. Below, we present as an example, one methodology that can be used to determine a safe distance within the FSS earth station protection zone where a fixed station can be located without increasing the potential of that station to cause harmful interference to the earth station. We reiterate that this is being presented only as an example of one methodology. We recognize that there are many methods for providing the required protection, such as locating the fixed station behind an obstruction, and that licensees are free to propose any method they deem appropriate. * I would assume that you could use this method to calculate the safe distance for operating at 3.65GHz and present it to the FCC and the FSS earth station operator. I will need to do this for my WiMAX deployment which will have two mountain ranges between the WiMAX network and the earth station. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of pat Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations Anybody else having any luck with these people. They're trying to tell me I might have to clear all my customer sites for a proposed WiMax deployment on a case by case basis. I'm at the edge of the 150km exclusion zone and have a mountain range in between us. This is getting really annoying. Thanks, Pat --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations
Do you have permission from SES Americom to at least install your base station? If so, register your base station on the FCC site. Once the base station is approved, start registering your client sites. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of pat Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations SES Americom, and they suffer from cranial rectitus. Tim Sylvester wrote: Who are these people? The FCC or the satellite earth station people? The FCC describes an alternative for determining a safe distance for locating a station with in an FSS protection zone in Appendix D of the Report and Order authorizing the 3.65 - 3.70 GHz band. You can read the full document here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-56A1.pdf This is the intro to the appendix. * APPENDIX D: A Methodology For Locating Fixed Stations Within The FSS Earth Station Protection Zone The rules adopted herein require that fixed stations in the 3650-3700 MHz band be located at least 150 km from any grandfathered FSS earth station unless all affected licensees agree on closer spacing. Below, we present as an example, one methodology that can be used to determine a safe distance within the FSS earth station protection zone where a fixed station can be located without increasing the potential of that station to cause harmful interference to the earth station. We reiterate that this is being presented only as an example of one methodology. We recognize that there are many methods for providing the required protection, such as locating the fixed station behind an obstruction, and that licensees are free to propose any method they deem appropriate. * I would assume that you could use this method to calculate the safe distance for operating at 3.65GHz and present it to the FCC and the FSS earth station operator. I will need to do this for my WiMAX deployment which will have two mountain ranges between the WiMAX network and the earth station. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of pat Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite earth stations Anybody else having any luck with these people. They're trying to tell me I might have to clear all my customer sites for a proposed WiMax deployment on a case by case basis. I'm at the edge of the 150km exclusion zone and have a mountain range in between us. This is getting really annoying. Thanks, Pat --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I would like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB dongle. Does anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz? Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World next week. Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed deployment, but if you nailed me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too many things for too many people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far more useful for fixed deployments. -Matt On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary ple...@apertonet.com wrote: The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and now is the time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e drum in a manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper it put out in November 2005, penned by Monica Paoli of Seza Fila: The WiMAX Forum is committed to providing optimized solutions for fixed, nomadic, portable and mobile broadband wireless access. Two versions of WiMAX address the demand for these different types of access: * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on the 802.16-2004 version of the IEEE 802.16 standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed and nomadic access in Line of Sight (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) environments. * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic mobile radio channels, this version is based on the 802.16e amendment and provides support for handoffs and roaming. It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is going to asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week. The fact is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was designed to do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband. This version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile version for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per MHz and 35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric or even higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for networks doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance. For too long, vendors that now only do the mobile standard have been trying to squeeze the round peg of the mobile standard into the square hole of fixed networks. This has been confusing many, and leading some to overpay for their networks. Why pay for millions in RD for features that you can never use, especially in a 3.65 GHz network where mobile can't happen? We have seen consultants spec'ing in E for 3.65 GHz, thinking they will get interoperability and even PC cards for their networks. They also think they can get self-install -- something this community knows is not possible in 3.65 GHz due to the power restrictions placed on indoor modems. Operators and other would-be WiMAX deployers are being hoodwinked. The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a high cost and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self- install. Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5 GHz doing self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's service. D is better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for public safety video type networks and definitely for voice-centric users. D is better for enterprise, where many users sit behind the CPE. E is better for roaming individual users with modest expectations. We'd like to hear your opinions, and if you like to discuss this with us while at 4G World, please drop me a note. Regards, Patrick Leary Aperto Networks Patrick Leary Aperto Networks 813.426.4230 mobile - --- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ - --- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives:
Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
Is a 1/4 a rough estimate or has someone been able to test E at 3.65GHz? What type of range have people seen in the field with E at 3.65GHz with indoor subscriber units? I would a agree that a 1/4 mile in rural area of Colorado or Iowa (where I grew up) is not very useful but now I live in a reasonably dense urban area. A 1/4 of a mile is small but if I can do mobile WiMAX at up to 1 mile, then the economics work. Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of 3-dB Networks Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:55 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? Nothing as far as I know... but the lower power limits and the higher frequency don't make it too feasible. If you have to be within 1/4 mile of the tower to make mobility work... it seems like your going to spend a lot of money for nothing Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tim Sylvester Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 4:53 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? What part of the 3650 rules make E not supportable? Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable with the current 3650 rules. -Matt On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote: I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I would like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB dongle. Does anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz? Tim -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World next week. Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed deployment, but if you nailed me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too many things for too many people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far more useful for fixed deployments. -Matt On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary ple...@apertonet.com wrote: The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and now is the time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e drum in a manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper it put out in November 2005, penned by Monica Paoli of Seza Fila: The WiMAX Forum is committed to providing optimized solutions for fixed, nomadic, portable and mobile broadband wireless access. Two versions of WiMAX address the demand for these different types of access: * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on the 802.16-2004 version of the IEEE 802.16 standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed and nomadic access in Line of Sight (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) environments. * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic mobile radio channels, this version is based on the 802.16e amendment and provides support for handoffs and roaming. It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is going to asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week. The fact is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was designed to do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband. This version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile version for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per MHz and 35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric or even higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for networks doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance. For too long, vendors that now only do the mobile standard have been trying to squeeze the round peg of the mobile standard into the square hole of fixed networks. This has been confusing many, and leading some to overpay for their networks. Why pay for millions in RD for features that you can never use, especially in a 3.65 GHz network where mobile can't happen? We have seen consultants spec'ing in E for 3.65 GHz, thinking they will get interoperability and even
Re: [WISPA] OEM Supplier Options? (Network appliance, CPE, etc...)
Try the following companies ... IntelR Embedded and Communications Alliance http://www.intel.com/design/network/ica/index.htm iBase - http://www.ibase.com.tw/2009/fwa6104.html Logic Supply - http://www.logicsupply.com/ -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mailing LIst Member Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 8:44 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: [WISPA] OEM Supplier Options? (Network appliance, CPE, etc...) Greetings list. We are wondering if anyone had any good resources for OEM appliance supplier services. We are still very new, and are still researching to figure out what the most effective and viable route would be, for possible network appliance configurations services/sales to some local clients. We are looking for mini-itx, or pico-itx Intel Atom processor-based main boards and enclosures, preferably that are aesthetically pleasing, to put out platform software on, and sell/lease to our clients for network management/access applications. We are developing on BSD and Java EE however, that is superfluous in reference to platform considerations already discussed. Any input would be appreciated... Respectfully, Martes G Wigglesworth M. G. Wigglesworth Holdings, LLC --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
