[WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service And Provide the Atlanta Metro Market with New Wireless Offerings ATLANTA (January 9, 2008) - One Ring Networks announced today that it will be launching WiMAX service in the Atlanta Metro area using licensed spectrum it was recently granted. The grant which gives One Ring access to 50Mhz of spectrum between 3650Mhz and 3700Mhz has favorable propagation characteristics. WiMAX is a wireless technology which allows broad coverage with data-rich connectivity unlike Wi-Fi which is unlicensed and limited to small hot-spots. One Ring will couple this spectrum with WiMAX equipment to offer a wide array of wireless business offerings. By using the company's existing and extensive wireless infrastructure, the entire metropolitan Atlanta area and surrounding cities can expect to see new, economical, and innovative offerings as a result of the company’s WiMAX network. One Ring has aggressive rollout plans that will bring WiMAX to all major Atlanta sub-markets in 2008. Additionally, the company has plans for a multi-market initiative to expand the reach of its services to businesses throughout select metropolitan markets. “Our new WiMAX offering will allow us to provide Atlanta businesses with a whole new value proposition,” said Matt Liotta, CEO of One Ring Networks. “Businesses across metro Atlanta are increasingly discovering the limitations of T1s and the need for truly diverse telecommunication services.” In the United States, an estimated 2 percent of buildings have access to fiber. That means 98% of businesses don't have any access alternative. As a fiber and fixed-wireless provider, One Ring now has the infrastructure to offer access solutions to both large and small businesses regardless of their proximity to fiber.“Companies often struggle with business continuity issues related to their telecom infrastructure,” said Kris Maher, Director of Sales for One Ring Networks. “Most businesses can't afford a fiber build and are excited to learn about a wireless solution.” One Ring's deployment of WiMAX technology will emerge as an alternative broadband solution for a range of business services where deployment of landline-based technologies is cost prohibitive. About One Ring Networks One Ring Networks operates one of the largest hybrid fiber-fixed wireless networks in the United States and is one of the few carriers offering end-to-end telecommunications and networking services that are truly diverse. Over its state-of-the-art network, One Ring offers high-speed data services and feature-rich IP phone services. For Press Inquiries, please contact: Suzanne Urash CRE8 Group, Inc. 813-649-8504 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Whose gear? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > > > One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > And Provide the Atlanta Metro Market with New Wireless Offerings > > ATLANTA (January 9, 2008) - One Ring Networks announced today that it will > be launching WiMAX service in the Atlanta Metro area using licensed > spectrum it was recently granted. The grant which gives One Ring access > to 50Mhz of spectrum between 3650Mhz and 3700Mhz has favorable propagation > characteristics. WiMAX is a wireless technology which allows broad > coverage with data-rich connectivity unlike Wi-Fi which is unlicensed and > limited to small hot-spots. One Ring will couple this spectrum with WiMAX > equipment to offer a wide array of wireless business offerings. By using > the company's existing and extensive wireless infrastructure, the entire > metropolitan Atlanta area and surrounding cities can expect to see new, > economical, and innovative offerings as a result of the company’s WiMAX > network. > > One Ring has aggressive rollout plans that will bring WiMAX to all major > Atlanta sub-markets in 2008. Additionally, the company has plans for a > multi-market initiative to expand the reach of its services to businesses > throughout select metropolitan markets. “Our new WiMAX offering will > allow us to provide Atlanta businesses with a whole new value > proposition,” said Matt Liotta, CEO of One Ring Networks. “Businesses > across metro Atlanta are increasingly discovering the limitations of T1s > and the need for truly diverse telecommunication services.” > > In the United States, an estimated 2 percent of buildings have access to > fiber. That means 98% of businesses don't have any access alternative. As > a fiber and fixed-wireless provider, One Ring now has the infrastructure > to offer access solutions to both large and small businesses regardless of > their proximity to fiber.“Companies often struggle with business > continuity issues related to their telecom infrastructure,” said Kris > Maher, Director of Sales for One Ring Networks. “Most businesses can't > afford a fiber build and are excited to learn about a wireless solution.” > One Ring's deployment of WiMAX technology will emerge as an alternative > broadband solution for a range of business services where deployment of > landline-based technologies is cost prohibitive. > > About One Ring Networks > One Ring Networks operates one of the largest hybrid fiber-fixed wireless > networks in the United States and is one of the few carriers offering > end-to-end telecommunications and networking services that are truly > diverse. Over its state-of-the-art network, One Ring offers high-speed > data services and feature-rich IP phone services. > > For Press Inquiries, please contact: > Suzanne Urash > CRE8 Group, Inc. > 813-649-8504 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ### > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Mike Hammett wrote: > Whose gear? > We have not announced a vendor at present. That announcement will be forth coming. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Do your radios have sub channelization? I Congratulate you on the build, but I have to question if stuff like this is not part of the total misunderstanding of WiMAX (what it is and isn't). I really don't think WiMAX is the right term, Maybe WiMAX based, but it definitely is not WiMAX. We just turned up our first WiMAX base station today. Running 2.5Ghz and using 16e ready hardware. I'm Not trying to steal glory here, just making a point. Mike Bushard, Jr Wireless Network Engineer 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [SPAM] Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Importance: Low Steve Stroh wrote: > Fixed WiMAX profiles for 3.5 (non-US), but NOT 3.65 GHz in the US because of > the unique "contention protocol" requirements (systems for 3.65 GHz should > be considered proprietary and quite possibly non-interoperable). > The lower 25Mhz of 3.65Ghz does not have a "contention protocol" requirement. However, if the radio implements contention then it won't be restricted to the lower 25Mhz. As of today, only WiMAX radios have been certified for 3.65Ghz. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I'd like to make a point in return. This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? If Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target market understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers are going to do deep layer1 and 2 analysis to see that their bandwidth is coming over the "one true WiMax". If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and you're talking to kindergarteners, just go ahead and call it a duck and reeducate the 1/1000 of 1 percent who become ornithologists when they grow up and care to learn the subtle nuances. I know companies that sell/sold "wireless DSL". Technically, this is a complete absurdity. But, I'd bet that it did a good job of communicating the concept--which is, after all, the point of marketing. I'd imagine that they do better then companies that sell "High bandwidth 802.11A/B/G Data Traffic Transport Solutions". There are service providers who still keep on trying to sell "VoIP" with multi page explanations about how the analog voice get digitized, packetized, encapsulated, and 20 other gazillion processes that no one really cares about unless they like reading RFCs every time they make even mundane purchase decisions. Then there's Comcast who, while definitely not hurt by the existing customer base and financial resources and technical infrastructure, became the fourth largest telco in quite a short amount of time. They did this by having the marketing common sense to sell "telephone service", not "Voice over IP". If the customers understand what Matt's product is better because he calls it "WiMax", then great. It sure sounds better than "Modified pre-release quasi 802.16". You're in business to sell products...and, that involves communication. Using language that people can understand sells products and, in the end, gets more "truth" across--if that is your objective here--by actually communicating with people as opposed to using language that people just don't understand--nor care to. -Clint Ricker Kentnis Technologies On Jan 10, 2008 7:49 PM, Mike Bushard, Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do your radios have sub channelization? > > I Congratulate you on the build, but I have to question if stuff like this > is not part of the total misunderstanding of WiMAX (what it is and isn't). > I > really don't think WiMAX is the right term, Maybe WiMAX based, but it > definitely is not WiMAX. > > We just turned up our first WiMAX base station today. Running 2.5Ghz and > using 16e ready hardware. I'm Not trying to steal glory here, just making > a > point. > > > Mike Bushard, Jr > Wireless Network Engineer > 320-256-WISP (9477) > 320-256-9478 Fax > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Matt Liotta > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:22 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [SPAM] Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX > Service > Importance: Low > > Steve Stroh wrote: > > Fixed WiMAX profiles for 3.5 (non-US), but NOT 3.65 GHz in the US > because > of > > the unique "contention protocol" requirements (systems for 3.65 GHz > should > > be considered proprietary and quite possibly non-interoperable). > > > The lower 25Mhz of 3.65Ghz does not have a "contention protocol" > requirement. However, if the radio implements contention then it won't > be restricted to the lower 25Mhz. As of today, only WiMAX radios have > been certified for 3.65Ghz. > > -Matt > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. Scriv Clint Ricker wrote: > Tom, > I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms of > deliverables. > > My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves using > buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your product. > Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and > communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is that > the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is > communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. > > Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that it > isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate and, in > the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the deliverables, in > that sense. > > Thanks, > Clint Ricker > -Kentnis Technologies > > > On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with new >> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of Press >> Releases. >> >> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding the >> release. >> >> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state of >> the >> art. All the same to the consumer. >> >> Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". >> I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. >> There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public >> eye. >> Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. >> Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. >> 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the >> characteristics >> of unlicensed, with registration added. >> Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to think >> the service is something more than it really is. >> >> Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not >> illegal. >> Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any different >> than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe >> just >> clever marketing? >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >> >>> I'd like to make a point in return. >>> >>> This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and >>> publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? >>> >> If >> >>> Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target market >>> understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers >>> >> are >> >>> going to do deep layer1 and 2 analysis to see that their bandwidth is >>> coming >>> over the "one true WiMax". If it looks like a duck and quacks like a >>> >> duck >> >>> and you're talking to kindergarteners, just go ahead and call it a duck >>> and >>> reeducate the 1/1000 of 1 percent who become ornithologists when they >>> >> grow >> >>> up and care to learn the subtle nuances. >>> >>> I know companies that sell/sold "wireless DSL". Technically, this is a >>> complete absurdity. >>> But, I'd bet that it did a good job of communicating the concept--which >>> is, >>> after all, the point of marketing. I'd imagine that they do better >>> >> then >> >>> companies that sell "High bandwidth 802.11A/B/G Data Traffic Transport >>> Solutions".
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Tom, I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms of deliverables. My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves using buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your product. Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is that the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that it isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate and, in the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the deliverables, in that sense. Thanks, Clint Ricker -Kentnis Technologies On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with new > technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of Press > Releases. > > With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding the > release. > > I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. > Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state of > the > art. All the same to the consumer. > > Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". > I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. > There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public > eye. > Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. > Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. > 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the > characteristics > of unlicensed, with registration added. > Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to think > the service is something more than it really is. > > Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not > illegal. > Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any different > than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe > just > clever marketing? > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > I'd like to make a point in return. > > > > This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and > > publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? > If > > Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target market > > understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers > are > > going to do deep layer1 and 2 analysis to see that their bandwidth is > > coming > > over the "one true WiMax". If it looks like a duck and quacks like a > duck > > and you're talking to kindergarteners, just go ahead and call it a duck > > and > > reeducate the 1/1000 of 1 percent who become ornithologists when they > grow > > up and care to learn the subtle nuances. > > > > I know companies that sell/sold "wireless DSL". Technically, this is a > > complete absurdity. > > But, I'd bet that it did a good job of communicating the concept--which > > is, > > after all, the point of marketing. I'd imagine that they do better > then > > companies that sell "High bandwidth 802.11A/B/G Data Traffic Transport > > Solutions". > > > > There are service providers who still keep on trying to sell "VoIP" with > > multi page explanations about how the analog voice get digitized, > > packetized, encapsulated, and 20 other gazillion processes that no one > > really cares about unless they like reading RFCs every time they make > even > > mundane purchase decisions. Then there's Comcast who, while definitely > > not > > hurt by the existing customer base and financial resources and technical > > infrastructure, became the fourth largest telco in quite a short amount > of > > time. They did this by having the marketing common sense to sell > > "telephone > > service", not "Voice over IP". > > > > If the customers understand what Matt's product is better because he > calls > > it "WiMax", then great. It sure sounds better than "Modified > pre-release > > quas
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with new technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of Press Releases. With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding the release. I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state of the art. All the same to the consumer. Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public eye. Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the characteristics of unlicensed, with registration added. Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to think the service is something more than it really is. Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not illegal. Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any different than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe just clever marketing? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > I'd like to make a point in return. > > This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and > publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? If > Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target market > understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers are > going to do deep layer1 and 2 analysis to see that their bandwidth is > coming > over the "one true WiMax". If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck > and you're talking to kindergarteners, just go ahead and call it a duck > and > reeducate the 1/1000 of 1 percent who become ornithologists when they grow > up and care to learn the subtle nuances. > > I know companies that sell/sold "wireless DSL". Technically, this is a > complete absurdity. > But, I'd bet that it did a good job of communicating the concept--which > is, > after all, the point of marketing. I'd imagine that they do better then > companies that sell "High bandwidth 802.11A/B/G Data Traffic Transport > Solutions". > > There are service providers who still keep on trying to sell "VoIP" with > multi page explanations about how the analog voice get digitized, > packetized, encapsulated, and 20 other gazillion processes that no one > really cares about unless they like reading RFCs every time they make even > mundane purchase decisions. Then there's Comcast who, while definitely > not > hurt by the existing customer base and financial resources and technical > infrastructure, became the fourth largest telco in quite a short amount of > time. They did this by having the marketing common sense to sell > "telephone > service", not "Voice over IP". > > If the customers understand what Matt's product is better because he calls > it "WiMax", then great. It sure sounds better than "Modified pre-release > quasi 802.16". You're in business to sell products...and, that involves > communication. Using language that people can understand sells products > and, in the end, gets more "truth" across--if that is your objective > here--by actually communicating with people as opposed to using language > that people just don't understand--nor care to. > > -Clint Ricker > Kentnis Technologies > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 10, 2008 7:49 PM, Mike Bushard, Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Do your radios have sub channelization? >> >> I Congratulate you on the build, but I have to question if stuff like >> this >> is not part of the total misunderstanding of WiMAX (what it is and >> isn't). >> I >> really don't think WiMAX is the right term, Maybe WiMAX based, but it >> definitely is not WiMAX. >> >> We just turned up our first WiMAX base station today. Running 2.5Ghz and >> using 16e ready hardware. I'm Not trying to steal glory here, just making >> a >> point. >> >> >> Mike Bushard, Jr >> Wireless Network Engineer >> 320-256-WISP (9477) >> 320-256-9478 Fax >> >> >> >> -Origina
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: > I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not > for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only > practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput > clients. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > >> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >> Scriv >> >> >> Clint Ricker wrote: >> >>> Tom, >>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms >>> of >>> deliverables. >>> >>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>> using >>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your product. >>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is that >>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >>> >>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that >>> it >>> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate and, >>> in >>> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the deliverables, >>> in >>> that sense. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Clint Ricker >>> -Kentnis Technologies >>> >>> >>> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>>> new >>>> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of >>>> Press >>>> Releases. >>>> >>>> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding the >>>> release. >>>> >>>> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >>>> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state of >>>> the >>>> art. All the same to the consumer. >>>> >>>> Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". >>>> I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. >>>> There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public >>>> eye. >>>> Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. >>>> Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. >>>> 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the >>>> characteristics >>>> of unlicensed, with registration added. >>>> Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to >>>> think >>>> the service is something more than it really is. >>>> >>>> Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not >>>> illegal. >>>> Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any different >>>> than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe >>>> just >>>> clever marketing? >>>> >>>> Tom DeReggi >>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" >>>> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One R
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput clients. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 > just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new > profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As > far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is > not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that > I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. > Scriv > > > Clint Ricker wrote: >> Tom, >> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms >> of >> deliverables. >> >> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >> using >> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your product. >> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is that >> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >> >> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that >> it >> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate and, >> in >> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the deliverables, >> in >> that sense. >> >> Thanks, >> Clint Ricker >> -Kentnis Technologies >> >> >> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>> new >>> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of >>> Press >>> Releases. >>> >>> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding the >>> release. >>> >>> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >>> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state of >>> the >>> art. All the same to the consumer. >>> >>> Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". >>> I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. >>> There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public >>> eye. >>> Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. >>> Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. >>> 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the >>> characteristics >>> of unlicensed, with registration added. >>> Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to >>> think >>> the service is something more than it really is. >>> >>> Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not >>> illegal. >>> Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any different >>> than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe >>> just >>> clever marketing? >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>> >>>> I'd like to make a point in return. >>>> >>>> This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and >>>> publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? >>>> >>> If >>> >>>> Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target >>>> market >>>> understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers >>>> >>> are >>> >>>> going to do deep layer1 and 2 analys
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban > areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem > does this platform solve under that scenario? > Scriv > > > Mike Hammett wrote: >> I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >> not >> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only >> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput >> clients. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >> >>> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >>> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >>> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >>> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >>> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >>> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >>> Scriv >>> >>> >>> Clint Ricker wrote: >>> >>>> Tom, >>>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>>> terms >>>> of >>>> deliverables. >>>> >>>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>>> using >>>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>>> product. >>>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>>> that >>>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >>>> >>>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something >>>> that >>>> it >>>> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate >>>> and, >>>> in >>>> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the >>>> deliverables, >>>> in >>>> that sense. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Clint Ricker >>>> -Kentnis Technologies >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>>>> new >>>>> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of >>>>> Press >>>>> Releases. >>>>> >>>>> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding >>>>> the >>>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >>>>> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state >>>>> of >>>>> the >>>>> art. All the same to the consumer. >>>>> >>>>> Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". >>>>> I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. >>>>> There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the >>>>> public >>>>> eye. >>>>> Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. >>>>> Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. >>>>> 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the >>>>> characteristics >>>>> of unlicensed, with registration added.
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
> It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low > throughput I have a very hard time accepting that comment. 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of pine needles and leafs). Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or subburb or rural. If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to tackle foliage, I 100% agree. If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is any other technology. If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector designs, I'd agree with you. But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy unlicened gear. If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in interference. Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, its one more sector that can be added to the tower. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >not > for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only > practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput > clients. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >> Scriv >> >> >> Clint Ricker wrote: >>> Tom, >>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>> terms >>> of >>> deliverables. >>> >>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>> using >>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>> product. >>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>> that >>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >>> >>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that >>> it >>> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate >>> and, >>> in >>> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the >>> deliverables, >>> in >>> that sense. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Clint Ricker >>> -Kentnis Technologies >>> >>> >>> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>>> new >>>> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of >>>> Press >>>> Releases. >>>> >>>> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding >>>> the >>>> release. >>>> >>>> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >>>> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state >>>> of >>>> the >>>> art. All the same to the consumer. >>>> >>>> Where I saw it
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Exactly. > > What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? > > What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >>I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban >> areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem >> does this platform solve under that scenario? >> Scriv >> >> >> Mike Hammett wrote: >>> I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >>> not >>> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only >>> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low >>> throughput >>> clients. >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>> >>>> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >>>> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >>>> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >>>> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >>>> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >>>> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >>>> Scriv >>>> >>>> >>>> Clint Ricker wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tom, >>>>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>>>> terms >>>>> of >>>>> deliverables. >>>>> >>>>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>>>> using >>>>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>>>> product. >>>>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>>>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>>>> that >>>>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>>>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >>>>> >>>>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something >>>>> that >>>>> it >>>>> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate >>>>> and, >>>>> in >>>>> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the >>>>> deliverables, >>>>> in >>>>> that sense. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Clint Ricker >>>>> -Kentnis Technologies >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>>>>> new >>>>>> technologies. 2) He's cl
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or cable company". Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they are very accepting of the technology. So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and differentiates us from other technologies. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can say you are WiMax. - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. > > We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to > explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's > getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what > we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or > cable company". > > Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most > have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they > are very accepting of the technology. > > So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and > differentiates us from other technologies. > > > > > > > George Rogato > > Welcome to WISPA > > www.wispa.org > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I ran across this study a few weeks back: http://www.bsu.edu/owrm/article/0,,47997--,00.html Reading the executive summary, in their real world tests, NLOS/indoor radios only worked about one mile. Outdoor mounted radios worked maybe five miles. (I wasn't too impressed, in comparison to the unlicensed gear I'm using) I was particularly interested in this study, since the country they are working in (Indiana) is probably very similar to my country. On January 11, at 9:12 PM January 11, Tom DeReggi wrote: > Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. > You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. > In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. > > I think its important to define country. If you are talking about > Idaho > with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less > is the > better option. > But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where > 3 6Mhz > channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to > acheive > high modulations because its noise free. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I didn't say we said we were WiMAX. I said : " well, this is what we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or cable company". And then I sometimes also say " What we have been doing , going into our 10th year here, is what WiMAX is all about". Sometimes people actually ask about WiMAX, and we explain it to them, but it's not easily understood, the difference. Finding myself explaining about licensed and unlicensed spectrum and standards that aren't set is not an easy conversation, unless the person is technically savy. So I keep it simple. George Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: > I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can say > you are WiMax. > > - Original Message - > From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. >> >> We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to >> explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's >> getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what >> we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or >> cable company". >> >> Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most >> have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they >> are very accepting of the technology. >> >> So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and >> differentiates us from other technologies. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> George Rogato >> >> Welcome to WISPA >> >> www.wispa.org >> >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
The only benefit of 3.65 is, "additional spectrum". And that will get used up fairly quickly I'm sure. We need more. John Valenti wrote: > I ran across this study a few weeks back: > http://www.bsu.edu/owrm/article/0,,47997--,00.html > > Reading the executive summary, in their real world tests, NLOS/indoor > radios only worked about one mile. Outdoor mounted radios worked > maybe five miles. (I wasn't too impressed, in comparison to the > unlicensed gear I'm using) > > I was particularly interested in this study, since the country they > are working in (Indiana) is probably very similar to my country. > > > On January 11, at 9:12 PM January 11, Tom DeReggi wrote: > >> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >> >> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about >> Idaho >> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less >> is the >> better option. >> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where >> 3 6Mhz >> channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to >> acheive >> high modulations because its noise free. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
WiMax is sure getting lots of press. Especially at CES. Funny, they are talking up the Sprint roll out but Sprint has bailed. Still smoke and mirrors compared to Canopy but I guess we might as well capitalize on the buzz. While blathering on here, a business mentor told me long ago to contribute to all candidates for local office, not just the one you like. I guess that applies to email lists as well. Not saying I don't like WISPA, just never have taken the time to participate. I believe I am a sponsor but on the home page I don't see any sponsor info. I may not be looking in the right space. In any event, I guess I will be on two lists now. Any bets on what is going to happen to the "other" list? - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I didn't say we said we were WiMAX. I said : > > " well, this is what we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than > use the telephone or cable company". > > And then I sometimes also say " What we have been doing , going into our > 10th year here, is what WiMAX is all about". > > Sometimes people actually ask about WiMAX, and we explain it to them, > but it's not easily understood, the difference. > > Finding myself explaining about licensed and unlicensed spectrum and > standards that aren't set is not an easy conversation, unless the person > is technically savy. > > So I keep it simple. > > George > > > > > > Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: >> I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can >> say >> you are WiMax. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. >>> >>> We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to >>> explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's >>> getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what >>> we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or >>> cable company". >>> >>> Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most >>> have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they >>> are very accepting of the technology. >>> >>> So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and >>> differentiates us from other technologies. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> George Rogato >>> >>> Welcome to WISPA >>> >>> www.wispa.org >>> >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > George Rogato > > Welcome to WISPA > > www.wispa.org > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I'm wondering the same thing, Chuck. It is such a good list, so many answers can be had. I am going to try and talk the boss man into paying for it, but I don't know if he will. It's really amazing what he will/wont spend money on... WISPA should create Vendor specific lists Mike Bushard, Jr Wireless Network Engineer 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service WiMax is sure getting lots of press. Especially at CES. Funny, they are talking up the Sprint roll out but Sprint has bailed. Still smoke and mirrors compared to Canopy but I guess we might as well capitalize on the buzz. While blathering on here, a business mentor told me long ago to contribute to all candidates for local office, not just the one you like. I guess that applies to email lists as well. Not saying I don't like WISPA, just never have taken the time to participate. I believe I am a sponsor but on the home page I don't see any sponsor info. I may not be looking in the right space. In any event, I guess I will be on two lists now. Any bets on what is going to happen to the "other" list? - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I didn't say we said we were WiMAX. I said : > > " well, this is what we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than > use the telephone or cable company". > > And then I sometimes also say " What we have been doing , going into our > 10th year here, is what WiMAX is all about". > > Sometimes people actually ask about WiMAX, and we explain it to them, > but it's not easily understood, the difference. > > Finding myself explaining about licensed and unlicensed spectrum and > standards that aren't set is not an easy conversation, unless the person > is technically savy. > > So I keep it simple. > > George > > > > > > Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: >> I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can >> say >> you are WiMax. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. >>> >>> We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to >>> explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's >>> getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what >>> we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or >>> cable company". >>> >>> Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most >>> have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they >>> are very accepting of the technology. >>> >>> So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and >>> differentiates us from other technologies. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> George Rogato >>> >>> Welcome to WISPA >>> >>> www.wispa.org >>> >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
If the 'other' list is the part-15 list. I think you will see the private lists drop down to the core part-15 members. Michael was talking about having one general list open to everyone and you will probably see more people there. But for the experienced operators (the people that answer the questions) they won't want to wade through all the other stuff on the lists. I for one do not plan on joining another general wireless list as I don't have the time. I have stayed active on the Mikrotik list because I use it a lot and feel that if I can help someone else out I'm paying for the help I've received on the list. There has already been the announcement of at least 2 new mikrotik lists in preparation of the part-15 lists going private. I would assume the other specialty lists are probably doing the same, although I don't know as the only list I still follow from part-15 is the mikrotik list. I wish Michael the best, but I'm not sure what he is thinking in taking the lists private, I doubt it will really drive membership up. I use to be a part-15 member, but quite honestly the only benefit I saw to it was the discount on WISPCON tickets and since WISPCON seems to be dead I really don't see the point. At least with WISPA I know the money from my dues is put to good use and the organization is doing things to help the industry (calea, fcc commitee, etc). Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: > WiMax is sure getting lots of press. Especially at CES. Funny, they are > talking up the Sprint roll out but Sprint has bailed. Still smoke and > mirrors compared to Canopy but I guess we might as well capitalize on the > buzz. > > While blathering on here, a business mentor told me long ago to contribute > to all candidates for local office, not just the one you like. > I guess that applies to email lists as well. Not saying I don't like WISPA, > just never have taken the time to participate. I believe I am a sponsor but > on the home page I don't see any sponsor info. I may not be looking in the > right space. > > In any event, I guess I will be on two lists now. Any bets on what is going > to happen to the "other" list? > > - Original Message - > From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > >> I didn't say we said we were WiMAX. I said : >> >> " well, this is what we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than >> use the telephone or cable company". >> >> And then I sometimes also say " What we have been doing , going into our >> 10th year here, is what WiMAX is all about". >> >> Sometimes people actually ask about WiMAX, and we explain it to them, >> but it's not easily understood, the difference. >> >> Finding myself explaining about licensed and unlicensed spectrum and >> standards that aren't set is not an easy conversation, unless the person >> is technically savy. >> >> So I keep it simple. >> >> George >> >> >> >> >> >> Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: >> >>> I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can >>> say >>> you are WiMax. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>> >>>> I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. >>>> >>>> We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to >>>> explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's >>>> getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what >>>> we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or >>>> cable company". >>>> >>>> Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most >>>> have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they >>>> are very accepting of the technology. >>>> >>>> So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and >>>> differentiates us from other technologies. >>>> >>>> >
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I totally agree. I have known about Michael's plan to go pay for about a week now. He was going to make the announcement in Salt Lake City on Thursday. But I guess he wanted to break it today so there wouldn't be so much shock at the show. I truly wish him the best too. I have used his list for ersatz advertising ever since I started building wisp products. The last wispcon that I remember being good was in Wash DC. And even that one was wasn't as good as Charles Wu's show in Park City the same year (I think). Motorola had a good show for a couple of years in Tucson but this year their Palm Springs show wasn't very good at all. I wish we had one good list and one good show for the Motorola crowd. Perhaps WISPA and P-15 can bury any hatchets that need burying and merge. That would fix one problem. > I wish Michael the best, but I'm not sure what he is thinking in taking > the lists private, I doubt it will really drive membership up. I use to > be a part-15 member, but quite honestly the only benefit I saw to it was > the discount on WISPCON tickets and since WISPCON seems to be dead I > really don't see the point. At least with WISPA I know the money from my > dues is put to good use and the organization is doing things to help the > industry (calea, fcc commitee, etc). > > Sam Tetherow > Sandhills 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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. > You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. > In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. > > I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho > with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the > better option. > But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz > channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive > high modulations because its noise free. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Exactly. >> >> What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? >> >> What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>>I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban >>> areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem >>> does this platform solve under that scenario? >>> Scriv >>> >>> >>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>>> I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It >>>> is >>>> not >>>> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only >>>> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low >>>> throughput >>>> clients. >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>> http://www.ics-il.com >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" >>>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >>>>> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a >>>>> new >>>>> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >>>>> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >>>>> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move >>>>> that >>>>> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >>>>> Scriv >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Clint Ricker wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Tom, >>>>>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>>>>> terms >>>>>> of >>>>>> deliverables. >>>>>> >>>>>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>>>>> using >>>>>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>>>>> product. >>>>>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>>>>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>>>>> that >>>>>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>>>>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your >>>>>> product. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into e
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
The guys at Redline said their equipment is power limited due to FCC limitations. My point of view is based on Redline's statement of what their gear can do coupled with the documents filed with the FCC for their certification. The most I could get out of a PtP link was about 7 miles. With a 90* sector, only about 5 miles. I agree that all else the same 3.65 is better than 5.x GHz, only it isn't because the power isn't there. The throughput isn't there for WiMax compliant equipment due to small channels. If there were larger channel sizes, yes, it would support higher throughput applications. According to Redline, 7.5 MHz only gets about 15 megs of throughput with WiMax. Redline explicitly said 3.65 GHz isn't for rural applications due to the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low >> throughput > > I have a very hard time accepting that comment. > > 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. > 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. > Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of > pine > needles and leafs). > Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of > course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or > subburb or rural. > > If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to > tackle foliage, I 100% agree. > If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is > any other technology. > If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector > designs, I'd agree with you. > > But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. > And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy > unlicened gear. > > If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because > it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many > interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in > interference. > > Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will > also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, > its > one more sector that can be added to the tower. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >>I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >>not >> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only >> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput >> clients. >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >>> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >>> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >>> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >>> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >>> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >>> Scriv >>> >>> >>> Clint Ricker wrote: >>>> Tom, >>>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>>> terms >>>> of >>>> deliverables. >>>> >>>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>>> using >>>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>>> product. >>>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>>> that >>>> the end user understands w
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I think WISPCON and Part-15 decreased in attractiveness is directly related to the increase in other wireless trade shows. They all do basically the same thing, so the laws of supply and demand come into play here. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I totally agree. I have known about Michael's plan to go pay for about a > week now. He was going to make the announcement in Salt Lake City on > Thursday. But I guess he wanted to break it today so there wouldn't be so > much shock at the show. > > I truly wish him the best too. I have used his list for ersatz > advertising > ever since I started building wisp products. The last wispcon that I > remember being good was in Wash DC. And even that one was wasn't as good > as > Charles Wu's show in Park City the same year (I think). Motorola had a > good > show for a couple of years in Tucson but this year their Palm Springs show > wasn't very good at all. I wish we had one good list and one good show > for > the Motorola crowd. > > Perhaps WISPA and P-15 can bury any hatchets that need burying and merge. > That would fix one problem. > >> I wish Michael the best, but I'm not sure what he is thinking in taking >> the lists private, I doubt it will really drive membership up. I use to >> be a part-15 member, but quite honestly the only benefit I saw to it was >> the discount on WISPCON tickets and since WISPCON seems to be dead I >> really don't see the point. At least with WISPA I know the money from my >> dues is put to good use and the organization is doing things to help the >> industry (calea, fcc commitee, etc). >> >> Sam Tetherow >> Sandhills 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] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Just like all 802.11 isn't WiFi, not all 802.16 is WiMax. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I guess as long as your over the air protocol conforms to 802.16 you can >say > you are WiMax. > > - Original Message - > From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:25 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >>I find myself referring to WiMAX when describing our service. >> >> We use the term "broadband" to describe our service. When asked to >> explain the difference between our broadband and the others, it's >> getting easy to say "you have heard of WiMAX right?" " well this is what >> we do" "we use microwave to reach you rather than use the telephone or >> cable company". >> >> Now they think abit, and WiMAX and WiFi are similar sounding and most >> have heard the terms, so they sort of get it, but most importantly, they >> are very accepting of the technology. >> >> So "I like WiMAX" and I like finally hearing a name that describes and >> differentiates us from other technologies. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> George Rogato >> >> Welcome to WISPA >> >> www.wispa.org >> >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: > > Perhaps WISPA and P-15 can bury any hatchets that need burying and merge. > That would fix one problem. There's no hatchet between wispa and p15. Some of the wispa board and a lot of the wispa members and listers are active on p15 lists. One reason we have not created vendor specific lists is not to infringe upon what bullit and isp-lists are doing. If someone is doing a good job, why compete, augment. Another thing, we're not here to compete for dollars for profits, we are here to make changes in the industry for the industry. It would be doubtful that there could be a merger between the two orgs. Ours is a non profit and the others are some type of profitable ventures, as I understand it. If anyone wants a topic specific list on wispa, just ask. If your a vendor member, I believe you are entitled to your own list. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. > It just doesn't have the power. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >> >> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho >> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the >> better option. >> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz >> channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to >> acheive >> high modulations because its noise free. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Exactly. >>> >>> What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? >>> >>> What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>>I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban >>>> areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem >>>> does this platform solve under that scenario? >>>> Scriv >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>>>> I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It >>>>> is >>>>> not >>>>> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's >>>>> only >>>>> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low >>>>> throughput >>>>> clients. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>>> http://www.ics-il.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: "WISPA General List" >>>>> Sent: Friday, January
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. > It just doesn't have the power. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >> >> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho >> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the >> better option. >> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz >> channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to >> acheive >> high modulations because its noise free. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Exactly. >>> >>> What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? >>> >>> What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>>I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban >>>> areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem >>>> does this platform solve under that scenario? >>>> Scriv >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>>>> I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It >>>>> is >>>>> not >>>>> for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's >>>>> only >>>>> practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low >>>>> th
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Perhaps, but what good is an FCC rule if there's no equipment available to use it? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Mike, > > Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your > position. > I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind > the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. > > To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, > do > not have that same limitation. > Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond > accurately. > > But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by > 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. > > Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for > wider channels? > > I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which > could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. > But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, > that > rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and > interfere less. > In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who > strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more > efficient. > There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. >> It just doesn't have the power. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >>> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >>> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >>> >>> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho >>> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is >>> the >>> better option. >>> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 >>> 6Mhz >>> channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to >>> acheive >>> high modulations because its noise free. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> >>>> What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? >>>> >>>> What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>> http://www.ics-il.com >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" >>>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>>> >>>> >>>>>I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban >>>>> areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem >>>>> does this platform solve under that scenario? >>>>> Scriv >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mike Hamm
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Airspan grant: > > https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP > Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T > > 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 Tom DeReggi > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > Mike, > > Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your > position. > I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my > mind > the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. > > To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar > with, do > not have that same limitation. > Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond > accurately. > > But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by > > 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. > > Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power > for > wider channels? > > I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which > > could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. > But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, > that > rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and > interfere less. > In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those > who > strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more > > efficient. > There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum > ediquete. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed > documents. >> It just doesn't have the power. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >>> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >>> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >>> >>> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about > Idaho >>> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is > the >>> better option. >>> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 > 6Mhz >>> channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to >>> acheive >>> high modulations because its noise free. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> >>>> What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? >>>> >>>> What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>&g
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > and the Redline grant: > > https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA > > So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Airspan grant: >> >> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP >> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T >> >> 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 Tom DeReggi >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> Mike, >> >> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your >> position. >> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my >> mind >> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. >> >> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar >> with, do >> not have that same limitation. >> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond >> accurately. >> >> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by >> >> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. >> >> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power >> for >> wider channels? >> >> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which >> >> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. >> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, >> that >> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and >> interfere less. >> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those >> who >> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more >> >> efficient. >> There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum >> ediquete. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed >> documents. >>> It just doesn't have the power. >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >>>> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >>>> In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. >>>> >>>> I think its important to define country. If you are talking about >> Idaho >>>> with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is >> the >>>> better option. >>>> But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 >> 6Mhz >>>> channels would actually be enough to get dec
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I thought it was Airspan 5 mhz channel: 4.07 w 10 mhz channel 7.24 w 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:19 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > and the Redline grant: > > https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA > > So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Airspan grant: >> >> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP >> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T >> >> 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 Tom DeReggi >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> Mike, >> >> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your >> position. >> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my >> mind >> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. >> >> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar >> with, do >> not have that same limitation. >> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond >> accurately. >> >> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by >> >> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. >> >> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power >> for >> wider channels? >> >> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which >> >> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. >> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, >> that >> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and >> interfere less. >> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those >> who >> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more >> >> efficient. >> There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum >> ediquete. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed >> documents. >>> It just doesn't have the power. >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. >>>> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. >>>> In LOS, they can go just as far
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Are you sure those channel sizes are correct? I thought Redline used 3.5 and 7 while AirSpan used 5 and 10. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Wow- Thats a huge difference. > For those that don't want to pull up the link... > > Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w > AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w > AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> and the Redline grant: >> >> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA >> >> So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> ----- Original Message - >> From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Airspan grant: >>> >>> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP >>> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T >>> >>> 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 Tom DeReggi >>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> Mike, >>> >>> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your >>> position. >>> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my >>> mind >>> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. >>> >>> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar >>> with, do >>> not have that same limitation. >>> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond >>> accurately. >>> >>> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by >>> >>> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. >>> >>> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power >>> for >>> wider channels? >>> >>> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which >>> >>> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. >>> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, >>> that >>> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and >>> interfere less. >>> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those >>> who >>> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more >>> >>> efficient. >>> There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum >>> ediquete. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed >>> documents. >>>> It just doesn't have the power. >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>> http://www.ics-il.com >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From:
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I've already sent an email into Redline asking why AirSpan is so much higher and then why the documentation filed with the FCC further limits what the grant's maximum is for, The documentation that accompanies the grant has everything limited to 26 db, well, for 7 MHz. There's no way I'd use 3.5 MHz. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Wow- Thats a huge difference. > For those that don't want to pull up the link... > > Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w > AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w > AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> and the Redline grant: >> >> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA >> >> So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> Airspan grant: >>> >>> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP >>> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T >>> >>> 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 Tom DeReggi >>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> Mike, >>> >>> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your >>> position. >>> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my >>> mind >>> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. >>> >>> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar >>> with, do >>> not have that same limitation. >>> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond >>> accurately. >>> >>> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by >>> >>> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. >>> >>> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power >>> for >>> wider channels? >>> >>> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which >>> >>> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. >>> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, >>> that >>> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and >>> interfere less. >>> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those >>> who >>> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more >>> >>> efficient. >>> There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum >>> ediquete. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed >>> documents. >>>> It just doesn't have the power. >>>> >>>> >>>> - &g
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I very well could have been wrong on channel size, not understanding what I was reading. The FCC cert on link showed a spectrum range of 20Mhz wide: 4.07 w 15Mhz wide: 7.24 w I have no idea if that has anything to do with available channel widths. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:27 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > Are you sure those channel sizes are correct? > > I thought Redline used 3.5 and 7 while AirSpan used 5 and 10. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> Wow- Thats a huge difference. >> For those that don't want to pull up the link... >> >> Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w >> AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w >> AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> ----- Original Message - >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >> >> >>> and the Redline grant: >>> >>> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA >>> >>> So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>> >>> >>>> Airspan grant: >>>> >>>> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP >>>> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T >>>> >>>> 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 Tom DeReggi >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM >>>> To: WISPA General List >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>>> >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your >>>> position. >>>> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my >>>> mind >>>> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. >>>> >>>> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar >>>> with, do >>>> not have that same limitation. >>>> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond >>>> accurately. >>>> >>>> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor >>>> by >>>> >>>> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their >>>> designs. >>>> >>>> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power >>>> for >>>> wider channels? >>>> >>>> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, >>>> which >>>> >>>> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. >>>> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, >>>> that >>>> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and >>>> interfere less. >>>> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those >>>> who >>>> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being >>
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service
Guys I keep hearing people say 3.65Ghz has more power than 2.4Ghz, I guess I can see this over all with 25Watt total but because of how the rules are written this is not the case. The base station in Wimax is 7 Watts EIRP max if you use the larger channel size, and less if you use the smaller ones which is what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to! Anyway this puts the EIRP at about 3.5 Watts EIRP which is about what 2.4Ghz can do. On the client side 2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under 3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max. What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, non-exclusive license and a central database so you know when and where new base stations are installed! Because of this I dont see how there will be an issues for WISP as long as all the rules are followed, which they must by law, another good thing :) 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low > throughput I have a very hard time accepting that comment. 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of pine needles and leafs). Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or subburb or rural. If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to tackle foliage, I 100% agree. If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is any other technology. If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector designs, I'd agree with you. But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy unlicened gear. If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in interference. Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, its one more sector that can be added to the tower. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >not > for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only > practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput > clients. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >> Scriv >> >> >> Clint Ricker wrote: >>> Tom, >>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocatin
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service
>what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of >subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP. >2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under >3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max. That is a surprise to me. 3.6G was pitched as a PtP for rural in its early discussions, meaning a 25watt link between to points, meaning 25watts per side. Did the rules change? Are you saying manufacturers are putting out CPEs limited to 1 watt EIRP. Or are you saying the rules limit CPE to 1 watt EIRP. I was not under the impression CPEs were limited to 1 watt by FCC rules, if thats the case the band would be as worthless as 5.3Gz-5.4Ghz. >What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the > low noise floors, Yes, but only a temporary advantage. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service Guys I keep hearing people say 3.65Ghz has more power than 2.4Ghz, I guess I can see this over all with 25Watt total but because of how the rules are written this is not the case. The base station in Wimax is 7 Watts EIRP max if you use the larger channel size, and less if you use the smaller ones which is what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to! Anyway this puts the EIRP at about 3.5 Watts EIRP which is about what 2.4Ghz can do. On the client side What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, non-exclusive license and a central database so you know when and where new base stations are installed! Because of this I don't see how there will be an issues for WISP as long as all the rules are followed, which they must by law, another good thing :) 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low > throughput I have a very hard time accepting that comment. 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of pine needles and leafs). Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or subburb or rural. If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to tackle foliage, I 100% agree. If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is any other technology. If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector designs, I'd agree with you. But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy unlicened gear. If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in interference. Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, its one more sector that can be added to the tower. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >not > for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only > practical
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 1/18/2008 1:10 PM: what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP. 2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under 3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max. mobile radios are limited to 1W; fixed/bases are 25W leon That is a surprise to me. 3.6G was pitched as a PtP for rural in its early discussions, meaning a 25watt link between to points, meaning 25watts per side. Did the rules change? Are you saying manufacturers are putting out CPEs limited to 1 watt EIRP. Or are you saying the rules limit CPE to 1 watt EIRP. I was not under the impression CPEs were limited to 1 watt by FCC rules, if thats the case the band would be as worthless as 5.3Gz-5.4Ghz. What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, Yes, but only a temporary advantage. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service Guys I keep hearing people say 3.65Ghz has more power than 2.4Ghz, I guess I can see this over all with 25Watt total but because of how the rules are written this is not the case. The base station in Wimax is 7 Watts EIRP max if you use the larger channel size, and less if you use the smaller ones which is what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to! Anyway this puts the EIRP at about 3.5 Watts EIRP which is about what 2.4Ghz can do. On the client side What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, non-exclusive license and a central database so you know when and where new base stations are installed! Because of this I don't see how there will be an issues for WISP as long as all the rules are followed, which they must by law, another good thing :) 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput I have a very hard time accepting that comment. 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of pine needles and leafs). Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or subburb or rural. If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to tackle foliage, I 100% agree. If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is any other technology. If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector designs, I'd agree with you. But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy unlicened gear. If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in interference. Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, its one more sector that can be added to the tower. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. I
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service
Tom You are calling the Wimax base station an AP, this is not the case they are true base stations with a large amount of R&D behind them plus most are licensing code which adds a great deal of cost. I do not think you are going to see Wimax base stations anywhere near what WISP are used to doing, ever. This is correct for PtP 25 Watts max EIRP for 3.65Ghz, but you can do this now and much more with 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz so the power is not the plus. The plus is that each side of the PtP link must be listed in the central FCC database so a WISP will know where all the APs are and can make sure not to cause issues with each other which is what they must do by law. Any 3.65Ghz that is not listed in the central FCC database is limited to 1 Watt EIRP. But because the noise floor is low your single to noise should be descent in more locations. Which goes to the last point, this is NOT 2.4Ghz under part-15. 3.65Ghz is under part-90 which means all WISP MUST obey the law of the FCC or they will be forced to take down there equipment and fined for any issues. Also there is never going to be as must 3.65Ghz equipment out there and no of it will be AMP to all hell and way over FCC limits. Which means there will be very little "extra" power creating a every higher noise floor. Comments? 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 Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 1:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service >what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of >subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP. >2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under >3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max. That is a surprise to me. 3.6G was pitched as a PtP for rural in its early discussions, meaning a 25watt link between to points, meaning 25watts per side. Did the rules change? Are you saying manufacturers are putting out CPEs limited to 1 watt EIRP. Or are you saying the rules limit CPE to 1 watt EIRP. I was not under the impression CPEs were limited to 1 watt by FCC rules, if thats the case the band would be as worthless as 5.3Gz-5.4Ghz. >What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the > low noise floors, Yes, but only a temporary advantage. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service Guys I keep hearing people say 3.65Ghz has more power than 2.4Ghz, I guess I can see this over all with 25Watt total but because of how the rules are written this is not the case. The base station in Wimax is 7 Watts EIRP max if you use the larger channel size, and less if you use the smaller ones which is what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to! Anyway this puts the EIRP at about 3.5 Watts EIRP which is about what 2.4Ghz can do. On the client side What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, non-exclusive license and a central database so you know when and where new base stations are installed! Because of this I don't see how there will be an issues for WISP as long as all the rules are followed, which they must by law, another good thing :) 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 co
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
correct On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:15:18 -0400, "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > I thought it was > > Airspan 5 mhz channel: 4.07 w > 10 mhz channel 7.24 w > > > 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 Tom DeReggi > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:19 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > Wow- Thats a huge difference. > For those that don't want to pull up the link... > > Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w > AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w > AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > and the Redline grant: > > > > > https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP > Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA > > > > So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. > > > > > > - > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > > >> Airspan grant: > >> > >> > https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP > >> Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T > >> > >> 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 Tom DeReggi > >> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM > >> To: WISPA General List > >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > >> > >> Mike, > >> > >> Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your > >> position. > >> I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my > >> mind > >> the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. > >> > >> To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar > >> with, do > >> not have that same limitation. > >> Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond > >> accurately. > >> > >> But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor > by > >> > >> 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their > designs. > >> > >> Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power > >> for > >> wider channels? > >> > >> I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, > which > >> > >> could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. > >> But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array > antennas, > >> that > >> rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and > >> interfere less. > >> In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those > >> who > >> strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being > more > >> > >> efficient. > >> There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum > >> ediquete. > >> > >> Tom DeReggi > >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "WISPA General List" > >> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM > >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > >> > >> > >>> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Bear in mind everyone- the Airspan product is also about 2x the price of redline on base. Its ultimately designed for zero truck roll mobility for indoor 2km cells ( and works, Im actually sitting in Airspan's boca facility right now, getting training on Hipermax ) You could as well use it for fixed NLOS. Personally I would wait on the mobility until they release software version 8 which includes 2x2 mimo matrix A / B / S0FDMA 1024. it looks pretty damn sweet. ill keep everyone posted as we have 4-5 customers rolling networks this quarter. ( we dont however sell direct, via channel partners ) I love their new USB modems, sub 200.00 in massive QTY I AM ultimately excited the most about the fixed oppty, with super rad long range fixed coverage in NLOS. - Jeff On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:42:28 -0600, "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > and the Redline grant: > > https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=549096&fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA > > So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Gino Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > Airspan grant: > > > > https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP > > Y&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=686827&fcc_id=O2J-365T > > > > 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 Tom DeReggi > > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > Mike, > > > > Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your > > position. > > I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my > > mind > > the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. > > > > To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar > > with, do > > not have that same limitation. > > Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond > > accurately. > > > > But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by > > > > 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. > > > > Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power > > for > > wider channels? > > > > I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which > > > > could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. > > But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, > > that > > rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and > > interfere less. > > In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those > > who > > strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more > > > > efficient. > > There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum > > ediquete. > > > > Tom DeReggi > > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > > > > >> See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed > > documents. > >> It just doesn't have the power. > >> > >> > >> - > >> Mike Hammett > >> Intelligent Computing Solutions > >> http://www.ics-il.com > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "WISPA General List" > >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM > >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > >> > >> > >>> Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. > >>> You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NL
RE: [SPAM] [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Hmmm. I didn't know their was a profile for 3650.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wireless Network Engineer 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 11:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [SPAM] [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Importance: Low FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service And Provide the Atlanta Metro Market with New Wireless Offerings ATLANTA (January 9, 2008) - One Ring Networks announced today that it will be launching WiMAX service in the Atlanta Metro area using licensed spectrum it was recently granted. The grant which gives One Ring access to 50Mhz of spectrum between 3650Mhz and 3700Mhz has favorable propagation characteristics. WiMAX is a wireless technology which allows broad coverage with data-rich connectivity unlike Wi-Fi which is unlicensed and limited to small hot-spots. One Ring will couple this spectrum with WiMAX equipment to offer a wide array of wireless business offerings. By using the company's existing and extensive wireless infrastructure, the entire metropolitan Atlanta area and surrounding cities can expect to see new, economical, and innovative offerings as a result of the company's WiMAX network. One Ring has aggressive rollout plans that will bring WiMAX to all major Atlanta sub-markets in 2008. Additionally, the company has plans for a multi-market initiative to expand the reach of its services to businesses throughout select metropolitan markets. "Our new WiMAX offering will allow us to provide Atlanta businesses with a whole new value proposition," said Matt Liotta, CEO of One Ring Networks. "Businesses across metro Atlanta are increasingly discovering the limitations of T1s and the need for truly diverse telecommunication services." In the United States, an estimated 2 percent of buildings have access to fiber. That means 98% of businesses don't have any access alternative. As a fiber and fixed-wireless provider, One Ring now has the infrastructure to offer access solutions to both large and small businesses regardless of their proximity to fiber."Companies often struggle with business continuity issues related to their telecom infrastructure," said Kris Maher, Director of Sales for One Ring Networks. "Most businesses can't afford a fiber build and are excited to learn about a wireless solution." One Ring's deployment of WiMAX technology will emerge as an alternative broadband solution for a range of business services where deployment of landline-based technologies is cost prohibitive. About One Ring Networks One Ring Networks operates one of the largest hybrid fiber-fixed wireless networks in the United States and is one of the few carriers offering end-to-end telecommunications and networking services that are truly diverse. Over its state-of-the-art network, One Ring offers high-speed data services and feature-rich IP phone services. For Press Inquiries, please contact: Suzanne Urash CRE8 Group, Inc. 813-649-8504 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.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/
