Some range extenders may base their connection on the AP's wifi MAC address
so as to not connect to themselves if they rebroadcast the same SSID. So
you would need to reconfigure the extenders for the new router's wifi MAC
address unless you have an advanced router where you can change that MAC
Range extenders are evil. They are all different. Just say no.
bp
On 10/31/2018 4:10 PM, Ken Hohhof
wrote:
If a customer leases a router from us, but
in addition has range extenders, and we replace the
If a customer leases a router from us, but in addition has range extenders,
and we replace the router, what needs to match in order for the range
extenders to work without any manual steps?
Is it sufficient to match the old SSID and WPA key? I would have thought
so, but customer says no go.
I’d find it more “ominous” if there was an actual case of them censoring
someone, rather than just some language in an AUP. I’d also worry more if the
current AUP actually had such language, which apparently it doesn’t.
I’ll give you the thing about Rise can do stuff that the government
Rise is a private company. They can write whatever rules they want.
A city is government, the people.
They should not be able to abridge rights.
This is identical to preventing local residents from checking out certain books
from the library like Huck Finn.
According to this mentality,
By the article, you mean the think tank guy? That paper is from 3 years ago.
Maybe that language was in the EPB acceptable use policy then, hard to tell,
especially since he doesn’t cite a reference, but it’s certainly not there now.
O’Rielly made his speech just the other day. Warning of
Chuck, where in this document do you see a threat to the First Amendment:
https://epb.com/storage/app/media/uploaded-files/Residential%20Terms%20and%20Conditions.pdf
It looks like ours or any other ISP AUP/TOS document as far as I can see.
There are many muni broadband horror stories, I
I thought that was the definition of a politico..
On 10/31/18 12:59 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
I’m not a huge fan of muni broadband for some of the reasons you cite.
I was just amazed that he is all for free speech when it meets his goals
and then completely against it another circumstance.
I probably am too in some sense. I don’t want you picketing my house with
bullhorns because I choose to eat Brussels sprouts thereby harming the
asparagus league. Scares my kids. Hate speech if you ask me...
From: Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 1:59 PM
To: AnimalFarm
I’m not a huge fan of muni broadband for some of the reasons you cite. I was
just amazed that he is all for free speech when it meets his goals and then
completely against it another circumstance.
Mark
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 3:53 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
>
> I actually agreed with the muni
I actually agreed with the muni wireless and free speech issue. He cited exact
language in the AUPs. Hate speech is hard to define and muni’s should not have
that in their AUPs in my opinion. I also liked that he didn’t think munis
should be able to compete with private sector.
I am only
Oh, it’s even better.
In the same speech where he was railing against municipal broadband on free
speech grounds he was also busy bragging about how tough the FCC is being on
those dastardly free speech pirate radio stations. Because, you know, pirate
radio is obviously the lowest of the
True. The Pai FCC and the Trump Administration in general seems dedicated to
leaving a legacy that can’t easily be undone. Like selling spectrum, or
appointing Supreme Court Justices. They probably see Wheeler as a fool whose
accomplishments could be undone with the stroke of a pen, and
Michael O’Rielly absolutely positively thinks it’s a fantastic idea.
The really scary part is that he thinks it’s better for private industry to own
it, since he can’t trust future FCC commissioners.He’s that guy that won’t
date a girl that would go out with a guy like him.
Mark
> On
It’s going to be interesting to watch the prices in the mmWave auctions,
especially in predominately rural states.
It’s a lot of spectrum, and central to the all important “race to 5G”. If you
believe all the press releases, it’s not icing on the cake, it’s the cake, it’s
how they get
All hardware in those families or only new stuff?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Dave"
To: af@af.afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 4:53:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] WiFi
If you're the government, the auction gives you funding.
If you're the carrier, the auction gives you exclusive access, which
makes a return on investment easier. And yes those spectrum rights are
a valuable asset which they can sell and trade.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal
" On the other hand, they get rewarded for carrying spectrum as an asset on
their balance sheet."
This is the most disgusting thing about the American auctioning system
right now.
Who in their right minds thought it was a good idea to just auction a
finite resource to the highest bidder? Why
It’s going to be interesting, I wonder why the carriers would pay anywhere near
the kind of money for CBRS spectrum that they are used to for low and mid band
spectrum, when they can use it for free as GAA. Similar to 5 GHz. No cost,
and opportunistic use for carrier aggregation.
On the
Adam - your statement is correct. The UE’s will most likely be over 23dB EIRP
and will need a SAS grant.
Mark
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 11:06 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>
> Oh I see. I think all of our existing UE have greater than 23dbm EIRP.
> So all of our UE will have to be registered in the
That makes it easier for the carriers to stomp out the little GAA guys :)
On 10/31/18 9:50 AM, Joe Novak wrote:
I think it's more likely that they will have a licensed anchor channel
and only aggregate 3.65 in the downlink, using different frequencies
for uplink. Carrier aggregation is a
Oh I see. I think all of our existing UE have greater than 23dbm EIRP.
So all of our UE will have to be registered in the SAS?
Sorry, I gave up following these rules after like 5 years of them being
1 year away, so I have no idea what's going on anymore. I guess I have
to catch up.
-Adam
I think it's more likely that they will have a licensed anchor channel and
only aggregate 3.65 in the downlink, using different frequencies for
uplink. Carrier aggregation is a whole different game of spectrum usage.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:38 AM Adam Moffett wrote:
> One thing that was
23dB EIRP to operate in Category A as an EUD (End User Device - which can be
mobile).To operate over 23dB EIRP the device has to be a CBSD and register
with the SAS.
Mark
> On Oct 31, 2018, at 10:37 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>
> One thing that was unfortunate about the NN license was
One thing that was unfortunate about the NN license was that mobile
stations had a stupid low Tx power limit. Basically mobile wasn't viable.
Is CBRS going to have that type of restriction?
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
25 matches
Mail list logo
