Sounds like the comments I've heard about Nextel/Sprint...
the sound of 'business getting done'...
Chuck Kelsey wrote:
> Unfortunately, this is exactly what Comcast was hoping -- the
> customer changed service. They don't want customers who keep making
> service calls requiring repeated tech suppo
oogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:30 PM
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
There's other things to look at... have you looked at your Comcast router
(in the admin menus) and seen what the received signal/noise ratio is at
your location, and what upstream po
o:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Don Kupferschmidt
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:48 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
For those who need to measure their upload / download speed of their ISP,
here are a couple of useful link
cards and routers are not real cheap though.
Nate WY0X
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:01 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link v
rch 12, 2009 6:51 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
There seems to be adequate bandwidth, as I
can load my cable connection with additional
downloads and it has no effect on the level
of packet loss and delay. The garble is at
a constant level, whether it is at 8 PM or
5 AM.
everywhere.
Nate WY0X
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Plack
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:03 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
Kevin, thanks for your
Mike,
My reply was not in response to your packet loss, I was trying to
describe other effects that had been brought up in the discussion by
Paul. I'm not saying your provider isn't tampering with packets or IP's
destine for competitors VoIP servers. What I am saying is depending on
the path
Thank you Kevin. I understand and appreciate
the problem you describe.
However, I am not trying to download at 2 Meg;
indeed the VOIP app is very happy on a 44 K
dial-up with the other Internet provider.
There seems to be adequate bandwidth, as I
can load my cable connection with additional
dow
Paul Plack wrote:
Kevin, thanks for your insight. Comcast must cap speeds below what it
advertises intentionally, because even distant speed test servers
would run higher speeds than what I could get to fellow Comcast users
in the same part of town.
WAN traffic is indeed limited so the overh
had zero dropped packets with a round-trip time of 67 ms. Not too
shabby.
73,
Paul, AE4KR
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Custer
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
Paul
Paul Plack wrote:
One of Comcast's independent techs told me their system runs wide-open
to the speed-test sites to ensure good results. I don't know if he was
being honest, but I never got the same speeds in normal use that I did
with the test sites!
As an engineer of a CATV Internet provid
Hi Mark,
I was using Earthlink/Direc two-way satellite.
There is the inherent latency. If you are a gamer,
it might bother you. I didn't mind it.
My fade margin was on the low edge. At my
latitude, the angle is fairly low and there was
a tree at a distance that was partially obscuring.
I wo
ferschmidt
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
For those who need to measure their upload / download speed of their ISP,
here are a couple of useful links to measure it:
http://review
oups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:45 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
I've done IRLP over a couple of different types of satellite connections
(and as an "official&
e fun !
73,
Don, KD9PT
- Original Message -
From: Paul Plack
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
Your experience with Comcast VoIP may vary widely, depending on your location
and
Unfortunately, this is exactly what Comcast was hoping -- the customer changed
service. They don't want customers who keep making service calls requiring
repeated tech support. These calls cost them money that they don't want to
spend.
I'll bet that they wasted no time in processing the termina
sday, March 11, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
I am a Comcast VOIP customer, the service works good.
Comcast is a sleezy company, and I have had experiences
with their IP blocking and/or packet interruptions.
X
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:56 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
Mike,
I'm curious regardi
I am a Comcast VOIP customer, the service works good.
Comcast is a sleezy company, and I have had experiences
with their IP blocking and/or packet interruptions.
-- Original Message --
Received: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:36:45 AM PDT
From: Mike Naruta AA8K
> Remember when "network neutrality"
Mike,
I'm curious regarding latency issues, especially if using VoIP for
connections like IRLP or remote voice links. Did you experience them when
on satellite, or was it a "non-issue" in your experience?
And I assume your connections losses while on the bird were due to "rain
fade" or similar?
Ethercrash wrote:
>
>
> My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine. As an
> inter-site link, I was thinking of using some sort of VOIP arrangement
> via the internet.
IMHO
Doug, KD8B, mentioned a critical point about
your VOIP not being interfered with.
Remember when
In addition to what's already been mentioned, a pure linking box (no
ID's etc.) on the commerical side is the JPS NXU2
http://www.jps.com/page/view/89about $750 for each end last time I
priced them.
Chuck n0nhj
Ethercrash wrote:
> My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m
epeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
Hi Brian.
The software you need is SvxLink.
It is FREE to download and has all the features you need, and a lot more.
In SvxLink you can use the remotetrx function to
400, audio cables, and have a blast
JS
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
> buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ethercrash
> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:43 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-B
r results!
73,
Paul, AE4KR
- Original Message -
From: Ethercrash
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:42 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine. As an
inter-site
Hi Brian.
The software you need is SvxLink.
It is FREE to download and has all the features you need, and a lot more.
In SvxLink you can use the remotetrx function to split RX's and TX's (yes
multiple!) between different QTH's. The built in voter can select the best
RX. Several codecs are availab
At 08:42 AM 3/9/2009, you wrote:
>My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine. As
>an inter-site link, I was thinking of using some sort of VOIP
>arrangement via the internet. I'm curious if anyone has tried
>something like this:
>
>My idea is to use a point-to-point, priva
--- On Mon, 3/9/09, Ethercrash wrote:
From: Ethercrash
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 9:42 AM
My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine.
As an inter-site link, I
y, March 9, 2009 8:42:42 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Split site link via IP
My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine. As an
inter-site link, I was thinking of using some sort of VOIP arrangement via the
internet. I'm curious if a
Brian;
In general VOIP as an audio link is not very stable if you
do not control the bandwidth loading of the Link. There are
technologies like TDM over IP that have much less jitter and dropout
issues.. but it still is reliant on the IP link being stable and not
overloaded as well as
My repeater group is considering building split-site 6m machine. As an
inter-site link, I was thinking of using some sort of VOIP arrangement via the
internet. I'm curious if anyone has tried something like this:
My idea is to use a point-to-point, private link (i.e. not IRLP or Echo) to
pump
31 matches
Mail list logo