How do you figure?
You don't think 5.4 is going to solve part of that?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:55 PM
Title: SR5s and 36miles - INPUT NEEDED
I've run the path calcs with Radio Mobile and I should see low -70s using the SR5s in Mikrotik and 2ft dishes at 36miles.
My question is - how many people out there have links 35+ miles with SR5s / Mikrotik and 2ft Panels or dishes ? I have a link I
Title: SR5s and 36miles - INPUT NEEDED
It may be difficult to provide a mission critical
link with 2-footers; but then again Iam using CM-9's on a 17-mile
link. I know this doesn't help you; but I just recently replaced my
PacWireless 2ft dishes with 2ft dual-polarity Radiowaves dishes and
No, I do not think so. The 5.47-5.725GHz issue is resolved. It is only a
matter of the FCC setting certification criteria. 3650MHz is still
unresolved, though the commission has begun work on it again. Once
resolution occurs, then they have to go through the steps of creating the
registration
For me, the statement old saying that comes to mind is, the definition of
character is what one does when no one else is looking.
Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
-Original Message-
From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL
This was posted by Frank Muto to the isp-clec list and should be of
interest to many of the isps on this list.
Basicly it says that the tax on long distance was illegal to collect and
there is a refund due you.
George
Credit goes to Frank Muto
--
George Rogato
Welcome to WISPA
www.wispa.org
George Rogato wrote:
This was posted by Frank Muto to the isp-clec list and should be of
interest to many of the isps on this list.
Basicly it says that the tax on long distance was illegal to collect and
there is a refund due you.
George
Credit goes to Frank Muto
One thought that comes to
Title: Message
Mike -
what is the actual output of the SR5s you are seeing ? Or anyone else have exact
figures - Should I be running my calculations using 21dbm or 26dbm as advertised
?
JohnnyO
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Sorry for the cross post...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/05/25/the.web.toll/index.html
Coming soon: The Web toll
New laws may transform cyberspace and the way you surf it
By Tim Folger
Popular Science
(PopSci.comexternal link) -- What if the Internet were like cable television,
with
Title: Spare Dragonwave ODU Modem available ?
Hey
My Dragonwave Airpair 100 ODU Modem is having issues talking to the radio, anyone has a spare available for sale, lease,lend, anything ?
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax
Title: Message
Actual output on the SR5s I tested with were about
20-21dB. I do not have any SR5s in a production environment at this time,
only the CM9. Most of my ptp links are actually Link10; but we have
started to do more testing of MT links for low volume repeaters.
Mike
-
Title: Message
I have a 30mile link, using the MTI dual
pols panels, 23db, signals are -75dbm and 2/3rds of the link
are over water I have 2 radios on each end
Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888)
927-9783
[EMAIL
Title: Message
That works out to 22-23db output at the SR5 card (depending on cable
loss from the card to the antenna).
Travis
Microserv
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a
30mile link, using the MTI dual
pol’s panels, 23db, signals are -75dbm and 2/3rds of the
link
are over
Title: Message
I am using the MMCX connectors, 6
pigtail, with 25 of lmr600
Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
CNN Report
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/05/25/the.web.toll/index.html
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
A. More power Tom. B. Much more sophistication in the equipment yielding
much higher spectral efficiency and system gain.
Frequency plays a major role, but you need to understand that other factors
are of almost similar levels of importance. For example, our 802.16e version
of WiMAX uses SOFDMA
Is that not that what faster accounts are for?!?
Jeromie
Cliff Leboeuf wrote:
CNN Report…
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/05/25/the.web.toll/index.html
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives:
To make it easier, maybe you can give what you believe to be an industry
price. I realize you can't give a price of Alvarion at this point. But
you can give us a hip shoot of what you think common pricing for ce and
ap are.
Thanks
George
George
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Pretty exciting.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 5:40 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
A. More power
Is Alvarion going to do the same for 5.8G unlicensed Wimax?
All though license and high power may not be there, the technical features
could have a major positive impact.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Leary
Well one would think so. If the Bell's feel
they need to be compensated, then pay the thousand of ISP's and Clec'sthey
put out of business by use of their political contributions. Their day is coming
to pay the piper one way or another.
Frank MutoCo-founder - Washington Bureau
for ISP
You can only collect 3 years worth according to law.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
After all this time, you still don't get it
USF, taxes, and national interest are built into the PSTN.
The FCC E-911 ruling was just one hurdle to prevent VoIP from
deflowering the PSTN.
As it is, at every turn, the BOCs are losing lines.
Cable has taken almost 10M VoIP lines already.
I think if you haven't already contacted your Congress critter about
this, you should do it first thing in the morning.
Jeff Broadwick wrote:
Sorry for the cross post...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/05/25/the.web.toll/index.html
Coming soon: The Web toll
New laws may transform
Unfortunately, such CPE are not going to happen in 5.8GHz, WiMAX or not.
Neither the band physics or power limits allow for it.
There are a host of other major issues surrounding UL WiMAX that all work
against it appearing any time this year. These include at least the
following:
- the
The question is, will backbone providers start prioritizing traffic, or will
last mile providers?If it's last mile providers, it's an opportunity for
those who aren't those trying to milk the last buck from the customer -
opportunity for me. An advantage for me.
If backbone providers do
26 matches
Mail list logo
