Don't have anything for you yet, but I'm interested in what others are
doing in this area. What types of arrangements/payments do others
make/collect from developers for service guarantees or such for their
new developments?
On 7/11/07, D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I was
This is very interesting and makes me curious, Felix.
Which part of the workforce is using the 4.9? What city services? This
implies something else than Public Safety because you said city services AND
public safety.
Ralph
WISPA full member
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Carl
We used one from Tessco that has a collar that bolts around the vent on top
of tank and adjustable legs for leveling.It has been up there 4 years with
no problems.It was easy to install approx 1hour.
Ray Hill
- Original Message -
From: J. Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA
FCC Auction Should Allow for Open Wireless Network, Say Lawmakers
By Kim Hart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 12, 2007; D08
Key lawmakers on Capitol Hill yesterday supported the idea that regulators
should give consumers greater control over how they use their cellphones.
Several
If I only have a 16 pubic ip addresses, can I control my reverse dns or
should my upstream be doing that In the past it was always done that
way, but now they are try to change and some of my email is not working
- no reverse dns.
--
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
Carl A jeptha wrote:
If I only have a 16 pubic ip addresses, can I control my reverse dns
or should my upstream be doing that In the past it was always done
that way, but now they are try to change and some of my email is not
working - no reverse dns.
Typically your upstream will handle
Delegated reverse DNS control cannot work with smaller than /24 IP blocks.
-Matt
Carl A jeptha wrote:
If I only have a 16 pubic ip addresses, can I control my reverse dns
or should my upstream be doing that In the past it was always done
that way, but now they are try to change and some
I have several /27s and /28s that I handle their reverse on! These are on
cable compaines and ATT networks too..
On 7/12/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Delegated reverse DNS control cannot work with smaller than /24 IP blocks.
-Matt
Carl A jeptha wrote:
If I only have a 16 pubic
I have a delegated reverse on a /25 from ATT. If you do a whois on
my netblock the reverse DNS servers are still ATT's, but they forward
all the requests on that block to my servers.
Graham
On 7/12/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Delegated reverse DNS control cannot work with smaller
My fault; I didn't realize RFC 2317 had changed things.
-Matt
Graham McIntire wrote:
I have a delegated reverse on a /25 from ATT. If you do a whois on
my netblock the reverse DNS servers are still ATT's, but they forward
all the requests on that block to my servers.
Graham
On 7/12/07, Matt
I don't konw if it is RFC or not. Just saying, it can be done!
On 7/12/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My fault; I didn't realize RFC 2317 had changed things.
-Matt
Graham McIntire wrote:
I have a delegated reverse on a /25 from ATT. If you do a whois on
my netblock the reverse
They will look into it this afternoon.
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha
Dennis Burgess wrote:
I don't konw if it is RFC or not. Just saying, it can be done!
On 7/12/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL
I've heard that welding on a water tower is a bad idea... messes up some of
the insides.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Carl Shivers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 2:36 PM
Hi there! New to the list but wanted to jump in with comments:
This was, IMO, a great hearing. I watched about the first 2 hours of it and
was delighted by the responses of the witnesses. Hearing the chair of the
committee refer to the ATT iPhone contract as being a Hotel California
service where
Proxim Wireless Adds 900 MHz Support to Point-to-Multipoint Product Line
New Tsunami MP.11 Model 954-R Enables Broadband, Non-Line-of-Sight Links for
Municipal and Other Applications
July 12, 2007: 09:00 AM EST
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/marketwire/0277031.htm
Proxim
I don't intend to ruffle any feathers, nor do I direct this at any one
individual
but, the number of assumptions made and the knee-jerk reactions and
false statements being made in response to a suggestion that
magnetic mounts can be successfully used in some circumstances is both
amazing
and
I think magnetic mounts are used by lazy / cheap people who do not want to
spend the $$ nor the time to do it right. Get a professional welder... Be
done with it, sleep at night. A magnetic mount would never fly with our
approval board on our water tower systems.
JohnnyO
ps - I have a
Not to argue with you JohnnyO, :) but the last time I hired
professionals (just recently
in fact) to do something I could well have done myself, it was because I
was lazy
and cheap. I didn't have the time, nor the inclination to do something
myself, so I
hired a professional crew to do it for me.
Or by people who have to deal with government people that are so
overwhelmed by the Homeland Security stuff that they want absolutely
nothing done that could even remotely cause an issue with the water
supply. I do not personally have any water tower mounted equipment,
partly because of this
$1200 for the cpe yikes...what are they smoking? It just the mp.11
board with a ubiquity 900 card..
Take a peak here:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_i
d=793933native_or_pdf=pdf
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband
Haha. Gotta love it.
Link to Ubiquiti board used:
http://www.ubnt.com/downloads/sr9datasheet.pdf
Drew Lentz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
can someone do a reverse look up on the following # 142.46.11.217. I
need to know who is answering for it. Also need to know how to create a
proper revers name for 16 ip addresses in bind all I'm is info for a /24
--
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone:
Our upstream has finally plug in our server names to their dns servers
and now we are working again
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha
Carl A jeptha wrote:
can someone do a reverse look up on
Carl A jeptha wrote:
can someone do a reverse look up on the following # 142.46.11.217. I
need to know who is answering for it. Also need to know how to create a
proper revers name for 16 ip addresses in bind all I'm is info for a /24
I don't think BIND can handle smaller allocations. You may
I have BIND doing /27 networks as well as larger.
Here is what www.dnsstuff.com found:
Location: Canada [City: Toronto, Ontario]
*Preparation*:
The reverse DNS entry for an IP is found by reversing the IP, adding it to
in-addr.arpa, and looking up the PTR record.
So, the reverse DNS entry for
My /25 is delegated to me from ATT as the zone: 128/25.xx.xx.12.in-addr.arpa
In my named.conf I have:
zone 128/25.xx.xx.12.in-addr.arpa {
type master;
file master/29.xx.12.in-addr.arpa;
};
Take note the CIDR and last octet of my network are reversed, my
netblock is
Graham McIntire wrote:
My /25 is delegated to me from ATT as the zone:
128/25.xx.xx.12.in-addr.arpa
Oooh, neat, I didn't know BIND could do that. Are you using BIND 8 or
BIND 9? (Or some other DNS software entirely?)
David Smith
MVN.net
Ok will try this. thanks. will report back.
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha
Graham McIntyre wrote:
My /25 is delegated to me from ATT as the zone:
128/25.xx.xx.12.in-addr.arpa
In my
John Vogel,
Disagreeing with you does not make this a less-than-professional
discussion. There was nothing in my post that was unprofessional or
uncivil; I simply disagree with the use of magnet-mounting equipment onto
towers. If discussion on such stuff is unprofessional, then these lists
Clint,
Thank you for the civil reply.
You are still making assumptions which are in fact un-founded.
Nowhere in my post did I state the weights and dimensions of what
I have secured to towers using magnets, the number and size of magnets,
their placement on the towers, proximity to areas where
I have done as you directed and it is working, I love my freedom, if I
want to change a server I don't have to fill in the forms in triplicate
and wait three for the instruction to executed wrong. :-D
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Gawd, it is this kind of thing that makes me wish I was a Democrat. Why
can't we all find the
middle?
-m-
David Hughes wrote:
FCC Auction Should Allow for Open Wireless Network, Say Lawmakers
By Kim Hart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 12, 2007; D08
Key lawmakers on Capitol
http://www.metal-cable.com/
Look at the MagneMount. No idea what is costs, but it should work for you.
Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC
320-256-WISP (9477)
320-256-9478 Fax
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark McElvy
Please join me in welcoming Ted Olson of OACYS Technology as WISPA's
newest Principal Member. Here is a little about Ted and his company:
OACYS (pronounced as in oasis) turned 25 this year, I founded it in
1982 after many years as a military and commercial helicopter pilot.
There's no
Comments In line
J. Vogel wrote:
I don't intend to ruffle any feathers, nor do I direct this at any one
individual
but, the number of assumptions made and the knee-jerk reactions and
false statements being made in response to a suggestion that
magnetic mounts can be successfully used in
35 matches
Mail list logo
