I sure can't understand why the IEEE is dragging it's feet on a standard that covers ALL unlicensed! DUHHHHHHHH
We've been stuck with WiFi devices for how long now? What we need, today, is a good polling system and more noise mitigation techniques. It seems to me that someone (the manufacturers, WISPA, whoever) should start up their own standards effort and get this ball moving. IEEE is too big to be useful anymore. Basically ONE guy came up with AC electricity and it's standard. All it would take is one manufacturer to cheaply license a good protocol and we'd be off and running. Look at the successes that are coming from the Linux GNU model. OR all of the iPhone apps. Everyone thinks first about the money, second about the consumer. I can't wait till all of those Harvard grads from the 70s and 80s are out on their tails. Those idiots are killing soooooo many good industries and companies. Before anyone dares say that helping the community isn't useful, research how the WISP industry grew from 1999 to 2005 or so. Look into guys like Jaime Solarza, Patrick Leary, Alan Masallis, Bob Moldashel, Joe D'Andrea, Mike Anderson, Stuart Pierce, John Scrivner, Bob Kirkpatrick and a handful of others. A few people telling anyone that would listen how to do something new. Laters, marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Leary" <ple...@apertonet.com> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? > Amen from the peanut gallery Bret. You'd find interesting the, ahem, > discussion taking place between us and the big guys inside the WiMAX > Forum board room. I think it is fair to say some are dillusional about > the LTE. Maybe I would be too if I'd bet my entire company on mobile > WiMAX. And it is not that it is not a good standard -- it is. But best > seldom wins when battling politics and all the vested interests in the > status quo. Carriers never warmed to the idea of on open network; they > want to control all the devices that ride on their networks. > > Patrick Leary > Aperto Networks > 813.426.4230 mobile > > > ________________________________ > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Bret Clark > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 4:07 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? > > > The 802.16e standard was a gallant effort, but by not be able to get the > cellular carriers on board early on was an ominous sign and I knew right > from the start that they wouldn't jump on board...open standards scare > telephone (AKA cellular) companies because it removes their ability to > control the end-users services and the pricing choke hold they have on > customers; hence the reason why the move to LTE. And before people say > LTE is standard base as well, I think we all agree its a controlled > standard made specifically for cellular carriers and not the little guy > trying to provide people with true alternatives. > > I agree with what you are saying Patrick with fact that the IEEE needs > to focus more on the 802.16d standard as the go forward standard. That's > not to say that the 802.16e standard can't play a role, but maybe it's > focus should change more from a mobile solution to a semi-mobile > solution. And what I mean by that it's a solution that provides > temporarily connections on the fly (hence the semi-mobile idea). For > example a business might be hosting a seminar at a conference center and > needs to bring in temporarily data connectivity for the day or a > companies main office has shut down due to some unforeseen event and > needs to open a remote office ASAP with instant data connectivity. > > In any case, having been someone who was involved with the IEEE 802.11 > standard (man I'm dating myself) if there was one thing I learn with my > involvement with the IEEE is that the best standards are the ones that > focus on doing one thing and do it well. > > Bret > > > Matt Liotta wrote: > > E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable > with the > current 3650 rules. > -Matt > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester > <t...@avanzarnetworks.com> <mailto:t...@avanzarnetworks.com> wrote: > > > > I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at > 3.65GHz. Also I would > like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook > and a USB dongle. > Does > anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz? > > Tim > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org > [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Matt Liotta > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? > > I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World > next week. > Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed > deployment, but if you > nailed > me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too > many things for too > many > people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far > more useful for fixed > deployments. > > -Matt > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary > <ple...@apertonet.com> <mailto:ple...@apertonet.com> > wrote: > > > > The subject question is one Aperto > thinks should be asked and now is > > > the > > > time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been > beating the 802.16e drum in > > > a > > > manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact > is, there are two WiMAX > standards, not one. By the Forum's own > words from a 2005 paper it put > out in November 2005, penned by Monica > Paoli of Seza Fila: > > "The WiMAX Forum is committed to > providing optimized solutions for > fixed, nomadic, > portable and mobile broadband wireless > access. Two versions of WiMAX > address the > demand for these different types of > access: > * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on > the 802.16-2004 version of the > IEEE 802.16 > standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses > Orthogonal Frequency Division > Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed > and nomadic access in Line of > Sight > (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) > environments. > * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic > mobile radio channels, this > version is > based on the 802.16e amendment and > provides support for handoffs and > roaming." > > It is time the Forum own up to their own > words, so Aperto is going to > asking the question at 4G World coming > up in Chicago next week. The > > > fact > > > is, the fixed standard is stable and > ideal for what it was designed > > > to > > > do: deliver fixed (and limited > nomadicity) wireless broadband. This > version of the standard is better, yes > better, than the mobile > > > version > > > for doing metroscale fixed. It provides > 13% more capacity per MHz and > 35% or so less latency. It can also be > configured for symmetric or > > > even > > > higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, > which is critical for networks > doing high capacity upstream like video > surveillance. > > For too long, vendors that now only do > the mobile standard have been > trying to squeeze the round peg of the > mobile standard into the > > > square > > > hole of fixed networks. This has been > confusing many, and leading > > > some > > > to overpay for their networks. Why pay > for millions in R&D for > > > features > > > that you can never use, especially in a > 3.65 GHz network where mobile > can't happen? We have seen "consultants" > spec'ing in E for 3.65 GHz, > thinking they will get interoperability > and even PC cards for their > networks. They also think they can get > self-install -- something this > community knows is not possible in 3.65 > GHz due to the power > restrictions placed on indoor modems. > Operators and other would-be > > > WiMAX > > > deployers are being hoodwinked. > > The E standard does enable use of > diversity, but it comes at a high > > > cost > > > and is of limited benefit for rural > operators. The truth is that > diversity is designed to increase link > budgets to support self- > > > install. > > > Basically, each standard has its place, > E is for people in 2.5 GHz > > > doing > > > self-install, like Clearwire, and we all > know the low service > (especially low upstream) packages > offered in Clearwire's service. D > > > is > > > better and cheaper for rural fixed > operators, and especially for > > > public > > > safety video type networks and > definitely for voice-centric users. D > > > is > > > better for enterprise, where many users > sit behind the CPE. E is > > > better > > > for roaming individual users with modest > expectations. > > We'd like to hear your opinions, and if > you like to discuss this with > > > us > > > while at 4G World, please drop me a > note. > > Regards, > > Patrick Leary > Aperto Networks > > > Patrick Leary > Aperto Networks > 813.426.4230 mobile > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----------- > > > 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/ > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------- > 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/
