<nods> to Zach-
I've been building outdoor wireless (mostly mesh) networks since about 2002. When I worked for Earthlink in 2006 and 2007 and deployed about 7 large Muni systems (12,000 APs in Philly for example), it was an open system. Anyone (including a WISP) who had the up-front $$ could get an SSID and be handed off their traffic. We had SSIDs for Vonage and DirectV as others. Several local towns here also installed various (mostly Cisco) Cisco mesh systems. Then they chose an ISP to power them. The later company I was with (a small WISP, not Earthlink) was chosen in two of the towns. We were handed an Ethernet cable. On the other end of that cable were all the residences and businesses in town that the Muni system passed. Pretty sweet. Back years ago when the WISPS on the lists were worrying about the Muni systems, you may remember that I promoted a "don't fight 'em, join 'em" strategy. Very few did. Now of course it is different because the Cablecos realized they could do it too. They have the (almost) unlimited wired backhaul, the access rights, the strand provided 60-90v power, and the DEEP pockets. This is why Cisco even stayed in the outdoor AP business at all. Their mesh did not perform well. But who needs mesh if you can make every AP a root (wired) access point. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Zach Mann Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 11:41 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. Oh btw, even tho COMPANY A deploys these AP's and broadcasts their own SSID, doesn't mean the other players in town can't "pay" COMPANY A for their own SSID for their subscribers. :) It will be interesting to see how this all develops. On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Matt Hoppes <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Right... I as well.. that's why I don't know what the answer is. Everyone's in this game, but some just play (seemingly) unfair... for example, it doesn't help anyone when you just go throwing up APs on cable plants and blasting all over the town. On the other hand Comcast may say it doesn't make sence for you (the WISP) to go sticking these high gain antennas up on the tower and covering the town! Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 <tel:%2B1%20%28570%29%20723-7312> On 11/15/13, 11:19 AM, Eric Flanery wrote: > How would you 'legally' define a WISP? > > What would make Comcast 'not a WISP', if they are delivering Internet over Wireless? > > If it's that they also deliver Internet over another medium, would we (and many other providers) also be excluded because we also deliver Internet over cable and fiber? > > If it's that they also provide TV service, then what about those of us that also run transport, hosting, development, and infrastructure services (examples among doubtless myriad others). > > Not that I wouldn't love some protected spectrum, I'm just having a hard time imagining anything that would prevent Comcast and the like from using it, while not also excluding quite a few of us. > > --Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:04 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. > > Yes and no... I mean... yeah it's a pain to those of us trying to use > the spectrum... but then again so is Comcast. > > This is exactly why there needs to be some sort of WISP only spectrum... > with laws carefully written so Comcast can't just say they are a WISP. > > > Matt Hoppes > Director of Information Technology > Indigo Wireless > +1 (570) 723-7312 <tel:%2B1%20%28570%29%20723-7312> > > On 11/15/13, 11:02 AM, Robert wrote: >> Spectrum trashers.... At least if there's no traffic on them there >> shouldn't be much noise.. >> >> On 11/15/2013 06:26 AM, Zach Mann wrote: >>> He's talking about these... (see attached) >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Scott Carullo >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I'm not talking about the ones in peoples homes, I'm talking about >>> the ones the cable carrier hangs on the lines outside runing through >>> the city on every corner.... clear LOS to every tower around. >>> >>> Scott Carullo >>> Technical Operations >>> 855-FLSPEED x102 >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From*: "Brian Webster" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Sent*: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:24 AM >>> *To*: "WISPA General List" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. >>> >>> One good thing about the higher bands and the noise floor is that >>> free space loss works to your advantage. That being that a 5 GHz >>> indoor Omni home AP router signal will fall off as an interference >>> source as a much shorter distance than a 2.4 GHz device will. The >>> laws of physics work in your favor. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank You, >>> >>> Brian Webster >>> >>> www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> >>> >>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com <http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com> <http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >] *On Behalf Of *Scott Carullo >>> *Sent:* Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:52 PM >>> *To:* Matt Hoppes; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >; WISPA General List >>> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. >>> >>> >>> >>> Hard to tell, noise floor is noise floor which keeps creeping up - >>> we all know things work better when its quiet. This used to worry >>> me a lot when I saw it coming, but then I realized it was already >>> there and I had no idea until I just happened to scan on some radios >>> (I don't usually install the stuff). I'm not worried any more, if >>> its not one thing it will be another any way. Thats what gives us >>> the edge every day, flexibility. We will work around it, we always do. >>> >>> I figure a high gain antenna on a tower with a good directional CPE >>> will continue to work fine. Their omni low gain antenna can't >>> compete with a 20-30db directional one. Still sucks though, you >>> drive down the street and see one after another running 5Ghz just >>> knowing there probably isn't 3 connections in the whole city to them.... >>> >>> Scott Carullo >>> Technical Operations >>> 855-FLSPEED x102 >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From*: "Matt Hoppes" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Sent*: Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:43 PM >>> *To*: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >" >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>, >>> "WISPA General List" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Cc*: "WISPA General List" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. >>> >>> Are you seeing any impact from them? >>> >>> >>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 18:03, "Scott Carullo" >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, won't matter either way with a 5Ghz AP on every street >>> corner. Already seeing that in our areas.... do a wireless >>> scan and you see 354 5Ghz APs now in addition to the 2Ghz ones >>> (they run dual band APs now). >>> >>> Scott Carullo >>> Technical Operations >>> 855-FLSPEED x102 >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From*: "Bret Clark" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> *Sent*: Thursday, November 14, 2013 5:49 PM >>> *To*: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. >>> >>> What could go wrong with Comcast taking up yet more 5GHz of >>> spectrum...[/sarcasm off] >>> >>> On 11/14/2013 01:40 PM, ralph wrote: >>> >>> I hope the links at the bottom come through. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> Comcast needs the FCC to open up the 5 GHz spectrum band to >>> power next-generation Wi-Fi services that could allow it to >>> deliver wireless broadband at speeds of up to 1 Gbps, SVP of >>> Business Development Tom Nagel testified at a House Energy >>> and Commerce hearing on Wednesday. >>> >>> >>> >>> Nagel disclosed in his prepared testimony that Comcast has >>> expanded the number of Wi-Fi access points for Xfinity >>> high-speed Internet customers to 350,000. The nation's >>> largest cable MSO also began deploying wireless gateways >>> from Cisco earlier this year that Comcast has said may be >>> able to power millions of neighborhood hotspots. >>> >>> >>> >>> While Comcast already is already using the 5 GHz band, Nagel >>> said it needs more of the unlicensed spectrum to meet demand >>> from subscribers for Wi-Fi. It faces potential opposition >>> from Toyota and other automobile manufacturers who want to >>> use the 5 GHz band to deliver next-generation connected car >>> applications, including applications that would warn drivers >>> of collision threats. >>> >>> >>> >>> Toyota principal researcher John Kenney raised concerns >>> about possible interference from Wi-Fi services at >>> Wednesday's hearing. "We have been actively engaged with >>> the Wi-Fi community and other stakeholders who are exploring >>> possible sharing solutions that will alleviate any risk of >>> harmful interference from unlicensed devices. But we're not >>> there yet and it's going to take a bit more time to see if >>> we can get there," Kenney said in his prepared testimony. >>> >>> >>> >>> For more: >>> - see Nagel's prepared testimony >>> <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=207 <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=207&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0 &j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0> &ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OT g3S0&rt=0> (.pdf) >>> - see Kenney's prepared testimony >>> <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=187 <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=187&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0 &j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0> &ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OT g3S0&rt=0> (.pdf) >>> - see Comcast blog post >>> <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=118 <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=118&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0 &j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0> &ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OT g3S0&rt=0> >>> - /Broadcasting & Cable/ has this story >>> <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=190 <http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=190&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0 &j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0> &ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OT g3S0&rt=0> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
