I thought this one was settled a long time ago... The FCC regulates
transmitters.
CPE to AP is PtP. AP to CPE is PtMP.
This was prior to "smart AP's" and the AP 120 deg or less beamwidth
rule.
RickG wrote:
Does the FCC take its cues from the IRS? :)
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:43 AM,
Anyone ?
Nike-95
8890 Factory Shops Blvd, Bld 8 - Twr 4
Jeffersonville, OH 43128
Might get some free shoes.
Sent via the WebMail system at avolve.net
I have:
(1) Trango 5830 AP $150
(1) Trango 5830-ext AP $150
(1) Alvarion AU-VL-5.8 $700
(1) Alvarion SU-E-54-5.8BD-VL $350
(1) Rev B Alvarion B28 BU and RB $600
Make an offer offlist. I'll cover ground shipping costs within the US.
--
Thanks Cameron
Covered by County Connections, WISPA member.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Stuart Pierce
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Jeffersonville, Ohio Internet Access
Anyone ?
Add in some packet sniffing time on the VLAN and watch OLSRs updates,
it should tell you what is causing the issue.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Michael Baird m...@tc3net.com wrote:
Turn off extra reporting on the Ubiquities.
Regards
Michael Baird
Sounds like Cisco / Vlan is giving you
Sorry Country Connections. Left out a letter. :)
http://countryconnections.net/
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:28 AM
To: spie...@avolve.net; 'WISPA General List'
Subject:
funny - I just emailed him the same thing :-)
Thanks Bob
On Jun 25, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Robert West wrote:
Covered by County Connections, WISPA member.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Stuart Pierce
Sent:
But did you spell it wrong? I win!
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Glenn Kelley
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Jeffersonville, Ohio Internet Access
funny - I just
ROFL
On Jun 25, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Robert West wrote:
But did you spell it wrong? I win!
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Glenn Kelley
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject:
At 6/25/2010 03:31 AM, Blair Davis wrote:
I thought this one was settled a long time ago... The FCC regulates
transmitters.
In general, yes. But they have claimed authority over receivers
too. Remember that even receive-only satellite Earth stations
required licenses in the days before DBS.
Greetings. I will be out of the office today June 25th and back on Monday.
If your matter is urgent:
For quote requests, send email to quo...@ctg3.com
Additional support contacts:
Bethany Crowell - (206) 383-8938 - bcrow...@ctg3.com
Marti Perkins - (360) 425-1212 - ma...@ctg3.com
Amy
I'm not aware of any AP 120 deg or less beamwidth rule.
I personally feel it is still a grey area what a PTP link is. It was not so
grey before when Certified Systems was a big thing.
When everything was a Certified System software had to be shown to only allow
one radio to connect to it.
When
We are in the process of redesigning our entire network from our
upstream all the way to the customer.
Currently everything is bridged and on the same physical network.
Obviously we are wanting to change this for many reasons. Subnetting
it out on the private side isn't a problem, but the public
If you're getting your IPs from ARIN and are running out, clearly you
can justify another block. Is there not enough time for this?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
We do not have them from ARIN, but we are in the process of getting
more from our upstream. ARIN will not give us any until we are
multi-homed or have at least a /20 I think they said.
Anyway, we haven't run out yet, I'm just trying to get an idea and
plan for what we will do if we run out on a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
And now upgrade ;)
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2009-4022
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-0097
It will never end with BIND - MUUUuuhahahahaha!
pls see below for additional comments.
On
I dumped the VM, started from scratch using webmin to build everything
and we came out well.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
On 6/25/2010 4:27 PM, Bradley D. Thornton wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
And now upgrade ;)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On 6/25/2010 2:21 PM, Alan Bryant wrote:
We do not have them from ARIN, but we are in the process of getting
more from our upstream. ARIN will not give us any until we are
multi-homed or have at least a /20 I think they said.
Getting new
That's where PPPoE (dhcp probably would as well) and extra addresses
come in.
When a tower runs out of a subnet, you can just add another subnet, or
move to a larger one.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
On 6/25/2010 4:21 PM, Alan Bryant wrote:
We do
It's not that easy anymore. Seven years ago when we applied to get our
first ARIN block, it took about 2-3 days and some paperwork. We got a
/18 without too much trouble.
A year ago, we started the process to get another block. This took over
a month, with over 30 emails back and forth, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On 6/25/2010 2:08 PM, Alan Bryant wrote:
We are in the process of redesigning our entire network from our
upstream all the way to the customer.
Currently everything is bridged and on the same physical network.
I'm not quite understanding.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On 6/25/2010 2:43 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
It's not that easy anymore. Seven years ago when we applied to get our
first ARIN block, it took about 2-3 days and some paperwork. We got a
/18 without too much trouble.
A year ago, we
I think you mean Ford?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IP_address_blocks
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
continue that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill
Dang... I thought I was losing my mind, because your list didn't include
MB. However, after doing a search I found this...
http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/02/13/where-did-all-the-ip-numbers-go-the-us-department-of-defense-has-them/
Mercedes actually goes by Cap debis css.
I knew MB had a /8,
Cap Debis CCS (Mercedes-Benz)
CCS not CSS you computer person you =P
Clearly some of them are real dicks.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
continue that counts.”
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
r...@condor:~# whois 53.0.0.0
OrgName:cap debis ccs
OrgID: CDC-6
Address:RRZ-S/K
Address: c/o Mercedes Benz AG
Address: Postfach 6002 02
Address: Mercedestr. 136
Address: 7000 Stuttgart 60
City:
StateProv:
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Bradley D. Thornton
brad...@northtech.us wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Currently everything is bridged and on the same physical network.
I'm not quite understanding.
That's not the most efficient -
I realize it is not the most
I think it's more alarming that Interop has a /8. Something that's only
open 4 times a year needs 16 million IPs?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
On 6/25/2010 5:03 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I think you mean Ford?
It's like Motorola with Canopy. Bureaucracy creates a lot of overhead :/
On 6/25/10, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:
I think it's more alarming that Interop has a /8. Something that's only
open 4 times a year needs 16 million IPs?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Alan Bryant
a...@gtekcommunications.com wrote:
As public IP addresses are limited and at times hard to come by, we
are trying to use them as efficiently as possbile, however, we
basically have a /24, 2 /22's, and a /23 allocated to us right now. I
have decided
Just in case a DHCP server goes crazy at the show...
You can never be too careful you know...
Travis
Mike Hammett wrote:
I think it's more alarming that Interop has a /8. Something that's only
open 4 times a year needs 16 million IPs?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
At 6/21/2010 11:46 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
..From Wili Mesh Website...
Look at the Supported Platform.. these are pretty much most of the SBC
Mfg. that make a multi radio board for use in outdoor AP.
At first Wili looked good. But I read some of its forum postings and
learned about its limits.
They were discussing the 120* rule at the WISPCON in your neck of the woods,
where you brought in bandwidth to the Pony Express lounge hotel.
-- Original Message --
From: Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
OpenWRT and OLSR or BATMAN on a Routerboard or Ubiquiti CPU platform
may be ideal, but I need to learn more about OLSR and BATMAN in
practice. BATMAN seems to be a distance-vector algorithm, like, uh,
DECNET 3 and 4 and IGRP, while OLSR is link state, like OSPF. I am
partial to link state.
At 6/25/2010 10:45 PM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
OpenWRT and OLSR or BATMAN on a Routerboard or Ubiquiti CPU platform
may be ideal, but I need to learn more about OLSR and BATMAN in
practice. BATMAN seems to be a distance-vector algorithm, like, uh,
DECNET 3 and 4 and IGRP, while OLSR is link
I suspect it's all by design. Much like how easy it is to defeat the kill
switch on lawn mowers, the seat belt alarm in automobiles, etc.Most
manufacturers have the Use Local Regulatory Domain check box. Everyone,
and I mean EVERYONE has ran outside the legal limits if only for a little
bit
Dude, your vernacular is getting me a bit excited. Not cool.
Time for a shower. Sheeesh!
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject:
You mean like hacking a router to pump out 1 watt of power and have it sit
next to your head while you sleep at night? That FCC indoor limit I totally
agree with. I've never understood people who have to max out an indoor
household router that will broadcast for 3 blocks.
Who can disagree
Fred Goldstein wrote:
At 6/25/2010 03:31 AM, Blair Davis wrote:
I thought this one was settled a long time ago... The FCC regulates
transmitters.
In general, yes. But they have claimed authority over receivers
too. Remember that even receive-only satellite Earth
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 16:08 -0500, Alan Bryant wrote:
We are leaning towards having routeros based routers at every tower
and subnetting all the way to the AP's. We don't have enough public
IP's to allow enough room for much growth. My main question is, what
is the best course of action once
40 matches
Mail list logo
